These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Stealth Orca nerf round #2
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pandorath
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2011-12-03 06:28:27 UTC
I'm sure you players are aware that orcas have ship maintenance bays where you store ships.
A group of people, the so called ninjas use them to carry the gank ships they use to kill victims, with introduction of Incarna that function got nerfed.

Unannounced, wasn't in patch notes, and we had to wait a few days for CCP to confirm that its another "hidden feature" aka silent nerf.

The thread is here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=37517#post37517

There was also this post by GM Haggis:
"Hi Everyone

This particular trick was patched out recently and deliberately, you will no longer be able to switch ships from a Ship Maintenance Array (in any ship) while you are under an aggression timer in High Security space. This will still work in Low Sec and Null Sec.

We are aware of the other method of switching ships (ejecting and having the SMA ship scoop them) and this is not against any rules, as it carries with it some more risks than the previous method of instantly switching from the SMA."

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1574877

And now the stealth nerf #2

You can no longer scoop targeted ships to the orcas SMA...

Was...

We are aware of the other method of switching ships (ejecting and having the SMA ship scoop them) and this is not against any rules, as it carries with it some more risks than the previous method of instantly switching from the SMA

...this intended?

Why is it *AGAIN* not in patch notes, and again came unannounced? Along with nerf of suicide ganking (no more insurance payouts when concord kills you)... Does CCP want to remove griefers from the game? Whats next on their list of things to do before they change EVE into a PEGI 7+ game (hello kitty with spaceships kind of thing) ?

PS: i might not reply because of my fireworks protest in jita today... You get the idea.
Pandorath
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2011-12-03 06:32:12 UTC
If i may add, Thank you GM Tiny for helping me with the fireworks, i couldn't have done it without you Roll.
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2011-12-03 06:39:49 UTC
I approve of CCP taking steps to remove the risk free PvP that goes on in this game.
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2011-12-03 06:57:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Marchland
Quote:
Tarsas Phage:

GM Haggis wrote:

The role of the Orca as a mining support vessel has not been changed in any and as that was it's designed purpose we would not consider this change anything other than a bug fix.


I don't buy this as being classified as a mere bug fix. This was a feature of the Orca which has existed since the ship, or ships with SMAs in general, have existed. Considering between then and now is a non-trivial amount of time, and given the recent results of the CSM Crowd Sourcing project, you must be daft to think that anyone will buy the "bug fix" line.

GM Haggis, is CCP now trying to enforce or confine ships to intended roles? Does this mean we can also expect to see Rorquals or Hulks being disallowed to mount neuts, points or any such other offensive modules? How about removing turret slots from Industrials?

And since you seem to be on a bug fixing bent here, lets hear about the progress on fixing the bugs which affect everyone's game play, such as windows sticking to mouse pointers, the random offline module lottery, and other such glaring examples of non-existent pre-release QA testing?


This, so hard.
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2011-12-03 06:58:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Marchland
woops
Pandorath
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2011-12-03 06:59:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Pandorath
Marlona Sky wrote:
I approve of CCP taking steps to remove the risk free PvP that goes on in this game.

It's not risk free pvp, its griefing. I'm ok with the first patch apart from the stealthy backstab, the second one however was unnecessary, you couldn't run away if you were pointed anymore. CCP just made the mission runners that shoot you "risk free pvpers". So much for knowing what its about.
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2011-12-03 07:21:22 UTC
This was one of the first things announced for Crucible.

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
VKhaun Vex
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2011-12-03 07:23:57 UTC
GM Haggis wrote:
Noot Khorhar wrote:
Screw you ccp. cant you announce future changes/nerfs that require long skilling for alts with ships and mechanics not long enough in advance. the second time you hit me with skilling for special things in eve and once i have skilled it is worthless. nice way you treat your paying customers.


The role of the Orca as a mining support vessel has not been changed in any and as that was it's designed purpose we would not consider this change anything other than a bug fix.



This makes perfect sense to me... I don't see an argument against it, just whining.

