These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2016-09-20 17:38:36 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
another "out of touch" with your customer base type of change


Edit: Personal attack removed, CCP Phantom
Wednesday Askira
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#62 - 2016-09-20 17:40:03 UTC
Anoron Secheh wrote:
Maybe CCP is just trying to make everything worth more? Less miners = lower supply = high prices = expensive ships.

I am now applying my tinfoil hat.
What if they secretly are trying to get all the miners to stop mining, increasing the cost of minerals, and everything minerals are used to make, forcing more players to buy plex.
Wednesday Askira
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2016-09-20 17:40:52 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Regan Rotineque wrote:
another "out of touch" with your customer base type of change



I'm a firm believer that their ventures have never been undocked.
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#64 - 2016-09-20 17:43:12 UTC
I got so excited for some info on the indy citadel when I saw there were 57 posts in Upcoming Features...

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#65 - 2016-09-20 17:43:28 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
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

are they hoping to get refunded the isk once they realize refining asshouses exist or something

who the **** bought those
Wednesday Askira
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#66 - 2016-09-20 17:44:10 UTC
NOVEMBER 2016: http://i.imgur.com/uzhaVk0.jpg
Prepare yourselves
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#67 - 2016-09-20 17:44:34 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Querns wrote:
Considering the rorqual's primary ability to haul ore, not to mention its (assumed) direct mining role coming with the rebalance, denying the rorqual the ability to dock in an Astrahus is, frankly, absurd.


I agree.

Please reconsider this change - why should a group have to put up a Fortizar in order to have a mining base?

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#68 - 2016-09-20 17:44:56 UTC
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
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

are they hoping to get refunded the isk once they realize refining asshouses exist or something

who the **** bought those

Idiots, who thought they'd improve the yield on reprocessing nyxes, clearly.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Movilion
Masterderizando
#69 - 2016-09-20 17:48:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Movilion
And Carriers? Does anyone thinks about the Carriers?


So, a lot of drama about F, JF and Rorquals, but Carriers are Smaller than F and JF, and even smaller than some Battleships!;ok this is only visual, but... Even some Dreads are smaller than a J or JF, and non can dock in Astrahus.

Please, dont try to justify that Rorquals should be able to dock in Astrahus cause they are smaller than F and JF.


I think Rorquals should go as Carriers & Dreads, BUT as many people said if the new Industrial Structures are going to grant dock access to Rorquals, should be changed when those are release.
Commander Spurty
#70 - 2016-09-20 17:51:13 UTC
If you haven't already, please also sticky (in the biggest font you can afford), that bumping ships out of tethering is not only legal, but every pilots duty to punish the cheap and the lazy

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Pirokobo
Game.Theory
GameTheory
#71 - 2016-09-20 17:52:12 UTC
I endorse this change and the anarchy it will cause.
Katerina Ivanovich
The Lost.
#72 - 2016-09-20 17:56:25 UTC
Wednesday Askira wrote:
NOVEMBER 2016: http://i.imgur.com/uzhaVk0.jpg
Prepare yourselves


Pure truth, can have my refund of 2.5 bil approximately or will they wait until their 100mil?
Anita Name
Perkone
Caldari State
#73 - 2016-09-20 17:56:46 UTC
http://imgur.com/a/ADT0A

The justification for rorqs is also that they are industrial, not combat ships. CCPs justification is likely that it doesn't line up with hisec gate permissions and are trying to 'fix' it regardless of whether or not it makes gameplay sense
Kismeteer
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#74 - 2016-09-20 17:57:26 UTC
Were people abusing the rorqual's abilities inside astrahuses?

Were there complaints from someone because of this? Or is this just CCP's fixing another non-existant problem because ... reasons?

Is there a reason a larger ship like a freighter (a charon is 16.2 mil m^3) can dock but a rorqual is only 14.5 mil m^3 can't dock?

Could this change wait till rorquals are 'fixed' as they are pretty crap already?

Was the CSM talked to about this?
Anita Name
Perkone
Caldari State
#75 - 2016-09-20 17:59:28 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
Was the CSM talked to about this?

Search your heart and you will find emptiness and also the answer to this question.
Bear Templar
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#76 - 2016-09-20 18:02:47 UTC
Whilst not a current Rorqual or Astrahaus user myself, i feel this is a bad decision (with current information)

Many smaller industrial entities can afford an astrahaus together as well as Rorq so that they can have their little "island" of mining or whatever, but they'll struggle with a fortizar.

That being said - it depends on how the Rorq will interact with the new Engineering Complexes.

If a fish weighs 1 Kilogram plus half its own weight, how much does it weigh? (It's not 1.5kg btw)
DrZoid Berg
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#77 - 2016-09-20 18:03:44 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:


CCP's fixing another non-existant problem because ... reasons?



This is basically what's happening with this magical bug fix.
Boroth Kindeze
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
#78 - 2016-09-20 18:06:51 UTC
ISD Max Trix wrote:
[quote=Forum Rules of Conduct]
5. Trolling is prohibited.
.


Can you redirect me then where I can make a complaint about a CCP employee, or is voicing my opinion against CCP in general forbidden?
Katerina Ivanovich
The Lost.
#79 - 2016-09-20 18:09:45 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
Were people abusing the rorqual's abilities inside astrahuses?

Were there complaints from someone because of this? Or is this just CCP's fixing another non-existant problem because ... reasons?



"Khakis?"
Creecher Virpio
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#80 - 2016-09-20 18:11:02 UTC
Well thank God we got this game breaking bug fixed. I mean, who needs citadel bumping fixed, or bumping in general, or capital resizing when we had roquals docking in astra's?