These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#221 - 2016-10-06 01:11:09 UTC
Decaneos wrote:
I think people are not reading things very well.

If you are in panic mode the only thing you can do is MINE!!!! you cant tackle, you cant use EW and you cannot attack.

No. The only thing you CANNOT do is damage or leave the grid.

Quote:

+99.99% Shield Resists
-90% Shield recharge duration (increases passive shield regen rate)
All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0
Prevents warp, cloak, jump, dock, tethering (if already tethered do not apply)


As presented, you can repair other ships. You can apply ecm, damps , webs, points, remote sebos, capacitor warfare, provide shield bursts, use ECM drones, logistic drones, neuting drones, and so on and so forth all while invulnerable to damage (but still vulnerable to being neuted out yourself, and affected ships that are not a sieged rorq are vulnerable to ewar).

As it stands, to engage a mining fleet, you will need neuts. Lots and lots and lots of Neuts.
Mariko Musashi Hareka
Kaishin.
#222 - 2016-10-06 03:46:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariko Musashi Hareka
Movement Effects:
-100% Rorqual velocity
+900% Rorqual mass
Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering


Can we get the -100% Rorqual velocity removed on the industrial core and remove the changing of the ship it is not needed anymore in the game as compression is now instant and the bpos/bpcs for compression were removed so this is outdated and not needed. Using the invul field already basically keeps you stuck on grid so no need to keep the rorqual immobile using the industrial core. Or at the very least reduce the cycle time of the industrial core to 1 minute as compression is instant now and the longer time for indy core cycle time is obsolete.
Zanthar Eos
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#223 - 2016-10-06 04:15:01 UTC
I really like these changes. Can't wait to get out in the belts with this.
Dutow Sa
Jupiter Fleet
#224 - 2016-10-06 04:55:34 UTC
David Mandrake wrote:
I had a big reply written out to your post, but the forums won't let me post it. But I think you need to look at the Rorqual as not a big mining barge, but as a capital, and compare it to those. I also think you need to check your numbers - the Rorqual can't rep nearly as much as you claim (the bonus is on it's local reps, not remote) - and even if it could, a Fax will outstrip it's repping power with a single repper.

For a combat situation, aside from fun fleets, I don't see why you would choose a Rorqual over a cheaper ship that's more effective at it's job - and yes, other caps are cheaper than Rorquals. The single most expensive ship I've ever owned is a Rorqual, and I've owned every kind of capital. You could, potentially, use it as an Entosis ship similar to what people are doing with Faxes - but it's still expensive to do this with it.

Basically it's an expensive, jack of all trades ship and although it does have it's niche and will do great doing what it's designed to do - mining support and logistics (not the fleet logistics type, the "I need 100,000m3 of fuel moved to this tower in the middle of nowhere" logistics). But it won't do that great at anything else, and I don't think you'll see any serious fleet concepts with it. Though I'm sure people will do Battle Rorqs, just like they do already, and they'll still die in a fire.


I'm pretty sure about my numbers:

By a quick check in pyfa, a current Rorqual with around 80% resists and a single CASB has above 6k / sec local reps. If I multiply that by 3.5... Okay, I ignored the reload time here, but the fact is, it's easy to reach insane tank on a rorqual in controlled situations (e.g. where you are able to supply it with an insane amount of cap charges). Even if I missed something and these bonuses are additive with something else, it's still insane.

For the remote reps:

-75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use.

I'm pretty sure that's a bonus there.

I was also speaking about a very specific situation: indy corp defending its base somewhere.

I'm also sure that the same facts make dual/multi boxed mining rorquals really hard to kill (yes, they can't remote rep each other while the core is active, but they can rep the defense fleet) - assuming that mining with excavator drones will be worth it.
Commander Who
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#225 - 2016-10-06 05:15:54 UTC
Zappity wrote:
I wish the Rorqual super drones were fighters. The fighter interface is soooo much better than the drone interface and is much more fun to use.



