These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Tootenh'amon
#681 - 2014-10-10 11:20:17 UTC
xttz wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
GreyScale

In the shorter term can you increase the mexallon quantities in nullsec/lowsec ores to help make nullsec less reliant on JF logistics

Presently the value of nullsec ores is below that of highsec ores, due to the lack of Mexallon in nullsec ores
4x more Mexallon in Arkonor would help in the short term, until a more permanent balance can be achieved


Quoting a pretty big reason why JFs are so heavily used in nullsec.



That's a lot of bull. JFs are extensively used in nullsec because they can. 6 years ago there were way fewer jfs, yet somehow people still managed to wage huge wars (incidentally now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a jf noone seems to be fighting big wars anymore). The reason why jfs are used so heavily is because people need to have 5 replacement ships for each and every one of their 20 doctrines. It's because of people's wants, not because of their needs.

These changes should throw people out of their comfort zones, make them realise that 0.0 is actually the Wild West, bare bones, kill or be killed. You can't push someone out of his comfort zone only to a level he feels comfortable with, and that's what CCP is apparently trying to do.
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#682 - 2014-10-10 11:29:13 UTC
Tootenh'amon wrote:
xttz wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
GreyScale

In the shorter term can you increase the mexallon quantities in nullsec/lowsec ores to help make nullsec less reliant on JF logistics

Presently the value of nullsec ores is below that of highsec ores, due to the lack of Mexallon in nullsec ores
4x more Mexallon in Arkonor would help in the short term, until a more permanent balance can be achieved


Quoting a pretty big reason why JFs are so heavily used in nullsec.



That's a lot of bull. JFs are extensively used in nullsec because they can. 6 years ago there were way fewer jfs, yet somehow people still managed to wage huge wars (incidentally now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a jf noone seems to be fighting big wars anymore). The reason why jfs are used so heavily is because people need to have 5 replacement ships for each and every one of their 20 doctrines. It's because of people's wants, not because of their needs.

These changes should throw people out of their comfort zones, make them realise that 0.0 is actually the Wild West, bare bones, kill or be killed. You can't push someone out of his comfort zone only to a level he feels comfortable with, and that's what CCP is apparently trying to do.


you seem to be arguing against something that will reduce jf usage?
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#683 - 2014-10-10 11:29:33 UTC
Dwissi wrote:

Take some time and roll back a few years - this kind of argument has been used over and over again. It was the exact statement before JF where showing up, then it was used when more caps appeared - hell is was even one of the arguments why everyone wanted to evict BoB back in the days claiming they controlled all of it .

Playing the 'boogie-man' card of T2 is going to be badly expensive wont work on educated players any more. We alreadfy have a inflation of T2 ships compared to player age and necessity - not even mentioning how easy isk comes by these days. Its not special anymore - it has become standard to have easy access to it. And we shouldnt if we want the real Eve back that is challenging like a chess game with a decent oponent.



Firstly, I'd like to thank you for supporting my point. T2 products have gotten relatively cheaper since the years of BoB, thanks in no small part to easier logistics from Rorquals and JFs. While many (including myself) would disagree with this development, is the best solution really a short sharp shock that drops the market back a full decade in one day? I used to manage moon-mining towers with a carrier in 2006, and I can honestly say that was easier and safer than the originally proposed version of this devblog.

Back then many T2 ships and modules cost more than a 30 day timecard. Now you can buy many fitted T2 ships for 30 days of playtime - and you want to change back overnight? I wonder how many people share your devotion to this idea. It must be pretty awesome to be so set on a vision of how the game works you're willing for it to happen overnight at the detriment of the bulk of the player population, and benefit of the large established powers.

