These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Dreamslayer Anzomi
Thirteenth Empire
#381 - 2016-10-28 23:28:50 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:



Industrial Core II:
Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5
Duration: 5 minutes
Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water
Enables Ore and Ice Compression
Movement Effects:
  • -100% Rorqual velocity
  • +900% Rorqual mass
  • Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering
Assistance and Electronic warfare:
  • 100% remote repair impedance (prevents other ships from repairing the Rorqual)
  • 80% remote assistance impedance (reduces the effect of remote assistance modules like remote sensor boosters)
  • 80% sensor dampener resistance
  • Full ECM immunity
  • +120% Scan resolution
Mining Foreman Burst Bonuses:
  • +30% Mining foreman burst strength
  • +200% Command burst range
Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses:
  • +140% Local shield booster repair amount
  • -60% Local shield booster duration
  • -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use
  • +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range
Drone Damage and Mining Bonuses:
  • +100% Drone damage and hitpoints
  • +30% Drone MWD speed
  • +500% Drone mining yield
  • -80% Drone ice harvesting duration



Why not have industrial core 1 max output be 9k instead of 3k? 3k seems pretty low and you have to train 38 days for 6 times as much for industrial reconfig 5 . Perhaps have this go up per level eventually getting to 18k max when you get level 5?

but 3k max when you have level 3/4 industry reconfig is pushing it

Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#382 - 2016-10-28 23:34:45 UTC
Dreamslayer Anzomi wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:



Industrial Core II:
Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5
Duration: 5 minutes
Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water
Enables Ore and Ice Compression
Movement Effects:
  • -100% Rorqual velocity
  • +900% Rorqual mass
  • Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering
Assistance and Electronic warfare:
  • 100% remote repair impedance (prevents other ships from repairing the Rorqual)
  • 80% remote assistance impedance (reduces the effect of remote assistance modules like remote sensor boosters)
  • 80% sensor dampener resistance
  • Full ECM immunity
  • +120% Scan resolution
Mining Foreman Burst Bonuses:
  • +30% Mining foreman burst strength
  • +200% Command burst range
Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses:
  • +140% Local shield booster repair amount
  • -60% Local shield booster duration
  • -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use
  • +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range
Drone Damage and Mining Bonuses:
  • +100% Drone damage and hitpoints
  • +30% Drone MWD speed
  • +500% Drone mining yield
  • -80% Drone ice harvesting duration



Why not have industrial core 1 max output be 9k instead of 3k? 3k seems pretty low and you have to train 38 days for 6 times as much for industrial reconfig 5 . Perhaps have this go up per level eventually getting to 18k max when you get level 5?

but 3k max when you have level 3/4 industry reconfig is pushing it


3k is without an industrial core at all, i.e. unsieged. The industrial core 1 won't get you all the way to 18k but it will be up there.

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!

Ali Virgo
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#383 - 2016-10-29 04:21:04 UTC
Rorquals  go into siege to amp up boost but they don't require  any Capital Siege Array to be made. why is that
Ali Virgo
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#384 - 2016-10-29 04:26:56 UTC
Soleil Fournier wrote:
TigerXtrm wrote:

For now I agree with the devs, let's just see how this plays out first before imposing all kinds of restrictions. But it does need to be closely monitored for the first few weeks and quickly jumped on if need be.


Players weren't able to light a cyno inside a POS shield, and I don't think they can do it while tethered either (without losing the tether and becoming vulnerable). Why should they be able to do it while invulnerable with the panic module?

light a cyno and go into panic mode as you titan and super fleet jumps to you . or bridge indy ships with ewar to a rorqual as it turns on it panic mode. it wont just be for mining :)
Emma Davaham
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#385 - 2016-10-29 18:07:32 UTC
Is anyone finding the rorq fleet boosts to be underwhelming? The best I can get is down to 49 second ice cycle times.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#386 - 2016-10-30 23:59:52 UTC
The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling.

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

Olmeca Gold
Democratic Space Socialism
#387 - 2016-10-31 05:36:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Olmeca Gold
Here are some concerns.

