These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting

First post First post
Author
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#261 - 2016-08-29 20:31:06 UTC


In other words, the Rorqual is getting a 1% higher boost strength for mining over the Orca when not using its Core.[/quote]


no disrespect to you at all winter so please do not take it that way

but a 1% difference between a capital ship and a sub capital ship.. is just total bullchit and someone who came up with those figures didn't even bother to look at the price difference between the two ships. "oh hey spend 2.2bn+ for an extra measly 1% difference"..that guy must wear plaid panties.

what i dont understand is how they seemingly want the rorqual to be held back from having a lot of power in its own industry? its a capital industrial ship.. why not give it full meaning of why its capital indy ship and not just some transformer that blows fire out of its head?
Sulvorati Kunoki
Sunstrike Enterprises
#262 - 2016-08-29 20:32:13 UTC
Seems to me that combat boosts and mining boosts should be a separate thing, because fundamentally they do different things. You do still have to train different skills though so I'm unsure why they should remain linked in any way.
Wayne Caderu
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#263 - 2016-08-29 20:32:39 UTC
Didn't think of this, but this is most certainly an issue.

big miker wrote:
Awesome changes, I love it!

There's just one small concern I have about tech 3 Cruisers.
I have a feeling they can still be somewhat used safely.

Let's consider the Tengu for this example.

[Tengu, New Setup 1]
Prototype Hyperspatial Accelerator
Prototype Hyperspatial Accelerator
Co-Processor II
Inertial Stabilizers II

Command Processor I
Command Processor I
'Thurifer' Large Cap Battery
'Thurifer' Large Cap Battery
Cap Recharger II

Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Maneuvers II
Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment II
Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing II
[empty high slot]
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
[empty high slot]

Medium Hyperspatial Velocity Optimizer II
COMMAND RIG
COMMAND RIG

Tengu Defensive - Warfare Processor
Tengu Electronics - CPU Efficiency Gate
Tengu Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix
Tengu Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Tengu Propulsion - Interdiction Nullifier

If you add mid-grade ascendacy implants to this fit it'll do 6.2 au/s.
Yeah that's all great and all but what's the issue with that?
Every 60 / 130 seconds you warp in the Tengu with a alt. You align out with the cloaking device running.
Deactivate cloaking device, hit link buffs and warp off to a safespot.

It's almost uncatchable since you'll be able to instantly warp it out after decloaking. Not to mention it's nullified so bubbles won't be a issue at all. Blog also mentioned link buffs will require alot of capacitor, which will be no problem for t3c at all ( yay cap battery's ).

I've got 2 proposals:
1: Proposal one is to make it impossible for tech 3 cruisers to use the nullification subsystem together with the warfare processor subsystem.
2: Penalize the link buff ship for 10 / 15 seconds not being able to warp.

Let me know what you guys think!
Other than that, very very stoked about the changes!!!


Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#264 - 2016-08-29 20:33:27 UTC
CCP: I recommend you release the ammo BPOs a few weeks ahead of the major release.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#265 - 2016-08-29 20:34:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Daemun Khanid
Darek Castigatus wrote:


well A is blatant bullshit, anyone who has the skills can fly the ships and provide the boosts which guess what is exactly the same as it was before, and B is your opinion combined with a terrible analogy. Please explain why I or anyone else should find either of those things in the slightest bit convincing.

And Hamasaki perhaps you should wait for the actual details to come out, like perhaps in a dev blog they've already said will be coming well before the release of these changes, before you fly off the handle and start making a fool of yourself with wild claims.


It's not a question of being able to fly the ships but even if it were just because you had leadership V that doesn't mean you can fly a command ship. But more importantly someone who trained a skill that required no specific ship or module shouldn't be forced to fly a specific ship/module to get use out of a skill they trained without those restrictions. A person doesn't just train basic leadership skills so they can be a link pilot flying a t3 cruiser they train them so they can command small gangs and fleets and get bonuses no matter what ship they are flying. This change says "well, if you want to get anything out of the skills that you've already devoted time training then you will be a boost ship" or "you can pay us to extract your skills and you can put the sp towards something that you'll actually use."

If you can't figure out the analogy that's your intellectual deficiency and not my fault but I'll break it down for you anyway.
Player plays monthly fee which allows them to train a skill.
(Consumer buys a guy that drives just fine and runs on gas like any other)

After making your purchase CCP says sorry but that skill doesn't do that any more.
(Consumer is told they can't buy gas anymore)

CCP says BUT if you fly fleet boost focused ships and used fleet boost modules you'll still get use of your skills
(Car dealer says, you can drive your care on these special roads and it'll work just fine)

CCP says you can always buy extractors from us and redistribute your sp (Car dealer say, you can by this special upgrade and drive wherever you want)

Understand now? They sell you a product, then decide after the fact that the product you paid for is no longer going to perform the task that you intended it for when you paid for it. They then try to upsell you more products just so you can get the same benefit from your purchase that you already paid for. More commonly referred to as a scam.

