These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Exia Lennelluc
Black Omega Security
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#221 - 2017-02-23 22:30:49 UTC
I'm trying to find where the reward will be after this patch sense the risk is still a 12b ship. Probably going to go back to mutliboxing exhumers sense thats much easier and i dont have to worry about my mining drones being destroyed by npc
Harrigan Raen
#222 - 2017-02-23 22:35:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Harrigan Raen
A second nerf to the excavator drone, can you at least bring down the construction cost too?


Edit:
How about if PANIC is active, set amount of target locks to 0?
Drones already engaged keeping doing so, Warp Scrams will fall off the second they go to go green again.
ultimatefox02
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#223 - 2017-02-23 22:36:25 UTC 
Excavator Drones:
We're planning another reduction in Excavator drone yield to help keep the mineral economy healthy. I know it never feels good when things get nerfed but we're very confident that the Rorqual will continue to be an extremely powerful mining ship after these changes (not to mention the value provided by its other functions such as foreman links and defenses). We plan on continuing to make changes in this area as necessary over the coming months with the goal of keeping the mineral market healthy and ensuring that a wide variety of mining ships are viable.
Speed up the cycle time of 'Excavator' ore mining drones to 60 seconds, and reduce the yield per cycle to 110 m3 base. This will reduce the idealized yield per minute, increase the number of trips required to and from the asteroid, but also reduce the amount of wasted cycle at the end of an asteroid's life.
Add killmails on the destruction of all 'Excavator' drones.
In March we are also planning on some UI/UX improvements for drones as a whole and mining drones in particular. These include a new keyboard shortcut for launching drones and enabling the "engage target" keyboard shortcut to work with mining drones. Discussion of these UI changes is best directed to this thread.
 


Ce changement est complètement stupide, j'investis 12 ou 13B sur un Rorqual , qui en passant étais supposé être une bête de minage (= a 5 barge environ) et peut après il ce fait nerf et vaut maintenant 3/4 barges , et la il va être environ 2/3 barges, la vous me casser mon game play, ont investis beaucoup de ISK sur c'est rorqual et la vous casser notre rendement , pour une fois que les mineur avait un boost, vous l'avez augmenter pour mieux la nerf après , et que vous la nerfé une fois ok,mais 2 fois et de cette façon la , je vous prédit la fermeture de plusieurs de mes comptes sinon tous , si vous continuer a casser mon EVE.
Falcon Starwalker
Suboc Industries
#224 - 2017-02-23 22:36:30 UTC
I am sure that having reduced the "excavator" drones by nearly half now, this also comes with a reduction in build cost by nearly half as well.

Currently we are paying nearly 1.1B in build cost for a drone that has crap for HP, slow as the year is long, and now has the mining yield of a poorly skilled mining barge with no upgrades or links.

While I realize price doesn't equal reward, it damn well should pay for itself in a decent amount of time, and with this nerf you are reducing its value while offering nothing in return. The cost was already hitting a point where risk vs reward was next to equal, now the balance is heavily sided on more risk than reward.

In exchange for these massively painful nerfs, there should be a healthy HP buff, PANIC can effect them or the cost dropped in half. The build cost was based on these being "powerful" boosts to mining, but if that is not going to be the case, then balance needs to be on both sides of the equation.
Grognard Commissar
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#225 - 2017-02-23 22:37:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Grognard Commissar
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.

no. wormholes don't give enough ore. minerals need to be balanced. it's driving down the price of all the other minerals. that is what is screwing the mineral market. fine, you want to throw sticks at us Indy players? how do you like not having any morphite?
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#226 - 2017-02-23 22:43:08 UTC
Interesting proposal, looks a bit artificial to me ... but the only question I have is, will it lead to more Rorquals used and die or not?

I'm my own NPC alt.
Paul Ares
Vaporware Inc
#227 - 2017-02-23 22:49:13 UTC
"Foozie makes a bunch of stupid pointless changes (don't ever remove this from the OP, because it is always true)"

Anyone who thinks being a "good loser" is a virtue is probably a f***ing loser.
Minerva Arbosa
Spatial Forces
Warped Intentions
#228 - 2017-02-23 22:54:32 UTC
CCP Fozzie
[u wrote:
PANIC Module:[/u]
We have been keeping a close eye on potential issues related to the PANIC module for a while, and although we are overall quite happy with the module we are interested in reducing the power of a few uses, primarily use for fleet tackle and cyno lighting, as well as an escape method for entosis operations.
To reduce the power of the PANIC module in these situations while also preserving all of its power for defending mining Rorquals and their fleets we are currently planning the following change:
  • Initial activation of the PANIC module would require the Rorqual to have an active target lock on an asteroid.



