These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Crius] Jump Drive Isotope Consumption

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#541 - 2014-05-08 14:58:47 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Moving goods in JF will be cheaper , if this JF will cargo expanding rigs.

This is predicated on JFs and freighters not taking a cargo bay nerf to partially or completely compensate for the rigs, which I feel is extremely likely (but as of yet unconfirmed.)

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#542 - 2014-05-08 15:07:23 UTC
Rayana Darine wrote:
This sounds like Obamacare already.


As opposed to the no care you would get from a conservative gov't because too expensive can't afford it? Stop reading the tabloids.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Elzon1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#543 - 2014-05-09 08:21:37 UTC
Cardano Firesnake wrote:
And to come back? There will be a time where your freighters will have to warp to the Titan in his POS in Null Sec.
If Hostile know you use this system for Logi an AFK cloaky will be there 24/24 until the day he will open the bubble...
But of course AFK cloakers are not dangerous!

Well if you stay in Low Sec the risk is lower....


There is always the option of having a defense fleet when doing larger logistics ops.

Logistic ops of this nature are on the rarer side as people usually like to transport their things by way of carrier in between nullsec systems. Carriers have a greater tank and still have good range, but of course they aren't the most isk efficient means of doing so.

In terms of day to day operations most people would use carriers or jump freighters to move thing around in nullsec itself.

My main point is that the titan based jump portal is a bit too efficient compared to all other methods transport in nullsec.
Anthar Thebess
#544 - 2014-05-09 13:35:30 UTC
Linking mass of the ship to fuel consumption to the ship mass will also be nice.
Shield ships burning less fuel than armor ones.

Moving titan from one system to another should burn more fuel than using a carrier , that is way, way , way more smaller.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#545 - 2014-05-09 22:00:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Rommiee
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Where some companies would reject such an improvement just to appear stronger or more decisive, we're very proud of our willingness to embrace player ideas.


LOL.....Excellent news....so you will not be going ahead with this dumb idea then ?
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#546 - 2014-05-09 22:31:43 UTC
Kern Walzky wrote:
its a dam shame that all Capitals now get a nerf... increase in fuel consumtion is ok, but you really need to be able to carry the amount required to jump as before.

i vote for bigger Fuel bays !!!

I think the change in isotope size was meant to counteract that. So with the new values your traveling range is the same as before.
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#547 - 2014-05-10 08:02:24 UTC
Or... You could fix POSes to still be viable in highsec this expansion, and not have to frontload the cost to other parties, in hopes of not completely destroying the ice market. Just saying..

Because you know when you finally do find a reason for POSes to be maintained in highsec 24/7 like they are now, you are not going to roll back these changes and these parties will be stuck with the bill, forever.
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#548 - 2014-05-11 18:10:02 UTC
Hey if Riot could poach Fozzie that would be really ******* appreciated

Ideally before he comes up with more ******** **** like this
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#549 - 2014-05-11 18:31:34 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Linking mass of the ship to fuel consumption to the ship mass will also be nice.
Shield ships burning less fuel than armor ones.

Moving titan from one system to another should burn more fuel than using a carrier , that is way, way , way more smaller.


It's 18% lighter. 1.1bn vs 1.3 bn

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Elequent-Lady Dolorous
Marchwarden
#550 - 2014-05-11 19:31:12 UTC
Can we have fuel conservation rigs please?

Yes, the "e" was intentional. 
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#551 - 2014-05-11 20:36:22 UTC
After stepping back and reviewing the intention behind most of these dev posts about coming industry changes, I believe most of these are focused on encouraging smaller grass roots indy corps to help flourish a little more in high and low to provide better market variety and distribution.

Whether or not this actually will achieve that goal remains to be seen, since I'm withholding judgement until the freighter/JF thread gets posted.
HuGo87
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#552 - 2014-05-12 06:37:58 UTC
If the idea is to avoid huge fleets being moved that often (as initially described) then:


  • Jump freighters should be unaffected. They're not part of "huge fleets", and this change would affect then negatively a lot. If would negatively affect lowsec dwellers and FW as well.
  • Increase the fuel cost those cyno generator arrays, which tend to be used more by larger alliances AFAIK.
  • Increase the fuel cost of larger capitals (eg: titans) more than that of the smaller ones (carriers? dreads?

sabastyian
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#553 - 2014-05-12 15:52:59 UTC
So with the next expansion looming with terrible ideas such as this and mountains of player feedback, have the devs even responded or looked at these threads since posting them, picking one thing and going "we used feedback, see?" If not, why bother posting these threads?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#554 - 2014-05-12 18:40:06 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Hey everyone.
As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI.

Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Crius on July 22nd.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#555 - 2014-05-12 18:40:44 UTC
Querns wrote:
I just thought of another side effect of changing isotope volumes -- Titans currently use their racial isotopes as fuel for their Doomsday weapons. Will doomsday weapon fuel consumption also see an increase in their tope usage commensurate with the volume reduction being planned?

During the battle of B-R, tope consumption due to doomsdays became a significant factor after several hours, and many titans had to jump out to refuel. Not increasing the usage will allow them to have a longer operational period, should such a slugfest ever occur again.

We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Batolemaeus
Mahlstrom
Northern Associates.
#556 - 2014-05-12 18:57:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Batolemaeus
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.
As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Cirius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI.

Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Cirius on July 22nd.


I'd suggest you take a wait and see approach to isotope production and consumption post industry expansion release anyway.

You are essentially doing premature optimization. You are trying to counteract something based on a hypothesis that might turn out to be completely false, while several dozen variables change at the same time. If your hypothesis is right, you can react in a timely manner since you have the data to see through speculative price bubbles and the processes to react timely. If you are wrong, the worst case scenario is demand outstripping the hard capped production capabilities of empire space and creating a t2 industry crash and heavy decrease in QOL in all space that depends on the empire lifeline for supplies. Have a look at the stocks in jita. Nitrogen will sell out FAST. And there is no capability for local production for alliances beyond the racial fuel type while game balance for capitals heavily favors a few distinct doctrines.

Basically, if I am wrong and isotope consumption does decrease a lot, the worst that happens is a decrease in fuel costs spurring industry activity and lowering prices in 0.0 market hubs and for t2 items in empire, while some ice miners transition to mining ore.

If you are wrong, prices for fuel could spiral out of control due to limited supply ever since the ice belt change, which will ripple though and make deep 0.0 even more of a shithole than it is now and raising prices for t2 gear, the established standard for being competitive in pvp.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#557 - 2014-05-12 19:58:49 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.
As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd i


And so the feature creep begins.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#558 - 2014-05-12 20:01:05 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone.
As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd i


And so the feature creep begins.

That's not what feature creep means.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Shivanthar
#559 - 2014-05-13 06:02:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
CCP Fozzie wrote:
:Edit:
...
We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss ...
:Edit:


Yay! Marauders that can jump finally! There is the ship, there is the cargo space more than enough. You guys really giving more and more tools for Marauders and encouraging them to go low-null every other thay Shocked
Btw, why only Kronos?

(Blink)

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#560 - 2014-05-13 06:11:33 UTC
Shivanthar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
:Edit:
...
We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss ...
:Edit:


Yay! Marauders that can jump finally! There is the ship, there is the cargo space more than enough. You guys really giving more and more tools for Marauders and encouraging them to go low-null every other thay Shocked
Btw, why only Kronos?

(Blink)

/doublefacepalm