Yep, I'm sure suddenly rewinding the clock 10 years for the sake of nostalgia will make many players thrilled. Why don't you just campaign for a server rollback to 2005? So long as your rose-tinted vision of EVE is realised, screw everyone else, right?
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#684 - 2014-10-10 11:34:15 UTC
Tootenh'amon wrote:

That's a lot of bull. JFs are extensively used in nullsec because they can. 6 years ago there were way fewer jfs, yet somehow people still managed to wage huge wars (incidentally now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a jf noone seems to be fighting big wars anymore). The reason why jfs are used so heavily is because people need to have 5 replacement ships for each and every one of their 20 doctrines. It's because of people's wants, not because of their needs.

These changes should throw people out of their comfort zones, make them realise that 0.0 is actually the Wild West, bare bones, kill or be killed. You can't push someone out of his comfort zone only to a level he feels comfortable with, and that's what CCP is apparently trying to do.


"Hello, my name is anonymous forums alt. Here is some random theory on how I think a complex economy works although I don't have enough conviction to post this speculation with my real character. Please believe me anyway."
Dwissi
Miners Delight Reborn
#685 - 2014-10-10 11:38:21 UTC
xttz wrote:
Dwissi wrote:

Take some time and roll back a few years - this kind of argument has been used over and over again. It was the exact statement before JF where showing up, then it was used when more caps appeared - hell is was even one of the arguments why everyone wanted to evict BoB back in the days claiming they controlled all of it .

Playing the 'boogie-man' card of T2 is going to be badly expensive wont work on educated players any more. We alreadfy have a inflation of T2 ships compared to player age and necessity - not even mentioning how easy isk comes by these days. Its not special anymore - it has become standard to have easy access to it. And we shouldnt if we want the real Eve back that is challenging like a chess game with a decent oponent.



Firstly, I'd like to thank you for supporting my point. T2 products have gotten relatively cheaper since the years of BoB, thanks in no small part to easier logistics from Rorquals and JFs. While many (including myself) would disagree with this development, is the best solution really a short sharp shock that drops the market back a full decade in one day? I used to manage moon-mining towers with a carrier in 2006, and I can honestly say that was easier and safer than the originally proposed version of this devblog.

Back then many T2 ships and modules cost more than a 30 day timecard. Now you can buy many fitted T2 ships for 30 days of playtime - and you want to change back overnight? I wonder how many people share your devotion to this idea. It must be pretty awesome to be so set on a vision of how the game works you're willing for it to happen overnight at the detriment of the bulk of the player population, and benefit of the large established powers.

Yep, I'm sure suddenly rewinding the clock 10 years for the sake of nostalgia will make many players thrilled. Why don't you just campaign for a server rollback to 2005? So long as your rose-tinted vision of EVE is realised, screw everyone else, right?



+1 for making me smile - have to give you that.

You would be perfectly right if the rewinding would include everything - but it doesnt. Its just a few aspects that where on that list and all the additions since then where still untouched. And since you like numbers and no one likes mining lets put some relative numbers to your 30-day argument:

Any half-decent player can easily mine - yes i use this on purpose as it doesnt require too much skill - its way to a plex in less than 14 days nowadays. That puts your 30-day value into this equation: When i could afford 1 T2 ship back then i now can easily afford 2 (and most players in Eve are better than just half-decent thus inflation).

Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins

Before someone complains again: grr everyone

Greed is the death of loyalty
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#686 - 2014-10-10 11:40:14 UTC
Burneddi wrote:
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.


Yes, I have several disco ships of my own, however as was stated in another post, some ceptors when properly fit can reach as much as 10k +/- HP so unless a person has the gate bubbled with disco ships, and/or the ceptor pilot is slow, lazy or asleep, there is little chance that you are going to catch 90% of them.
with a proper setup, as you've stated, and the advantage of forethought, the balance swings more toward the disco ships...

I was just answering a blanket statement with a blanket reply :)

o/
Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Tootenh'amon
#687 - 2014-10-10 11:40:29 UTC
xttz wrote:
Tootenh'amon wrote:

That's a lot of bull. JFs are extensively used in nullsec because they can. 6 years ago there were way fewer jfs, yet somehow people still managed to wage huge wars (incidentally now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a jf noone seems to be fighting big wars anymore). The reason why jfs are used so heavily is because people need to have 5 replacement ships for each and every one of their 20 doctrines. It's because of people's wants, not because of their needs.

