These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#61 - 2014-10-09 18:27:03 UTC
Thank you. And let me be clear: the fact that XavierVE is saying good things about this is some pretty damn high praise indeed :)

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#62 - 2014-10-09 18:27:21 UTC
Capqu wrote:
dunno why you incur a fatigue on blops at all tbh, all it does is make you idle in your client for 30 mins afk cloaked in your targets' system while fatigue runs down. just a waste of time, it's not like you're vulnerable while you're cloaked there

everything else seems gr8, im glad our logistics players wont be committing sudoku



Lol Sudoku... that's funny right there, I dont care who you are

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-10-09 18:27:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
I don't really like the thought of Titan-bridged freighters


The problem is getting the titans to where you need them to bridge the freighters. Titans themselves still have the full jump fatigue, so they are still at full risk when doing a freighter chain.


This only represents a hurdle, at most. If need be, the big alliances are particularly capable of leveraging one Titan into each relevant bridge point, especially when everyone knows (though no one seems to be able to prove) that lots of people share Titan characters to keep them available at all times. Smaller groups (and wholly EULA compliant players) will not be able to compete with larger groups in this respect.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#64 - 2014-10-09 18:27:44 UTC
Querns wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Rorquals will stay at 5LY/90%


Is there a reason that Rorquals don't get the same 10LY range as JFs? Rorquals are used just as much for logistics as JFs, especially because their actual intended use isn't really...useful.


We didn't think it was sensible to let it keep its drone bonus and have a 10LY range, and at the end of the day the bonus won out. The ship needs a large rework anyway, and we'll revisit all this when that happens :)


I think anyone who is sane would willingly trade the drone damage bonus on rorquals for the extended range. If you're going to rework the ship anyways, this is the clear sacrifice to make.

Hell, replace the drone damage bonus on the hull with 20% additional jump range per level.


Yeah, I would think that almost nobody puts Rorquals on the grid anyway, it usually just boosts from inside of a POS shield. The risk is too high. If it IS on grid then it's an obvious bait :)
Hendrick Tallardar
Doomheim
#65 - 2014-10-09 18:28:39 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
In the past week, from October 2nd, rorquals have been involved in 10 kills on zkillboard.

Obviously, the drone bonus is the reason everyone is flying these goddamn things.

Seriously, does ANYONE there play eve?


I'm sure if you keep accusing CCP of not playing the game, you'll eventually convince them you're right. Keep it up, I'm rooting for you!
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#66 - 2014-10-09 18:29:19 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
David Magnus wrote:
These do address some of the bigger concerns, thanks for taking the time to post about these!
Have there been changes to death-clone camping, or did I miss that in a different thread?


Death clone camping is handled by the new medical clone changes that are being implemented right now. The short version is that you'll always be able to intentionally revoke your clone contract somewhere and have it reset to your rookie system.

wait what, where is this


On Nullarbor's computer, currently.

Also, to everyone who was wondering whether or not I listened, I read 4000 freaking posts by myself. Whether or not I agreed with the concerns was an open question, but I hope it was obvious from my posting that I was paying attention!


Did you like my joke?


Also have you considered increasing the ship maintenance bays of ships like Titans and SCs so that they fit more of a "logistical" role? I think if a titan could have a 20-50million m^3 ship maintenance bay it could start tweaking the role of the ship and make it more en vogue. It would allow an alliance to have a strategic asset in the Titan, have a subcap escort fleet to position the titan (or titans) deep into enemy space, and be able to base out of it instead of forcing every attacking foe to live in NPC null. So in this brave new world with 50million m^3 SMAs, an alliance that would have moved 250 carriers twice - jumping from NPC station to NPC station completely risk free - could instead move 10 Titans + an escort fleet of 200. Through gates. Loaded with billions of isk worth of ships. Think of how glorious that could be! Please I need this.

~
The Ironfist
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#67 - 2014-10-09 18:29:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We've collected, parsed and thoroughly discussed your *extensive* feedback on the proposed long-distance travel changes, both in the official thread and elsewhere, consulted with the CSM, and made adjustments accordingly.