First of all, I didn't test this, but CCPls don't screw up and make it so that they can jump/tether right after the invul expires and before getting pointed again. Remember, a Rorqual in distress is most likely a non-consensual PvP issue, and most of hunters in that area use non-bubblers as tacklers. I don't think you are intending on making Rorquals safe vs. anything except bubblers, which would make them immune to covert cyno hotdrops, which would make them safe from one of the most common and balanced risks for PvE ships in Eve for example.

Also refitting rafter PANIC expires seem problematic as many others have stated. These ships don't need to warp or move around much in their PvE activity. They will have anchored mobile depots and spare modules with them. You need to give them a debuff of some sort, or what's gonna keep people from exploiting it by getting multiple PANICs? Even extending 1 minute combat timer until after the PANIC expires is not enough. An unsieged Rorq will still survive 1 minute to many groups. Then he will just refit, because he anchored a depot while mining before getting caught.

Furthermore, 5-7 minutes seem too long. Tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think you would want %100 safe PvE activity for even the most organized group in nullsec. There should be interesting ways for them to protect their PvE capitals, and interesting ways for small/medium sized fleets to snatch a capital every once in a while. You want to give Rorquals the ability to call their corpmates and online their PvP toons after getting tackled and that seems OK, but you take away the surprise element from hunting fleets. One of the key elements in nullsec hunting is killing the enemy before support arrives, so know this a PANIC button means heavily messing with nullsec hunting mechanics in its deep roots. You need to think more about how balance it if you want to have the PANIC button.

Right now the capability of response is on a regional level. Half of a region (10 jumps) can respond to a Rorqual getting tackled given 7.5 minutes. If you drop in a major alliance's space, people can even take mid-points in their titans or faxes, wait out their orange timer, and still save that Rorqual. And you are giving them 10ly jump range. So all the miners need to do is have cynoes and drop on each other when they get tackled. You are giving them immense combat capabilities but you are assuming that there will be one or a couple of these ships on belts sort of "leading" the herd, so its OK to give them 3000 DPS. What will happen is that people are gonna have cynoes in their belts and jump on each other. How many Rorquals do you expect to be mining at the same time in 10 LY range in any given region? I would say it will be more than 30 in some. No pirate group will be able to take that fleet down. It requires an invading fleet. But whenever those kinds (150 man battleship fleet etc) of fleets appear in their intel they will stop mining from 10 jumps away anyway.

If you want to keep this an interesting mechanic, you should keep the responset at a pocket (3-4 jumps) level. The respondents should be limited to PvP alts or friends in the system, and people readily in PvP ships in the pocket. Even a main pocket of a decent alliance will be 100 people, with a lot of capitals to drop to save the Rorqual. And you are giving them tank an entire batch of damage, and regen it back during invul. That alone is an additional 2 minutes for the response.

I too thought mining capitals needed a reason to be taken out from their poses, but the changes you propose really overdo it and upon hearing change by change I am having more and more doubts on whether CCP ever talks to a non-consensual PvPer when they ever are making a change. All those people on CSM are major null entities, they only represent the Rorqual side. You need to heed the other side if you wanna have a balance. Problem is people who don't have the spare time to commit to a major null entity won't have time to run for CSM or make themselves heard on forums/reddit either. Someone in CCP seriously needs to start playing Eve on tranquility as a person who tries to hunt these ships you are designing under conditions you are proposing. You rely too much on the feedback from people who represent just one aspect of this game. I know this last part was less relevant but it needs to be voiced every single time you make a change in non-consensual pvp.


Also do you want small/solo blopsers to switch to Rorquals for hotdropping on other PvE ships? Are you seriously intending this? Couldn't EFT with it yet, but given the combat capability, jump range and the fatigue that's looks likely to happen really.

Covert Cloaky FC. Sustainable Whaler.

Youtube channel.

Anthar Thebess
#388 - 2016-10-31 10:15:52 UTC
With the influx of all this ore, capitals will be so cheap.
I like it!
Rena Skyfall Trald
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#389 - 2016-10-31 12:14:49 UTC
The panic button makes it so you can't be killed but you can be targeted tackled held and have your cap drained.
The panic button will be very dangerous for a mining fleet if the rorqual pilot actual panics.
Ded Akara
Doomheim
#390 - 2016-10-31 12:57:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Ded Akara
As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game.