These changes should throw people out of their comfort zones, make them realise that 0.0 is actually the Wild West, bare bones, kill or be killed. You can't push someone out of his comfort zone only to a level he feels comfortable with, and that's what CCP is apparently trying to do.


"Hello, my name is anonymous forums alt. Here is some random theory on how I think a complex economy works although I don't have enough conviction to post this speculation with my real character. Please believe me anyway."


Made me smile Big smile
Jennifer Tanduay
smackin localz
#688 - 2014-10-10 11:45:55 UTC
really ? i got a job ccp i dont get paid to play this ****** game ..... wait for jump fuckique whatever is more wasted livetime !
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#689 - 2014-10-10 11:47:42 UTC
xttz wrote:
Baron Birco wrote:
Seems to me the only folks complaining about the JF range were 10yr old chars with JF alts capable of supplying their entire alliance via link to Jita.

The nurf to JF actually made dedicated industrialists extremely valuable to Nullsec alliances to develop their respective local economies. It would have encouraged greater integration of PvE-centric players and game play with PvP. The changes brought lines of communication into existence and all the PvP content that goes along with that.

What we have now is just one set of code contradicting the other.

RIP Phoebe.


Putting aside the other unresolved resource issues with living in null-sec, heavily nerfed logistics in a vacuum would cripple the entire T2 market for everyone. Do you want to pay 200mil for an Interceptor or 800mil for a HAC? The only people who win in that situation are those who have spent years assembling huge stockpiles of moon materials in high-sec and are able to control their distribution. Everyone else will pay through the nose or have to stick with T1.

CCP need to have a long hard look at re-balancing resource distribution before messing around any further with logistical ranges, as it won't be the large nullsec alliances paying the bill for it.




BEfore jf EXISTED, BEFORE JUMP BRIDGES AND before INVETION existed. A HAC costed 300M isk..

So stop exagerating. These changes woould NOT have an impact of more than 20-30% on the prices.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#690 - 2014-10-10 11:48:52 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Whisperen wrote:
Wow CCPs backbone up and disappeared again. The logistics changes was the best part now nothing matters.



Agree. Without the logistic changes, the benefits will be reduced to ZERO.

Zero extra content. Zero reasons to be happy about the expansion.

The hope was strong, but short lived.

That sided with people using haulers to travel trough bridges COMPLETELY negates all the changes.

Standard fast deployment will be jump bridge a hundred haulers , discarded on arrival and pods take ships from super carrieriers hangars :(


So the sole content from this patch was supposed to be freighters you can gank at a gate?



No.. was makign people play as a group and PROTECT those freighters.

If you cannot make ahalf a dozen friends in an MMO the thing that needs a real buff are not JF, but your social skills

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Arkumord Churhee
Nice Try.
#691 - 2014-10-10 11:58:02 UTC
I seriously feel that indy hulls should get a 18% per Racial Industrial level decrease in Jump Fatigue effects, instead of a flat 90% bonus, just to make it a tad bit harder to make "indy travel fleets" for people who are not actually ferrying anything. And, at the very least, the so-calles PvP'ers can be laughed at for training Racial Industrial to V.
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#692 - 2014-10-10 11:59:04 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
BEfore jf EXISTED, BEFORE JUMP BRIDGES AND before INVETION existed. A HAC costed 300M isk..

So stop exagerating. These changes woould NOT have an impact of more than 20-30% on the prices.


