These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#181 - 2014-10-09 19:48:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Lallante wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Sure, because Jump Freighters are what holds empires together. If the troops can't hold the space or the moons because of the "force projection" nerfs then it wont matter if a jump freighter can more easily pick up anything ie trade goods, ships/mods, moongoo, etc.


Its both. Unnerffing JFs just means the status quo for logistics is preserved and nullsec industry will never develop. Why bother building in nullsec when you can JF from Jita in safety?



I'm thinking there is already an incentive to build in 0.0 - discounts and lower cost indices as well as not having to haul the ore and pay for fuel to haul the said stuff from highsec. The problem is there's no large reliable market to sell stuff so you have to build one offs which is counterproductive. Making logistics more difficult will not increase demand in 0.0.. Unless i'm missing something nobody will build that much more stuff in 0.0 just because logistics is harder..
Etrei Kordisin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#182 - 2014-10-09 19:48:44 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
There's no smooth progressive nerfing of JF range, anywhere under 10 will cut off Stain and Drone regions entirely while leaving (i think) all other regions mostly intact. The map just wasn't designed for sub-10 ly jumps. Such a change would be simply unfair to some of the existing inhabitants.

Also freighters have no resists so keep in mind that they are basically indefensible against even small BC fleets.

It basically will amount to scout, go/no go. Engagements will be even much more so avoided than most engagements in EVE are.


Funnily enough, the map was the same before jump drives. Things were fine. Yes, you'd have to go through space that isn't stain. How terrible!
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#183 - 2014-10-09 19:49:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Etrei Kordisin wrote:
It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time.


It's not a question of trust, it's a question of a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. The goals of this change are pretty clear, and we're keen to follow up and ensure that we hit them over time.


your goals are terrible
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#184 - 2014-10-09 19:51:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
CCP Greyscale wrote:
a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it.

And you call it a sandbox?
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#185 - 2014-10-09 19:51:32 UTC
Then lobbest thou thy Holy Nerf of Greyscale towards thy foe, who being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#186 - 2014-10-09 19:51:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lallante
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
* 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


Mr Greyscale, I'd love to understand why you think that is a bad thing. Obviously with 5LY range JFs, the current status quo of logistics is untenable (I agree, it simply wouldnt survive), but I think this is a good thing. Is it really good game design that a small handful players in a 3000+ man alliance can easily fuel hundreds of POSs and provide replacement ships for all loses right to the frontline without any meaningful risk?

Alliances held space before JFs existed. And in fact, the logistical needs were vastly greater in those days (hello 60 moon outpost systems). It was possible, and people did it. Why is this unnerf needed, what are you afraid will happen if you dont do it?

Wouldnt it be better if logistics was a meaningful consideration both for holding space and for taking it?

I'd like to repeat my earlier suggestion. Fine, let JFs have 10LY but remove the 90% Fatigue reduction from them - this forces players to make meaninful strategic decisions - small 5LY hops with freighters/transports, or occasional 10ly hops with a JF.

As it is, the net result of your proposed changes is no-one will use anything but JFs for null logistics, JFs wont be interdicted mid journey because they will continue the current status quo of going from POS to POS and never gates, and business will continue very much as usual.
Ripard Teg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#187 - 2014-10-09 19:51:52 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
  • 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.
Just to be clear: the combination of these two statements seem to say that the JF range change is likely to be a temporary compromise fix while you put phases 2 and 3 of your plan into effect. And that once more of the overall plan is in place, the range of JFs is then likely to be reduced.

Is that more or less accurate with the information you have today?

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#188 - 2014-10-09 19:52:00 UTC
I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:

Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.

We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#189 - 2014-10-09 19:54:22 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Etrei Kordisin wrote:
It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time.


It's not a question of trust, it's a question of a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. The goals of this change are pretty clear, and we're keen to follow up and ensure that we hit them over time.


your goals are terrible


I don't think their goals are terrible, I think they are intensely unrealistic given the approaches they want to use. I still think the most likely outcomes are a worse null than what we have now because they aren't taking some key things into account.

It's like Super Capitals all over again. You could tell that CCP was thinking "no way these things will ever be a problem, they are so expensive and can only be built in space that is vulnerable". We all know how that thinking turned out.

CCP constantly underestimates what is 'viable' and what isn't despite 11+ years of players demonstrating the extreme lengths they'll go to to gain an in game advantage.
Anthar Thebess
#190 - 2014-10-09 19:54:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Do CCP have any plans about shifting regions away from each other a bit?
Currently some of the regions mix with each other.
Overall this kind of shift could be good for the game as it could create more variety in EVE universe.

Also do CCP plan to create lowsec connections for big nullsec regions like Venal or Stain to ease flow of new players to this regions?

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
The Cue
Violence is the Answer
#191 - 2014-10-09 19:54:41 UTC
Lallante wrote:
Please could CCP consider dropping the 90% fatigue reduction from Jump Freighters as the tradeoff for this change. Force players to make a meaningful choice - Bridge a freighter or some transports 5LY with 90% fatigue reduction, or Jump a JF 10LY but only get to do it once or twice before fatigue becomes a real issue.



Many times over this. Importantly, this would provide a very significant choice between freighters and JFs.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#192 - 2014-10-09 19:55:40 UTC
Etrei Kordisin wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
There's no smooth progressive nerfing of JF range, anywhere under 10 will cut off Stain and Drone regions entirely while leaving (i think) all other regions mostly intact. The map just wasn't designed for sub-10 ly jumps. Such a change would be simply unfair to some of the existing inhabitants.

Also freighters have no resists so keep in mind that they are basically indefensible against even small BC fleets.

It basically will amount to scout, go/no go. Engagements will be even much more so avoided than most engagements in EVE are.


Funnily enough, the map was the same before jump drives. Things were fine. Yes, you'd have to go through space that isn't stain. How terrible!


I see what you are saying but there's still something to be said about hitting inhabitants of just one or two selected regions with a nerfbat disproportionately.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#193 - 2014-10-09 19:56:42 UTC
CCP Greyscale, could you explain, why do you allow capitals to go through the gates?
What is the reasoning behind it?
And maybe it would be enough to let them through regional gates only?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#194 - 2014-10-09 19:57:10 UTC
Querns wrote:
Is trading the drone damage bonus on rorqs for 10LY max range in the interim, before you do a proper balance pass on rorquals, something you all are willing to do?


Happy to discuss it, yes :)

Evelgrivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Quoting first post:

Quote:
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.


Well... where do you want nullsec industry to be?


Somewhere where we feel comfortable nerfing JFs further :P We're not in a position to discuss details right now, but people building a significant percentage of their basic needs on-site without relying on JF chains is likely to figure in the final intention.

Etrei Kordisin wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Etrei Kordisin wrote:
It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time.


[quote=Overlord Invictus][quote=CCP Greyscale]

Here, let me quote a little snippet of the blog that you might've missed:



so basically the line you're towing is we cannot critique the changes because if we do your retort is that there are more changes on the way that may or may not quell your issues, but unfortunately for you, you will not know if theyre going to make life better until you're fully chained down and lubed up (ie fully committed to the full plan)?


No, I'm saying that our opinion on whether or not this constitutes a complete fix is very thoroughly laid out in the blog, and it's not clear how asking me to explain how this change fixes everything is constructive.
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#195 - 2014-10-09 19:58:30 UTC
So CCP watered down the changes in power projection nerf. I think this is all temporary until they make more changes to nullsec industry and resource availability. Once those things change I see them coming round with the hammer for round 2 of nerfs and rightfully so. A power projection nerf is meaningless unless all things are hit. But for the interim this is a acceptable bargain.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#196 - 2014-10-09 19:59:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Edward Olmops
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Conclusions we have reached through this exercise:
[list]
  • 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.


    • *sigh*
    Long-term, I would really favour the stronger nerf to Jump freighters as they kill the need for industry in nullsec and also interaction with entities sitting between Jita and their destination.

    However, there is a number of essential ressources that are not available in every part of the galaxy.
    If long-distance hauling would be much more difficult, this ressource distribution needs to change imo.
    Things that are vital for T1/T2 industry should be available everywhere - even if some things might be rare in one area and abundant in another to make trade routes viable.

    Then it would be impossible to starve an area to death by cutting off through nullsec entry gatecamps and/or extremely long jump routes.

    At the moment this affects mainly:
    - Moon materials
    - Ice
    - Datacores

    The complete range of Moon materials is needed for any serious T2 production.
    And one definitely needs all types of Isotopes for industry (some setups are e.g. impossible without Caldari Towers)

    I believe seeding a few moons and spawning smaller quantities of different Ice flavours (like Amarr and Minmatar Ice in Caldari space Ice belts) could solve the issue.

    Datacores are not THAT much an issue since they are small, but still it would be cool to have at least some source for them in deep Nullsec.
    Pirate Loyalty shops / R&D agents?
    Pirate Agents in space?
    Reasonable quantities in Data/Relic Sites?

    Any chance such a change could happen some time in the future as a follow-up?
    DexterShark
    Trask Industries
    #197 - 2014-10-09 19:59:24 UTC
    Where do I sign up for the list of Rorqual Logistics pilots that are falling over themselves to hand in their Drone bonus so that it might be put in line with the JF 10LY range?

    Take all the combat / defensive bonuses off it and call it a pure logistics / support platform if that is your concern - because that's what it's purely used for.

    The ~Battle Rorqual~ thing is a punchline to a bad joke, rather than an actual real-world use case of the ship.
    MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
    Pandemic Unicorns
    #198 - 2014-10-09 19:59:28 UTC  |  Edited by: MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
    Certainly makes a massive difference for npcnull dwellers. In one jump Stain can be reached from Khanid (Saminer > T-NN only), Outer Ring can be reached from highsec (most usefully Orvolle to the hub station in 4C-B), the south-west corner of Venal can be reached from Lonetrek (although none of the station systems), and Curse/Great Wildlands can be reached without taking a gate.
    Yroc Jannseen
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #199 - 2014-10-09 19:59:31 UTC
    Mr Omniblivion wrote:
    I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:

    Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.

    We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics.


    I'd be happy if they took away the drone bonus and gave the rorq 9ly or 8ly.


    I'd be really happy if they embraced the Rorqs tower logistics role and gave some sort of bonus for carrying fuel blocks.
    Yuri Thorpe
    Volatile Restability
    PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
    #200 - 2014-10-09 20:00:41 UTC
    PRAISE M60 JESUS