Honestly it really doesn't effect me that much. I started training my link alt to be ongrid combat links back when the command dessi's were released because their creation was an obvious move in the direction of on grid links. It wasn't a matter of if boosts were going on grid it was just when. I extracted my leadership skills from my main and injected the sp into my combat links alt. So again, I planned ahead and don't really have anything to lose w these changes. That still doesn't make their approach to the skills and potential profit from extractors less shady.

Daemun of Khanid

Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#266 - 2016-08-29 20:36:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Hal Morsh
I remember buffs in mmos.

I got kicked from a guild for buffing someone kicking someone elses ass.


Besides, you don't HAVE to fly command ships people, don't get so butthurt because you must put your link alts on field.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?

Rualan
Chiron Industries
#267 - 2016-08-29 20:38:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Rualan
So the Rorqual will now be OFFICIALLY KILLED BY CCP, figures!!! RollRoll

RORQUAL on GRID will always = a DEAD RORQUAL!


Will extract ALL Fleet bonus SP for industrial BOOSTS and re-purpose my Rorqual as POS MAINT JF until death by reprocessing
Drago Misharie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#268 - 2016-08-29 20:40:08 UTC
It's going to take awhile for CCP to recover from the loss of Revenue. Very pro-pvp change but does not take into account that all the targets will be gone.

Not saying that it's a bad change for players but it is an incredibly terrible change for CCP


1. Cancel four accounts
2. reprocess all industrial related ships and modules
3. Reprocess of all leadership and command skill related modules and ships
4. Extract usesless skill points
5. Sell all and buy plexes for remaining accounts
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#269 - 2016-08-29 20:40:16 UTC
Winter Archipelago wrote:
It's Risk vs. Reward: If you want the best reward, you need to put up the most risks, and just like pretty much everything else in EVE, the risk goes up significantly faster than the reward (which goes along with the absolute best mining buffs require you to lock yourself down for five minutes).

By that line of reasoning, should we expect command ships to receive a lockdown module as well?

The rorqual has always been the odd exception for boosts bonuses in regards to tying it to the Indy core. And countless threads have been almost always been about trying to make the module worthwhile, rather than trying to justify its existence from the beginning.

As much as I prefer to keep things in rather than removing them entirely, the Indy core has been a noose hanging around the rorquals neck for its entire existence.
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#270 - 2016-08-29 20:40:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Winter Archipelago
Milla Goodpussy wrote:

but a 1% difference between a capital ship and a sub capital ship.. is just total bullchit and someone who came up with those figures didn't even bother to look at the price difference between the two ships. "oh hey spend 2.2bn+ for an extra measly 1% difference"..that guy must wear plaid panties.

The Porpoise is going to be a Battlecruiser (so far as I understand), and receives a 1% boost. The Orca, roughly 12-14x the cost of a BC, gives a 3% boost. The Rorqual, a 3-4x cost of an Orca, gives a 4% boost. Even if you took ISK as the sole balancing factor, a 1% boost for a 3-4x cost is significantly better than a 2% boost for 12-14x cost.

ISK isn't the only balancing factor (and isn't a good one, even when it gets used as one). The Rorqual isn't going to be getting only a 1% boost to mining. It's also receiving a 3% per level boost to shields.

If the desire is for the Rorqual's boosts to be improved for mining, be prepared to sacrifice that boost for shields. Neverminding the issue that we don't know the full changes for the Rorqual yet, nor what's going to be happening with fighter-sized miners.
Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#271 - 2016-08-29 20:43:18 UTC
Drago Misharie wrote:
It's going to take awhile for CCP to recover from the loss of Revenue. Very pro-pvp change but does not take into account that all the targets will be gone.

Not saying that it's a bad change for players but it is an incredibly terrible change for CCP


1. Cancel four accounts
2. reprocess all industrial related ships and modules
3. Reprocess of all leadership and command skill related modules and ships
4. Extract usesless skill points
5. Sell all and buy plexes for remaining accounts



More money for my ores, tyvm.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?

TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#272 - 2016-08-29 20:46:49 UTC
Damocles Orindus wrote:
Winter Archipelago wrote:

The Rorqual still receives better boosts outside of its siege mode than does the Orca.

Fit a Higgs rig to the Rorqual, drop it in a belt, and align out at 75% speed. You'll be outpaced by a snail, so you'll be able to stay in range of your mining fleet, and because you're aligned and most certainly not AFK, you can warp out just as soon as a hostile shows up in your system or intel channels.

I don't get all this "the Rorqual is dead" and "nullsec mining is dead" nonsense.

It's Risk vs. Reward: If you want the best reward, you need to put up the most risks, and just like pretty much everything else in EVE, the risk goes up significantly faster than the reward (which goes along with the absolute best mining buffs require you to lock yourself down for five minutes).