The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do.

Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandably they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking.
Zhul Chembull
Universalis Imperium
The Bastion
#391 - 2016-10-31 17:01:59 UTC
Ded Akara wrote:
As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game.

The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do.

Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandably they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking.


Wrong. This is if you have mined enough to cover your losses, which you may or may not. There is a great deal of risk putting one in the field and a small organized fleet will have no problem smashing one. You must not fly the same null sec I do, I promise a group of 8 good pvpers will kill this no problem in T3's.

What is good here is the risk vs reward. It is quite a threat to put it out, but they also made it strong enough where you have to have a degree of organization to kill one. Eve players in general are cowards, they want the biggest kill without having to risk any ship themselves. This is the way it has always been and always will be, human nature dictates it. The changes are coming so embrace it. If this kills the ore market, oh well cheaper ships and more pvp time. If it makes ore prices rise, thats good. Either way the changes are coming regardless.
Zhul Chembull
Universalis Imperium
The Bastion
#392 - 2016-10-31 17:04:57 UTC
Olmeca Gold wrote:
Here are some concerns.

First of all, I didn't test this, but CCPls don't screw up and make it so that they can jump/tether right after the invul expires and before getting pointed again. Remember, a Rorqual in distress is most likely a non-consensual PvP issue, and most of hunters in that area use non-bubblers as tacklers. I don't think you are intending on making Rorquals safe vs. anything except bubblers, which would make them immune to covert cyno hotdrops, which would make them safe from one of the most common and balanced risks for PvE ships in Eve for example.

Also refitting rafter PANIC expires seem problematic as many others have stated. These ships don't need to warp or move around much in their PvE activity. They will have anchored mobile depots and spare modules with them. You need to give them a debuff of some sort, or what's gonna keep people from exploiting it by getting multiple PANICs? Even extending 1 minute combat timer until after the PANIC expires is not enough. An unsieged Rorq will still survive 1 minute to many groups. Then he will just refit, because he anchored a depot while mining before getting caught.

Furthermore, 5-7 minutes seem too long. Tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think you would want %100 safe PvE activity for even the most organized group in nullsec. There should be interesting ways for them to protect their PvE capitals, and interesting ways for small/medium sized fleets to snatch a capital every once in a while. You want to give Rorquals the ability to call their corpmates and online their PvP toons after getting tackled and that seems OK, but you take away the surprise element from hunting fleets. One of the key elements in nullsec hunting is killing the enemy before support arrives, so know this a PANIC button means heavily messing with nullsec hunting mechanics in its deep roots. You need to think more about how balance it if you want to have the PANIC button.

Right now the capability of response is on a regional level. Half of a region (10 jumps) can respond to a Rorqual getting tackled given 7.5 minutes. If you drop in a major alliance's space, people can even take mid-points in their titans or faxes, wait out their orange timer, and still save that Rorqual. And you are giving them 10ly jump range. So all the miners need to do is have cynoes and drop on each other when they get tackled. You are giving them immense combat capabilities but you are assuming that there will be one or a couple of these ships on belts sort of "leading" the herd, so its OK to give them 3000 DPS. What will happen is that people are gonna have cynoes in their belts and jump on each other. How many Rorquals do you expect to be mining at the same time in 10 LY range in any given region? I would say it will be more than 30 in some. No pirate group will be able to take that fleet down. It requires an invading fleet. But whenever those kinds (150 man battleship fleet etc) of fleets appear in their intel they will stop mining from 10 jumps away anyway.

If you want to keep this an interesting mechanic, you should keep the responset at a pocket (3-4 jumps) level. The respondents should be limited to PvP alts or friends in the system, and people readily in PvP ships in the pocket. Even a main pocket of a decent alliance will be 100 people, with a lot of capitals to drop to save the Rorqual. And you are giving them tank an entire batch of damage, and regen it back during invul. That alone is an additional 2 minutes for the response.