Why not have just make e-war have the same penalty as carriers? Like hey you are in PANIC mode, you can't use that freaking that e-war module as you don't have a large enough capacitor pool. Problem solved without all of the other nerfs that you are proposing.
Hamasaki Cross
Perkone
Caldari State
#229 - 2017-02-23 22:54:56 UTC
I'm against the Rorqual changes and basically I'd love to see Fozzie resign because he has wrecked this game enough over the years. Lets hire some people who do this weird thing like listen to people who aren't PL.

Oh and even cooler awesomer idea would be don't implement features which cost 37.5 Billion isk to train, then turn around after you've spent the money on potentially multiple accounts and completely bork it. I'm lucky because I assumed CCP are totally incompetent from the beginning and limited my exposure to only 4/10 of my mining accounts. So only 150 billion isk pissed away because CCP decided to change their mind after using the live server to test market effects of overly poweful rorquals. Now it's a million times more feasible to use hulks x 10 than rorqual x 5. and hulks x 10 = 2b + 80b in injected skills = 82b vs rorquals x 5 = 62.5b + 175b in injected skills = 237.5b. Oh and your killboard doesn't get raped. CCP borked it completely. Business as normal in Iceland it seems.

You want to change a tristan, knock yourself out. It takes 5 mins to train something else. You want to change cap mechanics (and rorquals are caps last I checked), you are talking 6 months of retraining,

But that's CCP's business model isn't it? You can't get new subscribers obviously, since you were desperate enough to go free to play, so instead, the new business model is completely bork characters so they are forced to RIP skills and REINJECT those skills elsewhere at a loss, both financially, and in lost SP.

Next, lets nerf super carriers and make dreads the new go to ratting isk faucet. And once everyone switches, or injects to dreads, lets change it to Titans, then once that's working well for people, lets change it back to rorqual. Then implement a new T2 bullshit ship that requires all new skills.

Adapt and overcome my ass. Just assume incompetence and go play something else. That's my game plan.Shocked
Malthuras
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#230 - 2017-02-23 22:59:30 UTC
You want to make the rorqual mine less? Fine

Then do something about the price of excavators so that the initial cost of the rorqual isn't so dumb.

Then I can get behind these changes.

Also, panic without asteroid? So all someone has to do is wait until a belt is cleared and boom, dead rorq.
Jo Kiyoko
Perkone
Caldari State
#231 - 2017-02-23 23:08:35 UTC
I know you're trying to bring vulnerability to rorqs to cyno ganks; any plans to make the cyno module a destroyer and size up only module?
arkarsk
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#232 - 2017-02-23 23:28:03 UTC
I don't usually post on such matters as game changes are game changes; you adapt.

Whether you agree with the changes or not; BTW I don't. The way in which CCP have gone about the rorqual changes is irresponsible (from business perspective) and hap hazard. Apart from the fact they will alienate a HUGE player base now.

In the first instance the initial changes were sweeping and profound. As a consequence the rorqual drones were nerfed, we accepted that and moved on. Now at this late stage in the changes we have a huge number of pilots that have respecceded and invested huge sums of isk into a new gameplay. This has involved mass skill injecting, liquidation of stocks , plex etc. We all know people that have p[oughed their years of assets into rorqual mining. Lets not forget the huge cost of fielding a rorqual, in part due to the rediculous cost of excavator drones. Now CCP nerfs the ship to the ground (read: in relation to cost) negating all the sweeping changes people have made to their pilots skills and isk investment.

Honestly, CCP can do what they want but it will see people leaving the game after such heavy investment in both time, risk and skill points.

All i can say is the initial rorqual changes have been great, and i don't mean from isk perspective, i mean from a gameplay perspective. Its introduced more organised home defence systems which bring content for all. Its brought kill mails throughout. Its introduced an entirely new gameplay of drone stealing. Overall i believe it was great for the game. Change this and people won't field them anymore. SIMPLE.

You want to change ore and mineral prices, then change the mexallon bottleneck ffs! Then perhaps you won't have so much tritanium or isogen on the market. Concurrently change the anom spawning rate. You want to stop Jump HICS then stop the ability to tackle with panic mode. Not this half baked 'rock' targeting method.

Im disappointed in CCPs lack of understanding and/or care of the player bases investment in time /isk and sp.

tldr: poorly conceived changes that don't address the real problems. Welcome to reduced subscriptions. Well at least from me.
AOSA
Atreidun Order
#233 - 2017-02-23 23:28:17 UTC
I don't understand the reason you chose that "solution" for the PANIC module... Rest sounds legit.
MajkStone
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2017-02-23 23:34:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Excavator Drones:
We're planning another reduction in Excavator drone yield to help keep the mineral economy healthy. I know it never feels good when things get nerfed but we're very confident that the Rorqual will continue to be an extremely powerful mining ship after these changes (not to mention the value provided by its other functions such as foreman links and defenses). We plan on continuing to make changes in this area as necessary over the coming months with the goal of keeping the mineral market healthy and ensuring that a wide variety of mining ships are viable.
[list]
  • Speed up the cycle time of 'Excavator' ore mining drones to 60 seconds, and reduce the yield per cycle to 110 m3 base. This will reduce the idealized yield per minute, increase the number of trips required to and from the asteroid, but also reduce the amount of wasted cycle at the end of an asteroid's life.


