These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Rorqual and Mining changes

First post First post First post
Author
Brescal
Therapy.
Evictus.
#201 - 2017-02-23 21:41:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Brescal
Thank god! this rework couldnt have come fast enough. Having 6-7 accounts in rorquals like some people have is EVIDENCE of a serious imbalance. The mineral market is tanking and afk drone mining with stupid rorquals is busted.

Thank you Fozzie for fixing it :D

and heres a video showing how players are capitalizing on the stupid mining drones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIgpGazqVkI&feature=youtu.be
Grymwulf
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#202 - 2017-02-23 21:46:01 UTC
Querns wrote:
[quote=Grymwulf][quote=Querns]
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/info/?typeid=42890

Hit the attributes tab, scroll all the way to the bottom. ECMResistance 0%. (This value is inverted; 0% means "immune.")

Edit: Saw your post above after I hit submit; more verification is always good!


But this just demonstrates the ease of solving it by adding 1 database entry for this item -

https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/info/?typeid=41411
"EW Capacitor Need Bonus 9999900 %"

So, the choice is allocation of developer time and resources. Write 1 line of SQL code to add an attribute to an itemID *OR* spend many developer man-hours custom programming a solution, additional QA man-hours testing the solution, and additional complexity to an already complex code base.

I wonder which is easier?

I'm a jerk.  Get used to it.

Jura McBain
Perkone
Caldari State
#203 - 2017-02-23 21:46:32 UTC
socos wrote:
The worst thing of all this is that CCP needs (again) to balance something that was just redesigned (the rorqual concept).

Next time when they do a major change they need to investigate better what the consequence will be and avoid a situation like this when they have to do 2 nerfs in less then 3 months.

People is investing isk / time / injectors / skills to a patch or a change and the got :scammed: by ccp




http://imgur.com/a/FH7XS
Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
#204 - 2017-02-23 21:46:40 UTC
Querns wrote:
Whole lotta folks not twigging to the fact that sieging the rorqual gives you ECM immunity ITT.

I won't comment directly on the nerf, but I do offer this: If the goal here is to help buttress mineral prices, consider taking a look at the mineral basket. (Ask Aryth if you don't understand what this means. Few do.) Decreasing the amount of pyerite and isogen in nullsec anomalies, while increasing mexallon (and to a lesser degree, nocx and mega) will do a lot to help correct the downward trend in minerals.

If you'd like an idea on how mineral prices react in a high-usage market, check the keepstar in 1DQ1-A.


What a load of bollocks. The Mexallon has been intended as a feature of the game several times by the devs. If you want more go wormhole diving. The mineral prices drop because null-sec has reduced dependence on exporting from high-sec. Less demand, same supply, lower price - economics 101. If you are so set on independence then we bring the 90% jump protection to the table of negotiation. There has been plenty of carrots given to null industry, it's now time for sticks.

Perhaps high-sec can have direct access to small amounts Zyd and Mega - why not, you're holding out a hand.
TheRighteousOne
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#205 - 2017-02-23 21:48:26 UTC
Two things:

  1. Make the drones a LOT cheaper to warrant these nerfs because the risk/reward ratio is getting out of control
  2. Just take away all offensive ecm stuff from the rorq and be done with it. No more complaing about battle rorqs and ppl can still panic as intended

The suggested solution with the locked asteroid is the worst thing i have seen since i started playing this game What?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#206 - 2017-02-23 21:49:33 UTC
Querns wrote:

If the rorqual is in the belt, it's probably sieged.

The purpose of PANIC is to allow you time to exit siege, so you can catch remote reps from escalating Force Auxiliaries.

Unless it is moving between rocks due to the super slow drone flight speed.
If this change to Panic was coming with a massive buff to Excavator speed to enable them to mine asteroids further away, it would be a lot more reasonable, but there are a lot of times where they will not be in siege for whatever reason at which point ECM will stop them using Panic.
Simply put, it's a bad mechanic and should be addressed in some other way.
Mr Bignose
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#207 - 2017-02-23 21:49:35 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
You can't get jammed in siege, cupcake. Just leave 1 Mercoxit roid alive in belt, Rorqual has 200km lock range base without the lock range skill even trained, with ECM immunity and 80% damp defence.



