These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[November] Rorqual Astrahus citadel docking fix

First post First post First post
Author
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#41 - 2016-09-20 16:48:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Flynt
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

Source? Last I heard was that they were thinking about removal of mining rigs from citadels without destroying them, which is quite a difference.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !

Erick Asmock
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2016-09-20 16:56:03 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Philip Shazih wrote:
The supposed to be end all be all mining ship (that will become a lot less usefull soon) cant dock in the station thats supposed to excel in refining... makes sense to you?



Citadel aren't supposed to excel in refining, that is a stop gap measure until drilling platforms come about

Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

If you aren't quite sure, re read the dev blog for the structures and look at the part where it talks rigs - it specifically didn't put those rigs in with citadel rigs, cause the aren't it is a band aid until the drilling platforms arrive


Assuming you are correct...

Putting mechanics like this as stop gap measures are in and of themselves game breaking mechanics. Nothing is worse than directing your CUSTOMER BASE in one direction temporarily and them pulling the carpet out from under them...horrible design and horrible customer service.

1 star in yelp for this.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#43 - 2016-09-20 16:56:08 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
I'm inordinately fond of miner tears and even I think this is unwarranted.



It's just more of the same, really. 'This is how we think you should be doing it, so we're going to force you to do it that way'. Small mining groups in lowsec can't afford a Fortizar, and even if they could, a Fortizar onlining in lowsec or NPC null is a big fat target.

Might as well have told the smaller mining groups "So you were feeling good about your small mining group managing to buy a Rorqual for boosts? Well, too bad. Go back to sitting in a POS (while we let you) and running a compression array. You're not allowed to use the shiny new toys."

There's literally no visible reason to push this through now, instead of waiting for the industrial complexes and drilling platforms. It's not like people are using Battle Rorquals en masse and then ducking into waiting astrahusen.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#44 - 2016-09-20 16:59:47 UTC
Sarah Flynt wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

Source? Last I heard was that they were thinking about removal of mining rigs from citadels without destroying them, which is quite a difference.



Nah, before people spent 250 bil on XL reprocessing rigs, they asked and it was made clear you would get a one time refund of rigs
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#45 - 2016-09-20 17:01:40 UTC
Erick Asmock wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Philip Shazih wrote:
The supposed to be end all be all mining ship (that will become a lot less usefull soon) cant dock in the station thats supposed to excel in refining... makes sense to you?



Citadel aren't supposed to excel in refining, that is a stop gap measure until drilling platforms come about

Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

If you aren't quite sure, re read the dev blog for the structures and look at the part where it talks rigs - it specifically didn't put those rigs in with citadel rigs, cause the aren't it is a band aid until the drilling platforms arrive


Assuming you are correct...

Putting mechanics like this as stop gap measures are in and of themselves game breaking mechanics. Nothing is worse than directing your CUSTOMER BASE in one direction temporarily and them pulling the carpet out from under them...horrible design and horrible customer service.

1 star in yelp for this.



Did you really think the Citadel would become the reprocessing platform after all the dev blogs specifically said the drilling platform would be?

They needed to do it to get rid of outposts quicker, so they don't hang around as long as POS will have to.

It wasn't a secret
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#46 - 2016-09-20 17:04:00 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Erick Asmock wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Philip Shazih wrote:
The supposed to be end all be all mining ship (that will become a lot less usefull soon) cant dock in the station thats supposed to excel in refining... makes sense to you?



Citadel aren't supposed to excel in refining, that is a stop gap measure until drilling platforms come about

Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

If you aren't quite sure, re read the dev blog for the structures and look at the part where it talks rigs - it specifically didn't put those rigs in with citadel rigs, cause the aren't it is a band aid until the drilling platforms arrive


Assuming you are correct...

Putting mechanics like this as stop gap measures are in and of themselves game breaking mechanics. Nothing is worse than directing your CUSTOMER BASE in one direction temporarily and them pulling the carpet out from under them...horrible design and horrible customer service.

1 star in yelp for this.



Did you really think the Citadel would become the reprocessing platform after all the dev blogs specifically said the drilling platform would be?

They needed to do it to get rid of outposts quicker, so they don't hang around as long as POS will have to.

It wasn't a secret

The logical time to lock the Rorqual out is therefore when the replacement structures are released.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Francisco Belaqua
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#47 - 2016-09-20 17:09:47 UTC
Just wanted to add my voice to the general consensus that this is horrible. This completely destroys the Rorq's ability to do Null Sec logistics in feasible manner. Please reconsider.
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#48 - 2016-09-20 17:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Winter Archipelago
Zappity wrote:
... the Rorqual is going to struggle enough as it is if you insist on making them immobile while boosting.

