These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Care bear capitals too protected?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#61 - 2015-06-09 22:41:07 UTC
Meh, just give Rorqs a unique ability to be immune to Interceptor/Frigate points, and to have it extend that bonus to any industrial/ORE ships on grid in fleet with it. Get rid of its drones, beef up its defensive stats and mining buffs, and remove the ability for mining links to run in a POS field.

The reason it's silly to put a Rorq in belt is because of bubble-immune inties and their super-duper warp speeds. You can go from clear intel to an inty-pointed Rorq faster that it can get off grid. Make it (and its associated industrial fleet) invulnerable to the roaming inty gangs and it's suddenly much less risky to put it in a belt.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#62 - 2015-06-09 23:51:21 UTC
This thread puts a scene into my mind.

There are some calm people trying to explain something rational to someone. They quietly listen but as soon as they stop talking, all they get is frothing at the mouth screaming and demands that are completely illogical.
The calm people haven't realised that the one they are talking to is insane, yet.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#63 - 2015-06-09 23:56:04 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Warfare links boost combat factors for PVP players (i.e. people shooting people).
Mining links boost mining factors for PVE players (i.e. people shooting rocks).

Possibly because a sudden overnight drop in mining yield might not be good for the game overall, because though a Rorqual in a belt is silly, a deployed one is insanity. Only CCP knows their reasoning though.



I fancy this as an issue generally with OGB separate from boosting from a POS shield. It's not the same issue mostly, but the OGB issue is far more sensitive and to address indie boosting from POS means the OGB issue adjacent to it.

From what I am hearing the legacy code around this is something like having a tumor with an artery running through it: you can't just cut it out. But that's not meaning it's impossible. I think it means, how much resources go into making a change that could potentially bring in another "summer of rage"?

Were it up to me nothing would apply if it were off grid. But then we would also have to confront "grid fu", meaning that even further modifications could be needed. If you end up with someone running some monster grid constantly and thus expanding the range, would grid fu, which is tolerated for the most part, have to be deemed an exploit?

Or just drop a range on these boosters and stick to that as if it were a logi?


Some days I'm glad I'm not a developer for CCP. I'd be afraid to touch this. (the other days I'm just drunk but that's off topic)

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#64 - 2015-06-09 23:59:35 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:

Or just drop a range on these boosters and stick to that as if it were a logi?


I've suggested that before, and was told that the number of calculations needed to do that would fry the servers. It was also mentioned that the technical limitations are the only reason that any boosts at all are still off grid, because they can't figure out how to do it without causing huge lag.

The discussion is over, basically. Boosts will be on grid, as soon as they figure out a way to do it.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#65 - 2015-06-10 00:03:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Same trigger that tells your watch list if someone is on grid with you or not can also fire off a "Are they boosting me? Y/N" ... or the same trigger that updates you overview.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Brutus Utama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2015-06-10 12:15:59 UTC
If you make rorquals on grid boosters and put them at HUGE risk because its basically a sitting duck miners will stop using them.... which means less ore gets mined.... which means the price of ore will rise which means the cost of building everything in game will rise which means your 10m cruiser suddenly costs 30-40m due to the Huge reduction of minerals being mined.

i dont think people understand that if the rorqual boost was removed prices would probably double....if not go higher for basically anything built by players i guess more than 50% of the ore mined is in null sec if not a greater number....

by taking away the bonus's of a rorqual by making it not worth the risk will also increase the price of ores due to the 10-20% lower mining speed/ yield of using the orca.

which in turn would mean miners would move back to high sec.... meaning less people for all the PvPers to get kills from because hey if you cant shoot anything that fights back then go shoot miners.... so all the people who want the rorqual moved to on grid only will probley be worse off also due to the miners not mining anymore... they might actually have to go and (attempt) to shoot somone who will fight back.