I think something like this would be good, at the moment if you park the rorqual in a Enormous Field and target one of the large Spodumain Rocks (>60000 = 960,000m³) will take ~ 1hr @ 18,400m³/min mining rate to eat it + Travel. If the drones works the same as other mining drones (right click mine) then you have not changed anything it will still be afk mining just a little bit risker.

Set your Shield alarm to 98% and watch TV, will only become interesting if:

  1. NPC Rats come to the belt
  2. Someone actually comes into the system and actually wants deal with killing a full tank with the Don't Touch Me module and the OP as hell damage drones on them; or
  3. your ore hold is full and you need to compress


Mole Guy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#226 - 2016-10-06 05:55:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Mole Guy
the cargo scan is nice if we were still in 2007 before we could abandon cans and they turn colors. change the name to "its done" and that nullifies a complete bonus on a ship. now we have a definitive time to pull cans and we dont have to try to target a can with a capital ship.

how about dropping the cargo scan option for a drone control and optimal range bonus?

the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em.

typical situation...drop sentries, set to defend xxx miner only to find out they are out of range. not a good thing.

the cargo bonus is 200% range. carriers got a 200% drone/fighter control range bonus before the fighter changes.
how about changing the cargo scan bonus to 200% drone control range and say 100% optimal/fall off?
or 200% control range as a role bonus and 100% optimal tied to the industrial core siege mode. maybe 150% for t2.

much more useful this way.

or a 200% control range role bonus and 20% per level optimal/fall off per level.
Mole Guy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#227 - 2016-10-06 06:32:07 UTC
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

we only get a bonus to cap for rr? local reps pull a ton of power and now they will be -60 duration. i can see our cap going away quickly and not having any to jump when the core turns off.

is this a typo or are we going to go cap dry?
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#228 - 2016-10-06 08:56:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
PANIC module should block entosis/break active locks/disallow it somehow. Whatever it takes, it can't be allowed to go live without a tweak there.

A 100% immune entosis ship is a *bad* thing.

Ed: and NSA type restrictions on ewar are only sane too.
Punky260
Kriegsmarinewerft
Goonswarm Federation
#229 - 2016-10-06 09:42:23 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:
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

we only get a bonus to cap for rr? local reps pull a ton of power and now they will be -60 duration. i can see our cap going away quickly and not having any to jump when the core turns off.

is this a typo or are we going to go cap dry?



I guess you have to decide if you commit to the fight and try to safe buddies - or if you rather decide to stay juicy and jump out once you can.
This is not a bad mechanic :)
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#230 - 2016-10-06 09:54:02 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:

the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em.

The Rorqual fails at this pillar, but not due to control range (which is part of your high slot and rig fitting choices).

You are not going to recall your mining turtles to launch combat drones. The barges will instead use their combat drones to clear the rats off the Rorqual, in some cases before the excavators can even be pulled in. In a PvP scenario you are going to abandon the mining drones to launch combat. Rats won't be worth losing the yield to clear faster. If there are no barges on grid, people might even ignore the rats completely.

Another thing that may become a big concern with respect to rats, is if they regularly primary the excavators. They are currently listed with 600 shield hp and 0% resists. You are not going to keep them up even if you prelock. We do not yet know the price point of the drones either. Players in small ships will be able to pick away at the drones and run before the Rorqual can respond. Not much of a fleet defender if it can't keep its own mining drones alive, is it? A better choice may be to make the excavator a single, more sturdy drone. The Rorqual could then mine with it while still fielding 4 combat drones.

The intent for PANIC is to be able to continue mining, but it will not apply to drones that we know of. Players will kill off the excavators stopping mining activity under panic anyway. To be honest, some people will be more interested in jetting the ore they already have to shrink the lossmail value and hope the attackers leave it behind, rather than want to continue mining. This is part of why I would like to see max targets locked and drone bandwidth set to 0 under panic, to prevent abuse edge cases. ECM Burst would still be usable, for better or worse. You want to retain ability to cycle modules, as dropping out of PANIC with hardners off would be really bad. Making cynos break the invulnerability would also give the pilot control for when the defense fleet needs reps and added dps, with its own costs to doing so.