Conclusions we have reached through this exercise:
  • The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be.
  • It *is*, however, pretty well aligned with where nullsec industry is right now. As we improve the status quo for industry in nullsec, we will want to reevaluate this balance, along with the impact potential changes would have on logistical work for other areas of the game.
  • We're pretty happy with the impact of the proposed changes on the movement of non-covert combat ships, as it relates to both jump drives and jump bridges, for all ranges.
  • We're not overly concerned about the battle rorqual; if it starts being used in a widespread fashion, we will nerf it, but we're not expecting this to happen.
  • Black ops are working in a generally OK manner on TQ right now, and we want to minimize harm to their use with these changes.
  • We don't like repeating decimals.


Therefore, changes we are making to the previously-announced plan:
  • Jump freighter max range will be bumped up to 10LY, and they will keep the 90% fatigue-distance reduction. This represents a slight range reduction compared to TQ, so some cynos will need to be repositioned, but otherwise leaves them largely alone. Note that, because ranges multiply together for fatigue purposes, one 10LY jump is *substantially* less fatiguing (multiply by 11) than two 5LY jumps (multiply by 36). Rorquals will stay at 5LY/90%
  • All ships designated as having a "hauling" role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can't jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals.
  • We are adding some additional code to allow us to put a bonus on jump portals that reduces fatigue generation for all ships jumping through that portal. This will be applied to Covert Jump Portals, with a value of around 50% (subject to further tuning). This means that all ships using a black ops portal will generate less fatigue.
  • We're going to bump the max range of black ops ships up slightly to 8LY, and likewise give them a ~50% fatigue bonus.
  • Finally, we're slightly nerfing JDC5, from 25%/level to 20%/level, and tuning base ranges accordingly. This allows us to give most capital ships a base range of 2.5LY, rather than 2.2r LY, and still hit our max range targets. More work on these skills will probably be done in future, this is just minimum changes necessary to get these changes on TQ so we can see how they play out in practice and establish how comparatively valuable their different bonuses are.


These changes should all be hitting Singularity in the next few days; please give us feedback when they land!

Thanks,
-Greyscale


I know people will be mad about this but 10ly is too much. It should be no more then 7,5-7,85ly something in that ballpark.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#68 - 2014-10-09 18:29:57 UTC
Cool. Might also want to check this thread on reddit regarding super carrier projection with ascendancies and hyperspatial accelerators post-phoebe. Keep in mind that those super fits don't give up *too* much ehp given that you can swap the low slots back to combat fit fairly easily.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#69 - 2014-10-09 18:30:53 UTC
A thought occurs: does fatigue reduction stack? If I bridge a blockade runner (now with inherent 90% fatigue reduction) through a covert bridge (-50% fatigue), am I looking at a cumulative fatigue reduction? If that isn't desired, I'd just suggest that the best fatigue reduction factor be used when doing the calculation.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Schluffi Schluffelsen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#70 - 2014-10-09 18:31:24 UTC
Decent compromise, don't get why you're not buffing the rorqual tho.

For the grand vision of smaller empires and more fights, could you add some npc space to be able to reinforce all the thingies, especially those who think they can hide behind a wall of renters? Love you long time :)
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#71 - 2014-10-09 18:32:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
Going to have to mull this over...
Pandaest Bee
U.N.M.C.
#72 - 2014-10-09 18:32:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Pandaest Bee
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Querns wrote:
Mixed feelings on this.

* Pretty sad to see JFs getting 10LY range. Their 5LY range allowed for some meaningful ability to disrupt incoming logistics. 10LY eliminates a lot of possibilities here.


- Yes, but that logistics is already in too fragile a place to be able to reliably survive that disruption


You mean to tell me you didn't just massively buff survivability of freighters and jump freighters? Feel free to revoke those changes if you've forgotten about them.
Polo Marco
Four Winds
#73 - 2014-10-09 18:32:39 UTC
You know guys, when a horse kicks or bites you don't cut off its hooves or pull its teeth. You modify either the behavior of the horse or the behavior of the person using it. Nullsec sov, politics and combat methods have everything to do with what motivates the users of these ships and not the ships themselves. You hobble the horse, he's not worth his feed so its off to the auction block with him. You give the rider gloves and a shinguard and he never learns how to manage the animal. You are treating the symptoms not the problem.