    • If you are going to nerf the yield you need to reduce the cycle time on the Industry core to compensate.
    Brescal
    ADFU Financial Co.
    Goonswarm Federation
    #235 - 2017-02-23 23:36:34 UTC
    bye bye AFK drone mining :D
    i love these tears
    Petrified
    Old and Petrified Syndication
    #236 - 2017-02-23 23:42:24 UTC
    An interesting solution to PANIC mode being used as an invulnerable Cyno, entosis, and tackle platform... consistent with your policy regarding POS garrage doors and invulnerability on Cyno and tackle generation.

    But like others have said: it means outside of being in an asteroid field, a Rorqual willl be extra vulnerable when moving between locations. This is mainly an issue if you are dealing with gate to gate movement. so outside of cynoing to another system or warping to a bookmark, the pilot will need to be extra careful.

    I suppose the other option was to simply prevent a Rorqual from being able to activate a Cyno or warp scram/disrupt while PANIC mode is active.... given either option: requiring a target lock on a asteroid seems the most reasonable way to deal with the issue without complicating the code to something obscene or making Rorquals in PANIC mode incapable of calling in support.

    Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

    Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
    Captain Pierce
    We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming
    BLACKFLAG.
    #237 - 2017-02-23 23:48:07 UTC
    Why Not Bring back the Old Triage Carrier Solution Just increase The Cap Use of Ewar Module while in Panic about a Few Thousend Percent then the Tackle will breack after 2-3 Cycles
    Lord Nighthawk
    Destructive Influence
    Northern Coalition.
    #238 - 2017-02-23 23:50:33 UTC
    agree with the Panic change sort of.
    it shouldn't be an invulnerable capital tackler..
    but requiring it to have roid locked is pathetic.

    Excavator drones.. smaller reduction.. something like 130/m3-60s.. that's 11.4%
    Then keep an eye on things.
    Unless you want to post data to support your OVER nerfing once again..

    2 Orca boosted maxed hulks(with implants) is approx. 1/7 the risk and 85%+ish the yield..
    better risk vs reward ratio and they aren't stuck there
    Grognard Commissar
    SUNDERING
    Goonswarm Federation
    #239 - 2017-02-23 23:54:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Grognard Commissar
    Lord Nighthawk wrote:
    agree with the Panic change sort of.
    it shouldn't be an invulnerable capital tackler..
    but requiring it to have roid locked is pathetic.

    Excavator drones.. smaller reduction.. something like 130/m3-60s.. that's 11.4%
    Then keep an eye on things.
    Unless you want to post data to support your OVER nerfing once again..

    2 Orca boosted maxed hulks(with implants) is approx. 1/7 the risk and 85%+ish the yield..
    better risk vs reward ratio and they aren't stuck there



    this sounds much more reasonable. you can always nerf it more, later, but the mineral market is gonna keep deteriorating until the minerals get rebalanced.
    Raindeth
    FACTION Inc.
    Still Irrelevant
    #240 - 2017-02-23 23:59:59 UTC
    Trying to fix the mineral market is a good idea. Nerfing rorquals (again) is probably not the smartest way of doing so. Why?

    1. By nerfing the yield, you accomplish one of two things. Either rorqual miners will decide it is no longer worth the time and risk, and therefore do significantly less mining, or they will simply spend more time mining what they need. If the former happens, you have a bunch of pissed off players who have spent significant ISK and SP to now watch their rorqual rot in a station. If the latter happens, you have not fixed the market.

    2. By the time you nerf rorquals enough to fix the market, rorqual pilots will be left with something that if you had announced what it settles on being in the initial roll-out of turning the rorqual into a mining ship, everyone looking at it would tell you to go get "fooled with."

    3. To fix the mineral market, you need to do a couple things. First, there is still an unlimited supply of ore. Why? Increase spawned belts and eliminate or greatly reduce ore in static belts. And more importantly, INCREASE DEMAND. You have not only increased rorqual mining yields, but with the citadel changes to reprocessing, a lot more minerals can be squeezed out of ore these days (up to 87.5% refine). Of course, mineral prices are gonna crash. You can start by removing basic ammo from all NPC loot tables. That has the added benefit of giving new industrialists a chance to make something that can be profitable.

    I'm sure there are other ways to increase demand for minerals. I hope you think carefully in this direction before nerfing rorquals again. Oh! and as for requiring PANIC to require having an asteroid targeted: this is the kind of idea I'd expect from our new president. It opens up a mess in so many ways. "OK, what do I need to target to activate THIS module?" Just don't even start down that road.