Charges Twilight fans with Ka-bar -Surfin's PlunderBunny LIIIIIIIIIIINNEEEEE PIIIEEEECCCCEEE!!!!!!! -Taedrin Using relativity to irrational numbers is smart -rodyas I no longer believe we landed on the moon. -Atticus Fynch
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2011-12-03 09:04:59 UTC
The argument against it is:

A Bug: The duplicating minerals glitch in the 0.0 stations that was used for years.

A Feature: The ability to switch ships in and out of a ship maintenance array, usable since the Orca was introduced.

Fix a ******* bug, don't take away a feature of a ship.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#10 - 2011-12-03 10:57:34 UTC
So, CCP decided that Orcas are now only unflippable jetcans and unscannable haulers, huh?

If they are so intent on 'fixing' the Orca, and restricting its role, when are they going to get around to

A) allow people to scan their hangar bays properly.
B) make it so the cargo drops, like any other cargo.

'Stealth' cargo bays are an abuse that allow risk-free hauling and risk-free trade profits. Huge amounts of valuable cargo and BPOs are moved in their corporate hangar bays every day. Large amounts of EHP already makes them difficult to gank - but no way to scan + 0% chance of dropping = risk free hauling in highsec.

So I think its long past time CCP did something about it this obvious bug.
Sphynix
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#11 - 2011-12-03 11:17:33 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:

'Stealth' cargo bays are an abuse that allow risk-free hauling and risk-free trade profits. Huge amounts of valuable cargo and BPOs are moved in their corporate hangar bays every day. Large amounts of EHP already makes them difficult to gank - but no way to scan + 0% chance of dropping = risk free hauling in highsec.


Actually i'd see it as not "risk free hauling" because the risk of being successfully ganked is just as high. The real risk is to the gank'ees, after all - you can kill it just as easy, but do you get anything?

So the real whine with this one isn't that it's risk free - but that your "piracy" attempts aren't guaranteed to give you (the chance of) phat lewts.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#12 - 2011-12-03 11:54:32 UTC
Sphynix wrote:

Actually i'd see it as not "risk free hauling" because the risk of being successfully ganked is just as high. The real risk is to the gank'ees, after all - you can kill it just as easy, but do you get anything?

So the real whine with this one isn't that it's risk free - but that your "piracy" attempts aren't guaranteed to give you (the chance of) phat lewts.


I haul all the time.
OFC its risk-free hauling, especially after the insurance nerf. Sure its 'possible', at a cost, to gank an Orca now, but why would anyone?

Ganking the massive EHP they have requires 12-20 Tempests/Tornados - costing hundreds of millions in hulls that are now not only guaranteed to die - but without an insurance payoff.

Thus, nobody is going to gank an seemingly 'empty' T1-Insurable Orca - especially if the 'hidden' loot will not drop - not even for tears. Any gang of that size would simply be better served taking down the nearest freighter.

If I wanted to move a T2 BPO worth Billions? Large stacks of Implants, worth 10's of billions? I would do it in a tanked Orca Corp hangar, hands down, every time, no question, with nothing else in the cargo. And no doubt, people do. I'd even undock from Jita 4-4 without the slightest concern - as nobody but me knows that is secreted there.

Making Orcas scannable forces that highly valuable cargo to be moved in other ways, or at least be at a slight risk for a loss to a determined gank squad.

Its quite simply, unbalancing to be able to move ultra high value goods around high-sec without exposing it to risk.

So, CCP, if you feel like the Orca needs fixing because a small subset of players use them creatively as speedy high-sec carriers, fine....but I don't see why they should be the 'ultimate hauler', either.

Time to squash that corp hangar bug!
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2011-12-03 12:08:54 UTC
It's not in the patch notes, as it is now classified an exploit.
HTFU.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#14 - 2011-12-03 12:12:44 UTC
DarkAegix wrote:
It's not in the patch notes, as it is now classified an exploit.
HTFU.


exactly my thoughts.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Ariane VoxDei
#15 - 2011-12-03 13:46:01 UTC
Pandorath wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I approve of CCP taking steps to remove the risk free PvP that goes on in this game.