Rorquals, post-change, will not require Sieging to be able to boost. They'll be getting a 5% per level boost to mining and a 3% per level boost to shields when outside of siege. Using the Industrial Core will increase their boosts by up to 30% (for the upcoming T2 Industrial Core).

Arrendis wrote:

Orcas are Large hulls, not XL—they're battleship-sized—so it's highly unlikely they'll make them unable to dock where every other subcap can.

Freighers...

...are made with Capital Components.
...require Capital Ship Construction to build.
...were going to use XL Rigs before CCP went with Lows instead of Rigs on them.

Really, the only thing that doesn't make them a Capital Ship is that you don't need Capital Ships to fly them. That's one single thing that makes them not capitals compared to three that do.
Amak Boma
Dragon Factory
#49 - 2016-09-20 17:14:38 UTC
removing docking access for rorqual inn astrahus will lead to less use of that ship. you can compress ore in POS,CITADEL you can do mining boost with ORCA, command ship sush sleipnir , absolution or nighthawk or even use command destroyer.
now you made rorqual even less useful
Wrent Simulus
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#50 - 2016-09-20 17:20:21 UTC
This is a poorly thought out change. Don't echo chamber your logic behind this and listen to the folks here please.

Focus your efforts on other things that need fixed, not on making an already under utilized, and undervalued ship even more under utilized and under valued.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#51 - 2016-09-20 17:20:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Arrendis
Winter Archipelago wrote:
Zappity wrote:
... the Rorqual is going to struggle enough as it is if you insist on making them immobile while boosting.

Rorquals, post-change, will not require Sieging to be able to boost. They'll be getting a 4% per level boost to mining and a 3% per level boost to shields when outside of siege. Using the Industrial Core will increase their boosts by up to 25% (for the upcoming T2 Industrial Core).

Arrendis wrote:

Orcas are Large hulls, not XL—they're battleship-sized—so it's highly unlikely they'll make them unable to dock where every other subcap can.

Freighers...

...are made with Capital Components.
...require Capital Ship Construction to build.
...were going to use XL Rigs before CCP went with Lows instead of Rigs on them.

Really, the only thing that doesn't make them a Capital Ship is that you don't need Capital Ships to fly them. That's one single thing that makes them not capitals compared to three that do.


Emphasis added in my original statement.

The ORCA—the Large hull in question—is not a capital ship. It's not a freighter. It is an 'Industrial Command Ship' that takes the same rigs as a battleship.

I said nothing about freighters.
Wednesday Askira
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2016-09-20 17:23:02 UTC
I assume in a few weeks you'll be telling us that all module slots except 1 high slot for indy core will be being removed in nov?
DrZoid Berg
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#53 - 2016-09-20 17:24:14 UTC
Don't worry, making jump clones without standings is an unintended feature, but this is such a game breaking bug, it has to go.

#JustCCPThings
Opner Dresden
H A V O C
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#54 - 2016-09-20 17:24:28 UTC
A "bug" that hasn't had a single word mentioned in 5 months and is probably a database entry away from being fixed... K... that sounds really believable.

Either way, this is dumb to do in October. At least wait until the rorq changes come.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#55 - 2016-09-20 17:30:10 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The intended design is that Rorquals should have the same docking access as normal sized capital ships like the carrier, dread and force aux classes. We're fixing this bug in the main October release which means that Rorquals will no longer be able to dock in Astrahus citadels.

Shocked

/facepalm

I'm speechless.
Favonius85
Hideaway Hunters
#56 - 2016-09-20 17:30:29 UTC
Everything is working as intended right up until it isn't. #ccpthings
Anoron Secheh
Heaven's Angels
#57 - 2016-09-20 17:32:16 UTC
Maybe CCP is just trying to make everything worth more? Less miners = lower supply = high prices = expensive ships.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#58 - 2016-09-20 17:35:54 UTC
Is the ill will being engendered here really worth making it so you don't take a tiny bump on the rightmost fortizar subcap undock? Would it not be better for all involved to just remove that undock from the list of places where subcaps can undock?

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Katerina Ivanovich
The Lost.
#59 - 2016-09-20 17:36:27 UTC
CCP, your really ruining this game, and your subscription rates are already low. Having the whale of a Rorq on the field to boost miners is quite ridicules, as it will be an easy target to kill. Oh, that is what your "shooting" for? I see. So mineral prices sky rocket as does the cost to plex accounts. Star Citizen, here I come.
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#60 - 2016-09-20 17:36:36 UTC
Forum Rules of Conduct wrote:

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.
#



Two Post Removed for one or more of the above reasons.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.