These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Burneddi
Avanto
Hole Control
#581 - 2014-10-10 06:00:16 UTC
Celly S wrote:
Hendrick Tallardar wrote:


Don't smartbombs work as a pretty good deterrent for Interceptors?
Sure, because it is a well known fact that every interceptor materializes within 5k of a disco ship when it jumps a gate...

If one was to smartbomb interceptors, you would do it by placing your disco BSes on the outgate, 5km in the direction of the ingate, then activating your smartbombs when the ceptors are landing. Just like you smartbomb anything else. Not even ceptors land fast enough to be completely immune to this, and you can get killed while in warp (your invulnerability only begins when you exit warp).

The key issue is that it takes some 5-10 smartbomb battleships to kill a properly fit travel ceptor, but that's not really that large an obstacle.
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
#582 - 2014-10-10 06:00:25 UTC
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benefits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).




Ummm i don't know where to begin with this other than, having faith in bs's is not a good idea especially when on Oct the 5 a large bs fleet was taking out by a fleet of bombers.

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.
Perseus Kallistratos
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#583 - 2014-10-10 06:06:13 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benifits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).

This is false. Interceptors are much better at travel than t1 industrials, even in the face of jump bridges. Check here for the math that proves it takes interceptors half the time to cross large distances.


It is not, while using gates has a certain risk (doesnt matter if you are using Interceptors, risk is there) and you dont get to leave systems out (as per jumping 5ly ahead), thus maintaining very low footprint compared to using gates and traveling system to system.

Using Indis and bridges will yield no such thing, also what about JUMP BRIDGES? using Indis is not and is never as fast as using jump bridges with 90% less fatigue.

Take a look at the math again. Using interceptors to cross the distance from YA0 to F2O takes half the time of using jump bridges in a travel fit industrial.

You can't talk about comparative risk while completely ignoring bubble immunity. That interceptors are vulnerable in a very specific scenario requiring significant setup time (and the accumulation of a boatload of fatigue for the smartbombing battleships) does not even remotely compare to the dangers a T1 industrial faces taking gates. You do know that jump bridges are only one per system, right? That anyone using them has to take a gate to get to the next one?


I think you should come up with some more math calculations to prove that your interceptor is faster than jump bridges.

If you come up with more numbers that substantiate your claim, then you're either bad at math or your jump bridge network is a pile of ****.

I find both options promising.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#584 - 2014-10-10 06:09:42 UTC
Perseus Kallistratos wrote:
I think you should come up with some more math calculations to prove that your interceptor is faster than jump bridges.

If you come up with more numbers that substantiate your claim, then you're either bad at math or your jump bridge network is a pile of ****.

I find both options promising.

I already did. Do all of you forget that fatigue is a thing when it is inconvenient?

I'm sorry that your shared, institutional paranoid fantasies of jump bridges aren't substantiated by reality. Truly, I am. They just don't compare to the nullified interceptor.

Hell -- the guy who came up with them is from your tribe. Really, you only have yourselves to blame.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Perseus Kallistratos
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#585 - 2014-10-10 06:14:17 UTC
Querns wrote:
Perseus Kallistratos wrote:
I think you should come up with some more math calculations to prove that your interceptor is faster than jump bridges.

If you come up with more numbers that substantiate your claim, then you're either bad at math or your jump bridge network is a pile of ****.

I find both options promising.

I already did. Do all of you forget that fatigue is a thing when it is inconvenient?

I'm sorry that your shared, institutional paranoid fantasies of jump bridges aren't substantiated by reality. Truly, I am. They just don't compare to the nullified interceptor.

Hell -- the guy who came up with them is from your tribe. Really, you only have yourselves to blame.


Sir I am going to have to ask you for more numbers and equations before i can take your claims seriously. Tribal politics I'm afraid.
Tiberizzle
Your Mom Heavy Industries
#586 - 2014-10-10 06:15:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiberizzle
a bonus to covert jump portal fatigue is stupid

bomber siegefleets are one of the most effective tools in the sov null strategic toolbox and nearly everyone has a combat T3 doctrine, which can carry a depot and refit in space to a minimal mass covert/nullified travel fit

pretty much the absolute last thing the game needs is everything except low-counterability, non-content-generating coward strategies and convenience features to be kneecapped in the name of nerfing force projection while the most egregious examples of content avoidance tactics are buffed stratospherically
Kalissis
#587 - 2014-10-10 06:16:19 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benifits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).