Why don't you try this first:


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5078735#post5078735


Fixing a clock is easier to do with a screwdriver than a hammer..............

Eve teaches hard lessons. Don't blame the game for your own failures.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#74 - 2014-10-09 18:32:54 UTC
These changes are good, I think they're a big improvement on the logistics side.
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#75 - 2014-10-09 18:33:24 UTC
Yroc Jannseen wrote:
Milton Middleson wrote:
Quote:
All ships designated as having a "hauling" role in ISIS (ie the following ship groups: Industrial, Blockade Runner, Deep Space Transport, Industrial Command Ship, Freighter) will similarly get a 90% reduction to distance counted for the purpose of fatigue generation. Obviously they can't jump themselves, but this also applies on use of bridges or portals.


This makes it extremely likely that you will see these ships used as bridge taxis in order to move people and material around as quickly as before. I think you should seriously reconsider this.


Not likely. Blockade runners are still pretty vulnerable to bubbles and cost near 200m now. If someone has a choice between taking jump bridges but potentially losing a 200m ship or taking an interceptor that costs a lot less and is bubble immune, they'll take the interceptor.


You realize it applies to regular industrials as well? Many of which are cheap-as-free and can be made fairly agile.
Hendrick Tallardar
Doomheim
#76 - 2014-10-09 18:33:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Hendrick Tallardar
Elise Randolph wrote:
Did you like my joke?


Also have you considered increasing the ship maintenance bays of ships like Titans and SCs so that they fit more of a "logistical" role? I think if a titan could have a 20-50million m^3 ship maintenance bay it could start tweaking the role of the ship and make it more en vogue. It would allow an alliance to have a strategic asset in the Titan, have a subcap escort fleet to position the titan (or titans) deep into enemy space, and be able to base out of it instead of forcing every attacking foe to live in NPC null. So in this brave new world with 50million m^3 SMAs, an alliance that would have moved 250 carriers twice - jumping from NPC station to NPC station completely risk free - could instead move 10 Titans + an escort fleet of 200. Through gates. Loaded with billions of isk worth of ships. Think of how glorious that could be! Please I need this.


Please do this. If not for Supers, for Titans as they are rather only being used as mobile Jump Bridges outside the rare battle like B-R.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#77 - 2014-10-09 18:34:15 UTC
Polo Marco wrote:
You know guys, when a horse kicks or bites you don't cut off its hooves or pull its teeth. You modify either the behavior of the horse or the behavior of the person using it. Nullsec sov, politics and combat methods have everything to do with what motivates the users of these ships and not the ships themselves. You hobble the horse, he's not worth his feed so its off to the auction block with him. You give the rider gloves and a shinguard and he never learns how to manage the animal. You are treating the symptoms not the problem.


Why don't you try this first:


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5078735#post5078735


Fixing a clock is easier to do with a screwdriver than a hammer..............

that is an impressive amount of bad ideas packed into one post without disrupting its purity with a single good idea
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#78 - 2014-10-09 18:34:16 UTC
Please increase the Mexallon in nullsec ores
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#79 - 2014-10-09 18:34:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
This shall be interesting...

-edit-

This is a good response to the industry side of things.

I'm also happy that combat based Capitals keep the nerf, which is the primary sourcesource of Nullsec stagnation!

Is there any hint of when Capitals will be allowed into Highsec?

Can you allow Carriers into Highsec in Phoebe?
(But not allow Capital modules being used, similar to bombs? And not allow the use of Fighters either?)

...
Nazri al Mahdi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2014-10-09 18:36:17 UTC
I take back all the horrible things I said about you Greyscale. 10ly jump range for JF still makes drone lands logistics much harder but at a level we can adapt to. To show our gratitude, you can have your way with any of my logistics pilots.