Yep absolutely. HACs did cost 300m isk. However 30 day timecards also cost 100m isk. Using these as a baseline, there has been a pretty substantial amount of ingame inflation since those days. Each single isk buys you less. Eight times less, apparently. With that in mind I was probably a bit low with my 800mil figure, as that's not eight times 300m :/

If you're having trouble following that I'm happy to retype it WITH RANDom capitalisation AND ADDITIONAL SPACES. Just let me know.
Jake Meracha
Icarus Holding
Solyaris Chtonium
#693 - 2014-10-10 11:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jake Meracha
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

Therefore, changes we are making to the previously-announced plan:
[list]
  • 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%


    • [edit 19:21 added bullet point 5 to first list]


    Thank you for listening to your NPC null community. Larger alliances and blocs can do escorts all day long for their logistics. For those that are smaller, we need supplies to hold our own out here, which requires a logistical supply chain.
    Elsa Hayes
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #694 - 2014-10-10 12:00:58 UTC
    Arkumord Churhee wrote:
    I seriously feel that indy hulls should get a 18% per Racial Industrial level decrease in Jump Fatigue effects, instead of a flat 90% bonus, just to make it a tad bit harder to make "indy travel fleets" for people who are not actually ferrying anything. And, at the very least, the so-calles PvP'ers can be laughed at for training Racial Industrial to V.


    The only indy that should get a fatigue reduction bonus is , as the name implies, the DEEP SPACE transport. No T1 hull should get it.
    Phoenix Jones
    Small-Arms Fire
    #695 - 2014-10-10 12:02:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
    I'll make a suggestion regarding the current industrial change, but this is a narrow suggestion, regarding all industrial subcaps and jump bridges/titan bridge fatigue.

    Making all industrial subcaps have a reduced fatigue timer is.. well slightly op in my opinion, but making just one of them is more controlled.

    I would suggest as a benefit of being able to fly it, the Deep Space Transport should be the only Industrial Subcap capable of reduced fatigue when taking jump bridges and titan bridges.

    You give that ship a completely dedicated role.

    The Blockade runner can already cloak, and use black ops bridges.

    So the Deep Space Transport should be the ship that can use jump bridges and titan bridges under reduced fatigue.

    It keeps T1 ships separate from the pool, and it causes people to truly think whether they want to use a DST, how to fit it, and where they can go with it.

    It gives it a dedicated purpose in lowsec and nullsec. It can't beat bubbles, but it can survive under fire. That pretty much sounds like its ideal position.

    Yaay!!!!
    Rolf Chr
    RC Industries
    #696 - 2014-10-10 12:12:39 UTC
    Kagura Nikon wrote:
    Adrie Atticus wrote:
    So the sole content from this patch was supposed to be freighters you can gank at a gate?



    No.. was makign people play as a group and PROTECT those freighters.

    If you cannot make ahalf a dozen friends in an MMO the thing that needs a real buff are not JF, but your social skills


    When will CCP release more content for SOLO players.. Yes it's a MMO, but it does not mean I want to play with people all the time. Some days I just want to float between planets without other people nagging about fleets every 30 minutes.
    Zifrian
    Federal Defense Union
    Gallente Federation
    #697 - 2014-10-10 12:14:36 UTC
    Can someone explain to me why jump freighters and rorquals jump ranges limit "force projection"? I just don't get why they are part of these changes at all.

    Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

    Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder
    Rolf Chr
    RC Industries
    #698 - 2014-10-10 12:22:59 UTC
    Remove plex and other gametime CHEATS from game so people actually have to work for their isk and the entire problem will be gone since there will not be enough time to waste on constant pvp
    Arsine Mayhem
    Doomheim
    #699 - 2014-10-10 12:30:09 UTC
    Oh, so no freighter convoy's? Could have been fun.

    Carebears 1
    Pirates 0
    Luscius Uta
    #700 - 2014-10-10 12:31:40 UTC
    I love the changes and I want to hug CCP Greyscale for deciding to give more love to JFs and Blops. Also, I noticed some people are unhappy with Rorqual not being given the same treatment - yes, I know they are great at fueling POSes, but they also have superb tanks, can remote rep and their DPS isn't too shabby either so they can have a combat role...of course the only reason Battle Rorquals weren't so common is because Dreads and Carriers are better at everything. If Rorqual had been given higher jump range than Dreads, Carriers and Supers then I'm pretty sure that Rorqual hotdrops would become a thing.

    Workarounds are not bugfixes.