Then we have the problem of dealing with two existing drone bugs in the game.

The first makes your drones the top priority target for all rats on grid. It requires a session change to fix. This will periodically cost you excavator drones and mining time until you realize the problem and fix it.

The second is a bug that occurs when recalling your drones. They are back in your bay, but your drone interface gets stuck showing them as still in space and "returning". The drones do not show in your drone window as inside the bay, so you can't relaunch the same flight. Launching a different flight does not update the interface. You can no longer tell when your drones are being targeted, which ones are out, or even if they're alive or not unless you can tell yours apart in the drone ball on grid. Recalling the next flight usually bugs out that one as well. I see this bug literally every single day. Sometimes every 20 minutes despite session changes and relaunching the client. I am not looking forward to having to deal with this in a Rorqual in a pvp scenario. "Let me just eject from my ship for 10 seconds and board it again to fix my UI real quick"

In fact, when it happened earlier today, it would not update my shields or armor either despite the citadel tether repairing my ship to full.
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#231 - 2016-10-06 11:43:48 UTC
@vlad... try repairing your client... that bug never happens to me. so it sounds more like client side than server side
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station
Goonswarm Federation
#232 - 2016-10-06 11:55:41 UTC
Tiberizzle wrote:
Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are.

#1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu.

#2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount.

The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk.

With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol.

Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats.
This just all this. Also the cyno should be allowed during panic.
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#233 - 2016-10-06 13:00:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Henry Plantgenet
Will these changes prevent the rorqual from being used instead of force auxiliaries because of the increased jump range?
and do mining laser upgrades/ ice harvest upgrades affect yields on excavator drones/ice harvesting drones/mining drones?
David Mandrake
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#234 - 2016-10-06 14:57:53 UTC
Dutow Sa wrote:


I'm pretty sure about my numbers:

By a quick check in pyfa, a current Rorqual with around 80% resists and a single CASB has above 6k / sec local reps. If I multiply that by 3.5... Okay, I ignored the reload time here, but the fact is, it's easy to reach insane tank on a rorqual in controlled situations (e.g. where you are able to supply it with an insane amount of cap charges). Even if I missed something and these bonuses are additive with something else, it's still insane.

For the remote reps:

-75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use.

I'm pretty sure that's a bonus there.

I was also speaking about a very specific situation: indy corp defending its base somewhere.

I'm also sure that the same facts make dual/multi boxed mining rorquals really hard to kill (yes, they can't remote rep each other while the core is active, but they can rep the defense fleet) - assuming that mining with excavator drones will be worth it.


I did miss the duration bonus so my apologies on that. You still don't have a lot of remote repping power with the Rorqual compared to a Fax, and I don't think it's enough to really hold up to much. Enough to buy time? Sure. Enough to stop a serious attempt at attacking something without being reinforced by a proper fleet? Not happening.

As far as the local tank goes, you can reach a quite high EHP and local rep. You are susceptible to neuting pressure, however, and you do need to keep your active tank running in order to reach these high EHP gains and don't have much room for cap injection. Either way it's all still trying to buy time for help to arrive, because with that sort of a fit you're not going to be killing much although you might survive for awhile.

If an indy corp wants to defend it's base with a Rorqual that's fine, but it's not an asset that I, personally, would use for that unless it was a last stand in a wormhole and I wanted to go out fighting and had literally nothing left to fight with. There's a lot better ships to fly to do that with, though.
Cade Windstalker
#235 - 2016-10-06 15:48:58 UTC
Vald Tegor wrote:
Mole Guy wrote:

the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em.

The Rorqual fails at this pillar, but not due to control range (which is part of your high slot and rig fitting choices).