So, I mean, we're already sitting in our anoms with 12 rorqs not boosting because mining foreman bursts inexplicably give combat timers that prevent refits and give rorq pilots no incentive to boost unless they need to address the mercoxit menace.

wait, we need to roll, well let me go high cap full tank and boost the subcaps for the last few 'roids.

oh look, a new cosmic signature!

www HALP

i did actually respect your suggested svipul nerfs because you were an avid field researcher in fade but i'm not sure if anyone involved with this ship redesign has actually used it.
Panther X
Dreadnoughtz Conclave
Requiem Eternal
#208 - 2017-02-23 21:49:54 UTC
Querns wrote:
Panther X wrote:

You want me to stop mining? Increase the Security Class of some of our systems. Kill the broken True Sec of Delve, and move it to Vale :)


Broken truesec doesn't affect ore anomalies. We only get 10% yield anoms in -0.85 or better, same as you.


You're right, but that's not what I was saying. I was referring to CCP's economic interest in getting us to stop mining. I will stop mining when ratting stops being ****. In Delve it's an Officer spawn every *over exaggerated cough* 35 seconds (yes I'm being overdramatic, but you know what I'm saying)

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
#209 - 2017-02-23 21:53:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Other misc mining changes:
  • Buffing the Mining Laser Field Enhancement foreman link from 30% to 40% base bonus.
  • Increasing the optimal range of the ORE strip miners (to 18.75km) and ORE ice harvesters (to 12.5km).

These changes will be appearing on SISI for public testing over the next few days and we're very interested in hearing your feedback. Thanks!



CCP Fozzie, can you please increase the range of the "ORE Miner" - that would keep it in line the other Outer Ring offerings.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#210 - 2017-02-23 21:54:07 UTC
Grymwulf wrote:
Querns wrote:
[quote=Grymwulf][quote=Querns]
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/info/?typeid=42890

Hit the attributes tab, scroll all the way to the bottom. ECMResistance 0%. (This value is inverted; 0% means "immune.")

Edit: Saw your post above after I hit submit; more verification is always good!


But this just demonstrates the ease of solving it by adding 1 database entry for this item -

https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/info/?typeid=41411
"EW Capacitor Need Bonus 9999900 %"

So, the choice is allocation of developer time and resources. Write 1 line of SQL code to add an attribute to an itemID *OR* spend many developer man-hours custom programming a solution, additional QA man-hours testing the solution, and additional complexity to an already complex code base.

I wonder which is easier?


Doesn't solve the problem.

I even posted about this earlier in the thread, but a fellow on GSF Jabber turned me around to the problem. (Thanks, The Slayer!)

Making the rorqual PANIC mode turn off ewar doesn't actually solve the Jump Hictor Problem, or any of the combat rorqual problems. The moderate hack presented here, while unwieldy, provides the best compromise between the reality of the game and the design intention for you to only be able to PANIC while mining or supporting other miners.

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

Cade Windstalker
#211 - 2017-02-23 21:54:08 UTC
Grymwulf wrote:
Ok, the amount of salt being generated in this thread is amazing. Let's not go overboard though...

Agreed, the nerf to Rorqual yields does seem to be a bit overboard, combined with the other changes it's hard to predict the actual change in yield.

I believe the amount of nerfing suggested shows yet again how CCP has very little idea of how to adjust things in a smart and intelligent way. First off, make one change, see how it goes, don't do 3 different changes where the combination of them all can be hard to predict. Honestly, make the changes to one thing at a time, less chance of unintended consequences.

Has no one at CCP learned the lesson from the history of overly complicated POS code? This goes again to my earlier comment, don't make big sweeping changes when small steps are capable of addressing the issue.

Question #1 - Is there currently a coded mechanic to address overpowered ECM capabilities when a particular module is activated?
Question #2 - Is it easier to adapt already existing code that has been through several passes of QA, or to code a truly unique and untested method that has glaringly obvious exploitable issues?