I too thought mining capitals needed a reason to be taken out from their poses, but the changes you propose really overdo it and upon hearing change by change I am having more and more doubts on whether CCP ever talks to a non-consensual PvPer when they ever are making a change. All those people on CSM are major null entities, they only represent the Rorqual side. You need to heed the other side if you wanna have a balance. Problem is people who don't have the spare time to commit to a major null entity won't have time to run for CSM or make themselves heard on forums/reddit either. Someone in CCP seriously needs to start playing Eve on tranquility as a person who tries to hunt these ships you are designing under conditions you are proposing. You rely too much on the feedback from people who represent just one aspect of this game. I know this last part was less relevant but it needs to be voiced every single time you make a change in non-consensual pvp.


Also do you want small/solo blopsers to switch to Rorquals for hotdropping on other PvE ships? Are you seriously intending this? Couldn't EFT with it yet, but given the combat capability, jump range and the fatigue that's looks likely to happen really.


You must not fly the same null sec I do. I have never seen a ping and a fleet able to respond in 7.5 minutes. Hell 15 minutes if your alliance is on point and closer to half an hour otherwise. I see some silly posts sometimes. You want to kill one, learn some organization skills and have the appropriate ships. It is a single ship and it will go down easily rest assured. We can have this discussion two weeks after these changes go into effect, there will be lots of rorqual losses rest assured.
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#393 - 2016-10-31 17:13:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dark Lord Trump
Zhul Chembull wrote:
Ded Akara wrote:
As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game.

The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do.

Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandably they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking.


Wrong. This is if you have mined enough to cover your losses, which you may or may not. There is a great deal of risk putting one in the field and a small organized fleet will have no problem smashing one. You must not fly the same null sec I do, I promise a group of 8 good pvpers will kill this no problem in T3's.

What is good here is the risk vs reward. It is quite a threat to put it out, but they also made it strong enough where you have to have a degree of organization to kill one. Eve players in general are cowards, they want the biggest kill without having to risk any ship themselves. This is the way it has always been and always will be, human nature dictates it. The changes are coming so embrace it. If this kills the ore market, oh well cheaper ships and more pvp time. If it makes ore prices rise, thats good. Either way the changes are coming regardless.

Please show me your T3 fit that does 6500 DPS while tanking Rorqual drones and being dual capital nos'd

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!

FT Cold
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#394 - 2016-10-31 18:01:42 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling.


I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy.
Flashmala
BlackWatch Industrial Group
Reckless Contingency.
#395 - 2016-10-31 20:06:14 UTC
I may have posted this in the wrong place, so I'll post it here as well -

With regard to the PANIC module, the dev blog stated the following :

"The module only requires Invulnerability Core Operation level 1 to operate, and the skill increases the duration of the P.A.N.I.C. effect by 10% per level. This means that Rorqual pilots can strategically train the Invulnerability Core Operation skill to whatever level they wish and ensures that the Rorqual pilot and its fleet have more information about when the effect will end than the attackers do."

This would indicate that some element of question was intended to not give away the timing of the PANIC cycle end. However, on Sisi, the bubble surrounding the Rorqual, when the PANIC module is engaged, starts to wobble when it nears the end of its cycle, so the enemy can visually see when the cycle is about to end.

These seem counter to each other and we are wondering which of these scenarios was the intended one?

Age does not diminish the extreme disappointment of having a scoop of ice cream fall from the cone.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#396 - 2016-10-31 23:39:12 UTC
FT Cold wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling.


I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy.


Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability.

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

Gaia Albosa
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#397 - 2016-11-01 09:37:53 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
FT Cold wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling.


I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy.


Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability.
`

No, this won't work we have been told already...

We will have to take a 5 Billion ISK risk to put a Rorqual and mining drones out in the belts and that is that. Way to go CCP!!!
Gaia Albosa
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#398 - 2016-11-01 09:55:21 UTC
Gaia Albosa wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
FT Cold wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling.


I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy.


Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability.
`

No, this won't work we have been told already...

We will have to take a 5 Billion ISK risk to put a Rorqual and mining drones out in the belts and that is that. Way to go CCP!!!


P.S. Minus the insurance that is...
Jean-Luc II
Doomheim
#399 - 2016-11-01 11:19:50 UTC
So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due!

Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration.

ahllamaar
#400 - 2016-11-01 12:22:32 UTC
I think these changes are going to completely disrupt the root of the industrial playing style. This is going to kill the mining ops.