It's not risk free pvp, its griefing. I'm ok with the first patch apart from the stealthy backstab, the second one however was unnecessary, you couldn't run away if you were pointed anymore. CCP just made the mission runners that shoot you "risk free pvpers". So much for knowing what its about.

Hypocrite much? Since when has there been much risk in shooting a mission runner that has agressed back at you?

Dont see much nerf in not being able to scoop ships with the orca, while said ships are locked.
Why would your orca be ongrid anyway and if it isnt locking is a nonissue anyway.
I could see much hilarity if the orca inherited the flagging by scooping the ship though, suddenly that big fatboy would be on the line too for taking part in asshattery.
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#16 - 2011-12-03 13:57:53 UTC
Long overdue fix.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#17 - 2011-12-03 14:01:52 UTC
Pandorath wrote:
It's not risk free pvp, its griefing.
You know that griefing isn't allowed in EVE and will get you banned, right?
Pandorath
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2011-12-03 14:30:51 UTC
At least 90% of eve players are the so called bears, i do not expect that i will get much support. This however has nothing to do with ships corp hangars which still work.

Also
Tippia wrote:
Pandorath wrote:
It's not risk free pvp, its griefing.
You know that griefing isn't allowed in EVE and will get you banned, right?

Griefing in eve is allowed and is not bannable.
L2EvE
Pandorath
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2011-12-03 14:33:57 UTC
Ariane VoxDei wrote:
Pandorath wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I approve of CCP taking steps to remove the risk free PvP that goes on in this game.

It's not risk free pvp, its griefing. I'm ok with the first patch apart from the stealthy backstab, the second one however was unnecessary, you couldn't run away if you were pointed anymore. CCP just made the mission runners that shoot you "risk free pvpers". So much for knowing what its about.

Hypocrite much? Since when has there been much risk in shooting a mission runner that has agressed back at you?

Dont see much nerf in not being able to scoop ships with the orca, while said ships are locked.
Why would your orca be ongrid anyway and if it isnt locking is a nonissue anyway.
I could see much hilarity if the orca inherited the flagging by scooping the ship though, suddenly that big fatboy would be on the line too for taking part in asshattery.


So its okay for bears to be able to shoot us without consequences but not okay for us to be able to kill them for it?

So much for calling me a hypocrite...

Bear/Missionrunner can choose to not shoot us OR call corpies for help. Im not sure you people realise that...
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#20 - 2011-12-03 15:02:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Wilkus
LOL, Ariene. If you don't know why the Orca is 'on grid', you have no business participating in this discussion.

If CCP has an issue with people 'removing ships from combat' via Orca, I don't have a huge problem with that.

After all, most ninjas use tanked-frigates to bait Mission-runners into shooting. And really, who cares if the bait is left outside the Orca and destroyed. Roll

What is important is that the Orca can bring a ship with more firepower to the grid, and that the swap can be done quickly enough to re-establish lock on the 'CNR' before it can warp-out.

The name of the game is getting a CNR to shoot at your frigate, keeping the CNR scrambled, and seamlessly switching into a larger ship that can kill the CNR - without having to leave grid. (If you leave grid to change ships, it gives the Mission Runner the opportunity to dock up at their leisure.)

Orcas are important to ninjas because mission-bears will not shoot at a Hurricane, but they WILL take potshots at Vigils. Conversely, a Hurricane can crack most PVE Battleship tanks - where a Vigil would fail.

Orcas merely allow salvagers to change the fight from CNR vs Vigil, into CNR vs Hurricane.

So, people can't hide a ship from combat in an Orca? Fair enough. Was never a concern for most of us.

But if artificial timers and flags make it impossible to BOARD a new ship (capable of cracking a PVE tank, that is) - call it what it is: "CCP hugging Carebear nutsak."

In all other ways, the Carebear controls the engagement - because they have to shoot first. They knew what they were doing. Any sympathy you have for them is misplaced.
123Next pageLast page