You are not going to recall your mining turtles to launch combat drones. The barges will instead use their combat drones to clear the rats off the Rorqual, in some cases before the excavators can even be pulled in. In a PvP scenario you are going to abandon the mining drones to launch combat. Rats won't be worth losing the yield to clear faster. If there are no barges on grid, people might even ignore the rats completely.

Another thing that may become a big concern with respect to rats, is if they regularly primary the excavators. They are currently listed with 600 shield hp and 0% resists. You are not going to keep them up even if you prelock. We do not yet know the price point of the drones either. Players in small ships will be able to pick away at the drones and run before the Rorqual can respond. Not much of a fleet defender if it can't keep its own mining drones alive, is it? A better choice may be to make the excavator a single, more sturdy drone. The Rorqual could then mine with it while still fielding 4 combat drones.


I don't think this is a failure, it's just a choice of trade offs the player has to make. There's nothing anywhere in that blog saying that the ships should be amazing at all three all the time or that defense has to take the form of whacking things for each ship. The Rorqual has the option to be an amazing miner or combat ship, but in some cases it certainly makes more sense to just slap a target painter on it and assist combat drones from the other ships to it.

Vald Tegor wrote:
The intent for PANIC is to be able to continue mining, but it will not apply to drones that we know of. Players will kill off the excavators stopping mining activity under panic anyway. To be honest, some people will be more interested in jetting the ore they already have to shrink the lossmail value and hope the attackers leave it behind, rather than want to continue mining. This is part of why I would like to see max targets locked and drone bandwidth set to 0 under panic, to prevent abuse edge cases. ECM Burst would still be usable, for better or worse. You want to retain ability to cycle modules, as dropping out of PANIC with hardners off would be really bad. Making cynos break the invulnerability would also give the pilot control for when the defense fleet needs reps and added dps, with its own costs to doing so.


I don't really see this as a problem. Some kind of wide area invulnerability is always going to have abuse cases, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing in this instance unless those uses become truly dominant and overpowering rather than niche cases that create amusing stories.

I would also point out that setting drone bandwidth to 0 would auto-abandon all deployed drones, which is far from ideal for something like this.

Vald Tegor wrote:
Then we have the problem of dealing with two existing drone bugs in the game.

The first makes your drones the top priority target for all rats on grid. It requires a session change to fix. This will periodically cost you excavator drones and mining time until you realize the problem and fix it.

The second is a bug that occurs when recalling your drones. They are back in your bay, but your drone interface gets stuck showing them as still in space and "returning". The drones do not show in your drone window as inside the bay, so you can't relaunch the same flight. Launching a different flight does not update the interface. You can no longer tell when your drones are being targeted, which ones are out, or even if they're alive or not unless you can tell yours apart in the drone ball on grid. Recalling the next flight usually bugs out that one as well. I see this bug literally every single day. Sometimes every 20 minutes despite session changes and relaunching the client. I am not looking forward to having to deal with this in a Rorqual in a pvp scenario. "Let me just eject from my ship for 10 seconds and board it again to fix my UI real quick"

In fact, when it happened earlier today, it would not update my shields or armor either despite the citadel tether repairing my ship to full.


Both of these bugs are quite rare overall, the first especially gets blamed far more often than it actually occurs, and neither is common enough that CCP should just refrain from doing anything with drones until they're fixed.

Regarding the second bug, if you're seeing it that often you may want to check through your client settings and open a ticket with CCP to provide them logs and other information. I've personally been running around primarily in an Ishtar for the last couple of months and I've never seen this bug in hundreds or thousands of drone deploys, swaps, and recalls. If you're seeing it that frequently that would suggest there is an issue with how your client is setup or communicating with the server. In other words, you're an edge case and that sucks, but it doesn't have much bearing on everyone else.
Raven Ship
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2016-10-06 17:15:38 UTC
Force rorquals to stay in belt is bad already,
but to give that insane boost to mining of those with industry core active,
that is worst possible thing to do, better simply remove mining boost at all.
Can't imagine the sick brain behind such idea, but it is what will benefit only few biggest alliances, and put in mayor disadvantage EVERYONE else.
Just look at megacyte price, hour after that dev blow, it drop 20%? on price.