This is false. Interceptors are much better at travel than t1 industrials, even in the face of jump bridges. Check here for the math that proves it takes interceptors half the time to cross large distances.


It is not, while using gates has a certain risk (doesnt matter if you are using Interceptors, risk is there) and you dont get to leave systems out (as per jumping 5ly ahead), thus maintaining very low footprint compared to using gates and traveling system to system.

Using Indis and bridges will yield no such thing, also what about JUMP BRIDGES? using Indis is not and is never as fast as using jump bridges with 90% less fatigue.

Take a look at the math again. Using interceptors to cross the distance from YA0 to F2O takes half the time of using jump bridges in a travel fit industrial.

You can't talk about comparative risk while completely ignoring bubble immunity. That interceptors are vulnerable in a very specific scenario requiring significant setup time (and the accumulation of a boatload of fatigue for the smartbombing battleships) does not even remotely compare to the dangers a T1 industrial faces taking gates. You do know that jump bridges are only one per system, right? That anyone using them has to take a gate to get to the next one?


You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).
Perseus Kallistratos
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#588 - 2014-10-10 06:18:45 UTC
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benifits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).

This is false. Interceptors are much better at travel than t1 industrials, even in the face of jump bridges. Check here for the math that proves it takes interceptors half the time to cross large distances.


It is not, while using gates has a certain risk (doesnt matter if you are using Interceptors, risk is there) and you dont get to leave systems out (as per jumping 5ly ahead), thus maintaining very low footprint compared to using gates and traveling system to system.

Using Indis and bridges will yield no such thing, also what about JUMP BRIDGES? using Indis is not and is never as fast as using jump bridges with 90% less fatigue.

Take a look at the math again. Using interceptors to cross the distance from YA0 to F2O takes half the time of using jump bridges in a travel fit industrial.

You can't talk about comparative risk while completely ignoring bubble immunity. That interceptors are vulnerable in a very specific scenario requiring significant setup time (and the accumulation of a boatload of fatigue for the smartbombing battleships) does not even remotely compare to the dangers a T1 industrial faces taking gates. You do know that jump bridges are only one per system, right? That anyone using them has to take a gate to get to the next one?


You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).



Sir I'm afraid your logic has no place in this thread. I'm going to have to ask you to tone it down.
Kalissis
#589 - 2014-10-10 06:18:55 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benefits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).




Ummm i don't know where to begin with this other than, having faith in bs's is not a good idea especially when on Oct the 5 a large bs fleet was taking out by a fleet of bombers.


BS is just an example, take any other ship, its the mass caching that counts.
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
#590 - 2014-10-10 06:19:03 UTC
Ok now a serious post.


1. Having working with people that do regular jf runs to null stations / npc areas for null alliances to pick up and deliver to their area. The 10 ly range is acceptable dont change it.

2. Next I would like to argue that a carrier for the most part is used more for hauling than combat i would like to see their range increase a little. 6lys.

3. Rorquals - how about a balance, decrease their drone bonus by 50% for an increase of range of 2.5 lyrs. its a 50/50 trade off on that.

4. Black ops - this is good. the range increase will work well not only with moving fleets, but deep space transports now have a bonus range as well. I can see logistic chains using black ops now as a viable option.

Finally - i still would like to see jump fatigue scaled rather than a flat rate for all other capitals.


To everyone still complaining, hey they met us half way on some of our demands and can i have your stuff?

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#591 - 2014-10-10 06:20:05 UTC
Perseus Kallistratos wrote:
Querns wrote:
Perseus Kallistratos wrote:
I think you should come up with some more math calculations to prove that your interceptor is faster than jump bridges.

If you come up with more numbers that substantiate your claim, then you're either bad at math or your jump bridge network is a pile of ****.

I find both options promising.

I already did. Do all of you forget that fatigue is a thing when it is inconvenient?

I'm sorry that your shared, institutional paranoid fantasies of jump bridges aren't substantiated by reality. Truly, I am. They just don't compare to the nullified interceptor.