The only reason nullsec mining would die is if the putzes refuse to change their methods and refuse to look beyond their noses.


No. A perfect Orca booster out performs a perfect non-sieged Rorqual. Thus no point to run the Rorq unless you have a immobilized it and put it at significant risk for 5 mins.

If you don't understand the outcry, I guess the hold/cancellation on the last POS boosting changes escaped your attention.

I agree with additional risk vs. reward. They were talking about giving the Rorqual capital mining drones and that would be an incentive to get Rorqs into the belts. But that's and additional feature, not a replacement. They need to give the Rorq additional incentives to get them to come out. Not turn them into PVP/Defense death pinatas.


It's too early to start speculating about how the Rorq is going to be balanced in November. Personally I see the issue with running the core in a belt and locking yourself in for at least 5 minutes. In that respect the most fair trade off, IMO, would be to remove the sieging aspect of using the industrial core and increase the fuel cost per cycle. Keep it mobile at all times but make each 5 minute cycle cost 500k to 1m in fuel.

Either way, I guess we'll see what CCP has planned. I dare assume they'll present their plans for feedback well in advance and that they have actually thought the belt part through. Time will tell.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Longdrinks
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#273 - 2016-08-29 20:48:53 UTC
Looks like ill finish my boosting skills just in time for this Cool
Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#274 - 2016-08-29 20:48:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Daemun Khanid
Drago Misharie wrote:
It's going to take awhile for CCP to recover from the loss of Revenue. Very pro-pvp change but does not take into account that all the targets will be gone.

Not saying that it's a bad change for players but it is an incredibly terrible change for CCP


1. Cancel four accounts
2. reprocess all industrial related ships and modules
3. Reprocess of all leadership and command skill related modules and ships
4. Extract usesless skill points
5. Sell all and buy plexes for remaining accounts


Extractors for all that sp cost $$. As do the plex that you use that isk for to plex your remaining accounts. They may lose money over time due to a reduction in multi-account usage for link alts but they'll get a boost of income for the extractors, they always have and will continue to make even better money off plex than account subs and some ppl like myself will continue to fly multiple accounts they'll just be combat piloting them. Not as easy as sitting afk at a safe obviously but possible.

And cancel 4 accounts? Who's running 4 link alts and why is that a mining thing?

Daemun of Khanid

Cerulean Ice
Royal Amarr Reclamation
#275 - 2016-08-29 20:50:52 UTC
Why does the mining burst trigger a weapons timer? It isn't pvp related in the slightest.

Will the orca be receiving some sort of agility boost, or will a fleet require multiple orcas to boost more than one mining squad? Mining fleets don't operate in one location like pvp fleets do. Any more than ten miners per belt results in horribly inefficient cycles from all the double lasering.

Why ammo for the boost modules instead of just scripts? They function as scripted modules, so they should actually be scripted modules instead of some weird ammo script hybrid. It makes no sense to have these modules only boost so many times before a reload when the script type isn't changing.
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
#276 - 2016-08-29 20:54:54 UTC
I kinda hope you don't screw the Orca pilots royally...like myself who love and live in an Orca.

I'm curious on this new Porpoise ship. I don't see how a new ship is needed where a revamp of the Orca could fix this. But, a new ship is a new ship...just don't screw it up!
Galaxy Mule
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
#277 - 2016-08-29 20:56:25 UTC
As someone who doesn't use or care about this feature, HA!
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#278 - 2016-08-29 20:56:47 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
it is absolutely mind boggling how seagull allows this kind of work done by folks who have zero knowledge about industry.

prepare for epic market disruptions in November.

Can you elaborate, I want to be prepared?

I'm my own NPC alt.

Syri Taneka
NOVA-CAINE
#279 - 2016-08-29 21:00:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Syri Taneka
At the least I'd like to see the Leadership range bonuses flipped (4%/5%/6% rather than 6%/5%/4%). Wing Command and Fleet Command cost additional time to train and should carry more significant payoffs as a result. This carries well with the logical fact that a fleet or wing will generally spread out more than a squad and thus need more range to hit them all. (The skills should probably also be renamed somehow since the hierarchy won't apply to them either.)
Silven Rubis
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#280 - 2016-08-29 21:03:05 UTC
Cerulean Ice wrote:
Why does the mining burst trigger a weapons timer?

Why ammo for the boost modules instead of just scripts? They function as scripted modules, so they should actually be scripted modules instead of some weird ammo script hybrid. It makes no sense to have these modules only boost so many times before a reload when the script type isn't changing.


Just for the gameplay and the deeper meaning of flying in space, EVE is unique and wonderfully we love it, yet I never seen any movie or read a fiction that tells a story about a bonus applied by amunition shoot in space - its so unlogical as a cat.

Scripted, yes, or lets say smartbombs kind of enhancing waves but please no launching magic bombs, rockets whatever "...beam me up scotti"