This is why CCP lose playerbase all the time, as CCP listen to those cry babys gathered around failscade alliances, who are in minority, but cry loudest and everywhere.
Elenahina
Embark
Triumvirate.
#237 - 2016-10-06 17:51:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Elenahina
Raven Ship wrote:
Force rorquals to stay in belt is bad already,
but to give that insane boost to mining of those with industry core active,
that is worst possible thing to do, better simply remove mining boost at all.
Can't imagine the sick brain behind such idea, but it is what will benefit only few biggest alliances, and put in mayor disadvantage EVERYONE else.
Just look at megacyte price, hour after that dev blow, it drop 20%? on price.

This is why CCP lose playerbase all the time, as CCP listen to those cry babys gathered around failscade alliances, who are in minority, but cry loudest and everywhere.


Most of the mineral prices are dropping because people are speculating that supplies will rise, prices will fall, and they're dumping their stockpiles (which, ironically, is causing supplies to rise and prices to fall). People really are their own worst enemy.

The market always finds a new normal though. You just have to ride out the storm.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

TomyLobo
Negative Density
Unchained Alliance
#238 - 2016-10-06 18:40:53 UTC
CCP, i'd consider making the rorqual 300mil mass so it can go through mid class wormholes, this will increase activity in wh space for miners and pvpers.
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
#239 - 2016-10-06 19:07:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Vulpine
Some suggestions to throw in to the pot here if CCP is able to be creative with their code

Rorqual, PANIC and Cynos.
Problem:
A mining Rorq under attack being able to light a cyno is good, a PvP rorq being able to light a cyno and be invulnerable is bad.

Suggestion:
If a Rorqual has a jump reactivation timer (or any fatigue if you want to be cruel) then it can't activate the PANIC module. Now for the Rorqual to be an invulnerable bridgehead through which you can bring your other caps in you need to either defend it after jumping in to the initial cyno or slowboat it in with your spearhead. Though you could still bring it in to system in advance and log it off I guess.


PANIC button and TSM 5
Problem:
TSM 5 as a pre-req is contentious

Solution:
Make Mining Upgrades 5 a pre-req.

As best as I can read from the comments a lot of people are up in arms about a relatively minor but provable disadvantage from training TSM to 5 instead of leaving it at 4. Since the scale of the problem is relatively minor these people are either devout min/maxers or strictly following what they've been told.

While TSM is an obvious choice of pre-req for something that makes a huge change to a shield stat in theory it could be any skill. I suggest Mining Upgrades to 5. Lore wise PANIC is unique and is some weird edge case effect that can be caused by mining augmentation feeding back in to shields. Game balance wise this takes a skill that many miners stopped training at 4 because "you'll never need mining upgrades to 5" and makes them train that to 5 instead. On a skill map that is going to be worse for most people than Int/Mem would be.
As an added bonus it's going to encourage people to speed in to a Rorqual and forget their shield skills. Everybody gets to benefit, not just the miners!
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#240 - 2016-10-06 19:28:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Vald Tegor
Ncc 1709 wrote:
@vlad... try repairing your client... that bug never happens to me. so it sounds more like client side than server side

When my alt blitzed L4 missions in a Rattlesnake during the war, I saw it all of twice over the course of months. But blitzing involves constant gate jumps, station docking and ship swaps.

Living out of a citadel, staying in-system most of the time, I see it all the time. It's not just me either. I heard dozens of people complain about it on comms over the past month.

TomyLobo wrote:
CCP, i'd consider making the rorqual 300mil mass so it can go through mid class wormholes, this will increase activity in wh space for miners and pvpers.

Build it inside?