Coding an entirely new solution to a problem that has an easily adapted solution already in the code-base seems more about pride and hubris than anything else. Is this a certain developers attempt to demonstrate that their solution is better than one coded by someone else? Is this ego getting in the way of effective coding?


Couple of points against this interpretation of events:

First off, CCP's already nerfed the Rorqual once, and it apparently didn't fix the issues they were seeing with Rorqual use and the mineral market, so they have been taking things incrementally. Considering the first round of changes didn't do much I think it's a bit silly to be claiming that this second set of changes is too far...

Second, CCP can't perfectly predict how players are going to react to a change or the full impact of that change. What CCP are trying to do here is modulate player behavior in aggregate (aka, people are mining too much ore too quickly). If you can predict the impact of any change perfectly then I think CCP might want to offer you a job, at least if they can beat out the half dozen global spy agencies trying to 'recruit' you...

As for the code change, I'm assuming you're referring to the "is an asteroid locked" thing.

First off, that bears almost no resemblance in any way to the POS code. The problem with the POS code was that it was written in the very very early days of CCP, was fundamentally tied into a lot of different systems, and the entire core concept of the POS shield was creating issues, exploits, and bad edge cases. Unless you've found a way to spontaneously generate asteroids on-grid with you then none of this applies to this change.

What this change does do is mean that CCP don't have to go running around chasing abuse cases because they've essentially gone with a white-list approach rather than a black-list one. It's not even like it requires much if any new code, modules check what you have locked all the time when activating.
Anya Aivora
Sister Margaret's School for Wayward Clones
#212 - 2017-02-23 21:59:10 UTC
At this point ccp, you really need a rerebalance for the rorq. Scrap the panic, scrap the siege and scrap these disgusting drones. A copy and pasta capital strip miner was a better idea than this garbage.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#213 - 2017-02-23 22:00:47 UTC
Penance Toralen wrote:
Querns wrote:
Whole lotta folks not twigging to the fact that sieging the rorqual gives you ECM immunity ITT.

I won't comment directly on the nerf, but I do offer this: If the goal here is to help buttress mineral prices, consider taking a look at the mineral basket. (Ask Aryth if you don't understand what this means. Few do.) Decreasing the amount of pyerite and isogen in nullsec anomalies, while increasing mexallon (and to a lesser degree, nocx and mega) will do a lot to help correct the downward trend in minerals.

If you'd like an idea on how mineral prices react in a high-usage market, check the keepstar in 1DQ1-A.


What a load of bollocks. The Mexallon has been intended as a feature of the game several times by the devs. If you want more go wormhole diving. The mineral prices drop because null-sec has reduced dependence on exporting from high-sec. Less demand, same supply, lower price - economics 101. If you are so set on independence then we bring the 90% jump protection to the table of negotiation. There has been plenty of carrots given to null industry, it's now time for sticks.

Perhaps high-sec can have direct access to small amounts Zyd and Mega - why not, you're holding out a hand.


Wormhole ore sites have bupkis for minerals. The fact that you even suggested that as a supplement to our mexallon intake shows you have no clue what you're talking about.

The problem isn't having ENOUGH minerals, it's the ratio. We can get all the minerals we need, even mexallon, with enough mining. The issue is that we end up oversupplied on pyerite and isogen. (Exporting pyerite is hideously cost inefficient, but isogen isn't, which is why it's nearly half the price of mexallon despite being in a higher "rarity tier.") Adjusting the ratio isn't about getting us more mexallon, it's about making our growing stores of pyerite and isogen actually worth something.

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

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#214 - 2017-02-23 22:01:42 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Querns wrote:

If the rorqual is in the belt, it's probably sieged.

The purpose of PANIC is to allow you time to exit siege, so you can catch remote reps from escalating Force Auxiliaries.

Unless it is moving between rocks due to the super slow drone flight speed.
If this change to Panic was coming with a massive buff to Excavator speed to enable them to mine asteroids further away, it would be a lot more reasonable, but there are a lot of times where they will not be in siege for whatever reason at which point ECM will stop them using Panic.
Simply put, it's a bad mechanic and should be addressed in some other way.


