Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Sorry but NO it doesn't. The single biggest mistake Devs made was giving Orca's and Rorqual's the ability to mine because there will now always be those who complain "they don't mine well enough".


Shiroe; The Orca is not meant to replace an exhumer - With a single Exhumer mining ice and using the Orca to boost and mine, you are getting roughly the same yield (per minute) as you would with 2 Exhumers (with no boosts), with the added bonus of not having to jet can or dock up each time you fill the Exhumers. So you are actually able to mine more in the same time period..

What would happen if Devs reduce bandwidth of Ice mining drones :- Reduce bandwidth for ice mining drones to 25 m/s - Then increase cycle time by 100%.

You do not need any third party timer since the buff timers are right there in front of you, assuming you are not AFK.

The purpose of the egg-timer is to draw attention to time just before, and not after, when they (the residual affect on the miners) will expire (and It is not an issue of AFK) - but rather it is situational awareness and "cockpit workload management" issue. Yes, if I only had two accounts running I probably could bother to move the mouse over, hover for a second, wait for the time left to pop back up again every 15 seconds (or alternatively squint to see when the little meter is getting really close on the first miner), but I'm managing several and don't have time for that. The egg-timer is working great thanks...

While I think this is fair for most people I don't think it's unreasonable to be able to set the auto-cycle to a more useful time, especially when there is a skill that specifically makes the boosts last longer and as things stand the impetus for the majority of pilots to train that skill is going to be pretty minimal.

Basically Eve is about fighting other players, not the UI, and while I agree that it's fair for something like this to not be a major priority for CCP if it's not causing a major inconvenience, it's not fair to say that it's not an issue *just* because it's only 60k ISK per hour or only a few tens of m3 of cargo space to work around it. That's still an issue with the UI and it should be addressed, because an egg timer at your desk doesn't add anything useful or meaningful to the game, it's busy work.

That's what default values are for.

CCP would be adding nothing to the chores list of anyone who doesn't care, they would get the same experience as they do now if they don't want to fiddle with the new settings. Besides, something like that is literally a one-time thing, and adds nothing outside of another menu option on the right-click menu for these modules. You wouldn't even need to figure out your cycle time, you'd just need to check the cycle time on the module in space.

That is miles away from worse than the problem unless you just *really* hate change, in which case I think you're playing the wrong game...

The odd thing I find is that you get these huge bonuses to tractor ranges, yet you have only 35km range on the boosts.

That being said, the overall range thing is an issue in larger belts, anomolies where you are often way over 35km apart from the orca, and rather than being able to complete the belts, anoms easily you are having to slowboat an orca around.

Would make far more sense to match the tractor/boost range on these. So you can have someone say 60-80km away from you and then tractor in the can they drop.

I can almost guarantee you his was taken into consideration, and someone probably went "well, we want the boost range here because that's the bigger balance concern. Should we nerf the tractor range to match?"

At which point someone went "Nah, they'd just complain about that"

So yeah, unless what you're asking for here is for the tractor range bonus to be nerfed I don't think you actually want them to match.

CCP have said very similar things on other questions regarding tractor/salvage/ect bonuses that have very small effects on a ship's overall performance but break conventions like this, and the response has generally been "Well, do you really want us to take this away just to fit convention?"

Boosts intentionally have a limited range to force you to make trade offs and to make positioning at least slightly more important. It also forces you to keep the boosting ship closer to the ships it's affecting, which is important in fleet combat.

There's absolutely nothing half-baked about leaving the tractor beam bonus as-is. Yes, it won't see too much use if you're within boosting range of something, but the options there are to take it away or just leave it as-is so as not to break whatever minimal use it might have.

Your numbers for fleet and wing boosts are laughable. You're taking the level 5 trains, which aren't a big impact, and holding those up as the problem. If you ignore the unneeded level 5s, or even just the level 5 on fleet, you get something much more reasonable for the effect.

No one's forcing you to train those to 5. If you don't want to then don't.

I misspoke, I thought that they'd changed Fleet Command to only require Wing 4, that was my mistake. That said you still don't *need* Fleet 5 to get good range out of these ships. If you do feel you need it, and it's that integral, then it's not that the train isn't worth the time it's that you don't like the time required.

Yes, range does matter, which is why CCP didn't match the boost range to the tractor range. The point of this isn't to make it super easy to cover everyone on grid with a single ship.

If I had to guess mining ships get reduced range because they move less and will have a much easier time positioning meaning they needed the reduced range to cause people to make tradeoffs with their boosting ships and positioning. You could bring another booster, or you could cluster up in a potentially less optimal configuration but trade the second booster for a mining ship.

Combat ships, on the other hand, are more likely to have disparate fleet element in different parts of the grid, so they get a bigger range boost.

By the way I'd appreciate it if you'd leave the personal attacks out of it, thanks, I haven't insulted you so I'd appreciate it if you'd return the favor.

As far as things being "half finished" I disagree on all points. The boosting changes as a whole, when combined with the changes to the mining ships themselves, were absolutely a buff to mining. You can't free-boost from inside a POS now, but you of all people should be in favor of getting rid of a free-lunch mechanic like that. The range changes affect, at best, 1% of belts in the game and most of those are in Null where you can use a sieged Rorqual if you so choose. Other than that it's just a matter of considering your positioning a little more when mining, and industry is nothing if not an activity about calculations and planning if you want to get optimal results.

Citadels are an intentionally piecemeal implementation. That was written on the tin when they started and it's the only reasonable way to put something of that size into the game. Otherwise they'd be in dev for 2-3 years with the players seeing basically nothing, then getting dumped in, inevitably having bugs and other issues all crop up at once, and both the devs and players scrambling to adjust to such a massive change. You're free to disagree if you like, you're also free to go start up your own game studio where you can do things your way. Let me know how that works out for you if you do.

I respectfully disagree. Being spread out is a bad thing. For one, which was just mentioned by you, Orcas now have remote shield rep capability and shield command boost ability, and considering that remote reps operate best in optimal range, yes you should be close to rest of fleet. Also worth noting: drone travel time in regards to defense. I've ganked a few retrievers myself, I freely admit that. The hardest kill I had was a retriever kill smack in the middle of a mining fleet that was almost entirely skiffs. Because they were all clustered together, getting a proper warp-in on him was a nightmare and they almost got me with their defense drones before I could pop him. If the skiffs weren't afk themselves, they would have sent their drones in enough time to save their odd-man-out-in-a-retriever bro. It was their AFK that killed him, not their clustering together. If they were spread out it would have been a piece of cake and no reaction time would have been enough to sic the drones on me due to distance.

So yes, clustering together saves lives. It's the same principle in play for herd animals. There's a reason it's done - it's a good idea.

Now, yes I'm talking about highsec mining. But if we're talking about low or null, I doubt there's anyone fielding a mining fleet with neuts in system or that being spread out is going to save you.