Hell -- the guy who came up with them is from your tribe. Really, you only have yourselves to blame.


Sir I am going to have to ask you for more numbers and equations before i can take your claims seriously. Tribal politics I'm afraid.

[x] ran out of rational arguments

Eve-o posters, ladies and gentlemen. I'll be here all week.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#592 - 2014-10-10 06:22:47 UTC
Kalissis wrote:

You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).


You're ignoring that bubbles stop T1 industrials cold, while being literally ignored by an interceptor.

Constructing a complicated vignette to try and prove an edge case is a pretty sure sign that you're out of ideas, and are only arguing because someone you don't like disagrees with you.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Burneddi
Avanto
Hole Control
#593 - 2014-10-10 06:23:21 UTC
Kalissis wrote:

You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).

I wonder what would happen if someone bubbled the JB when a fleet of T1 Industrials warp to it and launched some bombs at it.

I'd kinda like to see that.
Vlade Randal
Kenshin.
Fraternity.
#594 - 2014-10-10 06:24:47 UTC
+1 Great idea changing jump freighter jump range to 10ly

The Rorqual is used a lot in nullsec transport, for dropping control towers, fueling pos, and as an alternative logistical transport ship for those lacking the skills or isk for a jump freighter. It plays a vital role in current nullsec logistics at present. Therefore, I suggest that the rorqual should also have the 10ly range to enable it to continue its vital role in 0.0.

The only other suggestion I would make, is that 5ly is marginally short for reaching key logistics points that have stations to dock in. Several of the jump routes i have looked at are 5.1ly to 5.8ly. Therefore I recommend increasing maximum jump range of combat vessels to 6ly. This would still achieve the goal of reducing force projection, while keeping it reasonably painless to move combat ships over time when needed.
Tootenh'amon
#595 - 2014-10-10 06:25:10 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:

You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).


You're ignoring that bubbles stop T1 industrials cold, while being literally ignored by an interceptor.

Constructing a complicated vignette to try and prove an edge case is a pretty sure sign that you're out of ideas, and are only arguing because someone you don't like disagrees with you.


I wonder where in a jb titan chain the bubbles will be... You'll deploy them yourselves?
Tiberizzle
Your Mom Heavy Industries
#596 - 2014-10-10 06:26:33 UTC
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Querns wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
With T1 Indis having only 90% fatigue, power projection is going to be:

1. get into T1 into
2. project your ass over 10 titans (5ly bridges) to BS cache location.
3. get into BS, fight
4. fly back with your T1 indi using same 10titans.

@CCP Greyscale this benifits verly large groups that can cache their ships across EVE, please take away the 90% bonus and stick to your plan having this bonus only on Rorq and JF (and maybe BLOPS bridged ships).

This is false. Interceptors are much better at travel than t1 industrials, even in the face of jump bridges. Check here for the math that proves it takes interceptors half the time to cross large distances.


It is not, while using gates has a certain risk (doesnt matter if you are using Interceptors, risk is there) and you dont get to leave systems out (as per jumping 5ly ahead), thus maintaining very low footprint compared to using gates and traveling system to system.

Using Indis and bridges will yield no such thing, also what about JUMP BRIDGES? using Indis is not and is never as fast as using jump bridges with 90% less fatigue.

Take a look at the math again. Using interceptors to cross the distance from YA0 to F2O takes half the time of using jump bridges in a travel fit industrial.

You can't talk about comparative risk while completely ignoring bubble immunity. That interceptors are vulnerable in a very specific scenario requiring significant setup time (and the accumulation of a boatload of fatigue for the smartbombing battleships) does not even remotely compare to the dangers a T1 industrial faces taking gates. You do know that jump bridges are only one per system, right? That anyone using them has to take a gate to get to the next one?


You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).



smartbombing an interceptor pilot with an IQ higher than that of a garden vegetable works exactly once until they realize it's possible and spend all of a second realizing the numerous ways the tactic is defeated with minimal time and effort on their part

timing a bombing run is virtually impossible

there is essentially no risk of even being minorly inconvenienced, nevermind dying, you are reaching so hard it should be classed as sexual assault
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#597 - 2014-10-10 06:26:59 UTC
Burneddi wrote:
Kalissis wrote:

You are ignoring so many facts in your calculation. T1 industies can be learned in no time while interceptors can take up to 23d on a fresh char. Smartbombing incoming Interceptors is very well possible, look at how rens pirates perfected smart bombing back then, a focused group will kill every interceptor crossing. Well timed bombing runs will kill your interceptors too. Insta locking is possible in some cases (wrong inti fit/****** skills). So there is a lot of risk involed, and I bet ppl find even more ways. Fact is you can keep ppl away from any risk using Industials and JB/Titans while going gate to gate involes risk, more attention from the player and a way bigger footprint (even on the ingame MAP).

I wonder what would happen if someone bubbled the JB when a fleet of T1 Industrials warp to it and launched some bombs at it.

I'd kinda like to see that.

Same.

This doesn't happen to interceptors~

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Inslander Wessette
Unleashed' Fury
The Initiative.
#598 - 2014-10-10 06:29:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Inslander Wessette
Querns wrote:
Inslander Wessette wrote:
Querns wrote:
Andrea Keuvo wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:


  • 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.


    • You do realize that this will be horribly abused to quickly move capital pilot clones and will undo a lot of the positive aspects of the changes you are making right?

    This is not true. Interceptors are much faster over the distances you're worried about.


    Interceptor's cant carry as much as T1 haulers or as easily trainable than a T1 hauler. which is like 30 min ?

    Ah, yes, the terrifying 13k m^3 that a travel fit wreathe or blockade runner can hold. Truly, we are in the, as Laughable Xhosa Girl once said, "the winter of our discount tent." You could fit a whole CRUISER in there.

    In what world does it make more sense to carry around single ships in a t1 industrial everywhere you go over using a jump freighter on an alt, or employing a corp/alliance/coalition JF service to do the hauling for you?

    i can do 37 k m^3 on my interon 5 ? + Force projection is not entirely about time taken to travel but also how you travel. Moving through cyno's makes you hard to intercept and the harder to predict /intercept . Exactly why would i be travel fit again ?
    Eryn Velasquez
    #599 - 2014-10-10 06:30:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Eryn Velasquez
    Gorgof Intake wrote:


    Grath is spot on. Greyscale, I ask you a simple question here. Do you think this will change the current status quo of logistics in Eve? Does reeling back capital projection alone promote content in nullsec without also finally cutting the umbilical cord to Jita nullsec currently relies on? Its a bit of a post, but if you could take the time to read it, I'd appreciate it.

    1. At the moment, there is little to no point in me sourcing, producing or converting nullsec materials locally. It's far more time and energy efficient to continue to import and export out of Jita through a JF cyno chain.

    2. Alliance mates who run moon goo POS networks across 6 different regions maintain those POS with relative ease through a similar JF network, importing and exporting out of Jita. The logistics capability to import a large proportion of a major powerbloc's war materiel needs as well as then exporting out a heafty chunk of the wealth of nullsec moon goo is done by less than a dozen players, in relative safety and with no real need of support from our alliance mates.


    Create a new class of ships, the tanker, not capable of jumping. Perhaps a variant of the Orca. Disallow fuelblocks in JFs. This would near completely make this moongoo networks crush.

    And by the way - disallow also packaged ships in JFs. They should be produced locally, assembled, fitted and transported in carriers and motherships.

    _“A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau _
    machuugoo
    Kenshin.
    Fraternity.
    #600 - 2014-10-10 06:30:18 UTC
    Vlade Randal wrote:
    +1 Great idea changing jump freighter jump range to 10ly

    The Rorqual is used a lot in nullsec transport, for dropping control towers, fueling pos, and as an alternative logistical transport ship for those lacking the skills or isk for a jump freighter. It plays a vital role in current nullsec logistics at present. Therefore, I suggest that the rorqual should also have the 10ly range to enable it to continue its vital role in 0.0.

    The only other suggestion I would make, is that 5ly is marginally short for reaching key logistics points that have stations to dock in. Several of the jump routes i have looked at are 5.1ly to 5.8ly. Therefore I recommend increasing maximum jump range of combat vessels to 6ly. This would still achieve the goal of reducing force projection, while keeping it reasonably painless to move combat ships over time when needed.


    +1