If you're moving between rocks, and you get dropped, siege immediately and wait up to 20 seconds?

Are you saying you can't survive for 20 seconds? If you're worried, fit a Capital Emergency Hull Energizer in addition to your PANIC, which will GUARANTEE that you live long enough to survive.

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

Abdullah 3li
Project Valhalla.
The Initiative.
#215 - 2017-02-23 22:06:09 UTC
Dear CCP,
First of all I hope your doing well. I am amused by your brilliant ideas on the topic of Nerfing Capital Industrial ship's. Since the beginning when you started changing all the bonuses on these ships without having the Vision on future repercussions on the game economy e.t.c. Ore and mineral prices. As one of the Industrial players my self, I fnd these changes very annoying and tbh dumb.

1) Excavator Drone, when they where introduced into the game they where very effect at mining, then you realized that they are more powerful then you intended them to be. from the start they where over priced and their effectiveness went something like this (Release 5 drones can mine as 7 Hulks) then a balanced Nerf ( Now 5 Drones can mine as 5 Hulks) and finally ( inc changes 5 Drones = 2 Halks) don't you think such a huge Nerf would effect the price of those drones? Are you going to Compensate every player that payed a huge sum of ISK back. Maybe I should pickle them in hanger till you fix them.

2) PANIC Module, this module was **** since it was introduced , it gives the bonuses to the PVPer we did not benefit from it.

People who want to use the Excavator Drones should be on the Grid. people who safe boosting should be able to boost from POS. This plays more into Risk and Reward then the current stuff your doing.

Maybe in the future start serving players about such dramatic changes in the game play and Ruining our experience and making the game less fun. We are paying real money for subscriptions and alot of time that now feels likes its been wasted. it feels like these changes was meant for some selected players and cooperation /alliances i think many player know what do i mean.

I would like to say more but I know none at CCP will give a **** about my post. Pirate

Best Regards
Abdul Big smile
o7 CCP
Arronicus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#216 - 2017-02-23 22:10:06 UTC
Porthos Jacobs wrote:
So if I bring Ewar to get a rorqual it cannot panic now. bonus


Good luck with jamming out a rorqual there, boyo
Yonneh
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#217 - 2017-02-23 22:21:44 UTC
Considering that you are effectively removing the ship, with the significant yield nerf; will you be refunding all SP spent on rorquals? There are no other ships that use the Capital Industrial Ships, Invulnerability Core Operations, or Mining Drone Specialization skills.

Larger Asteroids will result in a 5-10% yield reduction
Direct 50% Yield Nerf
Increased ore anomaly sizes mean significantly more drone travel time.
33% decrease in cycle time is effectively an 11% decrease; as only 1/3 of the drones time is spent mining.

V/r,
Yonneh
Archeos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#218 - 2017-02-23 22:25:52 UTC
You have to understand that nerfing the rorqual won't affect the prices that much. People who have fleets of 5-10 rorqual alts will still make huge ammounts of money from them, the only people who will get the sharp end of the stick will be the small guys with one rorqual and casual players who like to mine. You have to find another way to fix the market and keep away the nerf bat from rorqual yields.
Shkiki
MastersCraft
#219 - 2017-02-23 22:26:24 UTC
This is all about bringing back the 12 account macro miners. I was very happy mining solo without the need to sport $120 a month on various miner accounts. Stop being Petty CCP.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#220 - 2017-02-23 22:27:36 UTC
Querns wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:

Attackers bring EWAR to the belt? No PANIC.


Wrong. The Industrial Core provides full EWAR immunity.

Fair point, although as discussed above not all mining/support Rorqs have a core running.

There's got to be a cleaner way to flag a Rorq as "engaged in mining operations" or, at least, "not acting as uber-tackle" than simply whether or not they have an asteroid locked. Weapons timer is out due to the timer generated by command bursts. Adding a separate flag just for this is just as clumsy as the current solution.

Maybe simply disallow modules requiring Propulsion Jamming from being used on the Rorqual at all? This seems like a cleaner solution that's more in-line with the Rorqual's role, would still let it PANIC in non-combat and non-mining situations, but would limit its use as an offensive unit.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs