These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#241 - 2016-10-06 20:55:22 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
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.

There definitely need to be some fitting and fleet composition choices. But the design intent for this ship is to enable you to ignore minor intruders and keep mining, even under PANIC. A handful of interceptors being able to all but completely neuter the mining capability of the Rorqual by bouncing in and out sounds like a failure to me. A single drone you can pre-lock, with some buffer to it, sounds more fitting. Even if it takes 100mbit bandwidth. You can't even pull the excavators when hostiles land on grid. It may take 20 or more seconds to recall them off a rock you are sitting at 0 with. These things move at the speed of a slowboating mining barge.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
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.

There are at least two obvious dominant cases.

The first is invincible cyno. It's not at all uncommon to jump a carrier through a cyno and immediately have it light a secondary. Why would you use anything other than the invincible Rorqual for that?

More importantly, we have Shield Command Bursts in a capital engagement. Capitals, including titans, are receiving a 2% per level bonus to Command Bursts in this update. Only Command Ships receive the 3% per level bonused links. There is no reason to ever use a shield command ship for that extra edge in tank when an invincible Rorqual provides the same bonus. Meanwhile, armor fleets are left with trying to keep a command ship alive or using 2% links from a capital.

The shield burst bonus should drop to 2% per level as with all capitals, and should not be usable in PANIC. (i know, that doesn't require target locks)

Beyond that, engaging a mining group with several Rorquals and a number of barges presents a lot of issues. Only one Rorqual needs to panic to enable the barges/industrials to apply invincible electronic and capacitor warfare, or remote reps. ECM drones and modules would have too easy a time breaking tackle to free the remaining rorquals, particularly with options like refitting or outright swapping to a "battle indy" stored in the Rorqual. It is at the very least counter intuitive for the attackers to have to worry about neuting out the invulnerable barges and haulers and killing their ewar drones. More importantly, the Rorquals who manage to get off grid are capital ship pilots liberated to rejoin the fight in a more appropriate ship. Killing off the stuck Rorqual who paniced won't be all that easy.

As for bandwidth abandoning drones, "screw the drones, save the the ships" sounds like PANIC to me. The Rorqual will most likely abandon the excavators anyway. The only people who will care about some small and medium drones floating in space are the ones who hold the grid at the end of the fight. Having them auto aggress targets and chase into orbit to land 0 damage hits is also counter intuitive, for both the attackers and defenders.


FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#242 - 2016-10-06 21:58:40 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. We are currently leaning towards allowing cyno lighting and watching closely to see if this causes problems. If needed, we can change the effect to prevent cyno lighting and prevent ships with an active cyno from receiving the P.A.N.I.C. effect.


Just say no to invulnerable cynos. If you want to light a cyno for reinforcements, it should be done on the Rorquals, not on a invulnerable Procurer.

So, since Rorquals cannot receive the PANIC effect, they should be able to light the cynosural field to bring in the reinforcements. Ships with an active cynosural field should not receive the PANIC effect. Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field.

I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual.

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

Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#243 - 2016-10-06 22:42:36 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field.

I don't see a problem with being able to light the cyno under panic, as long as doing so breaks the invulnerability.

FT Diomedes wrote:
I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual.

Your procurer would have to be in their fleet to benefit. You would need to bring in your own Rorqual, and at that point you may as well have that be your invulnerable secondary cyno. Hilarious things you can do, however, include putting a spy with neutralizers in their fleet. Help cap out their rorqual while benefiting from their own invulnerability. Or take squad command and kick exhumers from fleet right before you drop.

Another concern arises when you factor in the jump range increase. You now have welfare triage that can drop at black ops ranges, although cyno jammers can mitigate that. Engagements with invincible reps and ewar on both sides just sound really dumb.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#244 - 2016-10-06 23:00:02 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose.
You will want to fit those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP!

Good luck with that, as the drone bonus only applies when the core is active, and you are stuck in one spot.
Flashmala
BlackWatch Industrial Group
Reckless Contingency.
#245 - 2016-10-06 23:39:37 UTC
What's the ETA for Sisi?

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

Mariko Musashi Hareka
Kaishin.
#246 - 2016-10-07 03:32:06 UTC
Flashmala wrote:
What's the ETA for Sisi?

This^^
Elenahina
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#247 - 2016-10-07 03:40:53 UTC
Mariko Musashi Hareka wrote:
Flashmala wrote:
What's the ETA for Sisi?

This^^

That ^^

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

Marox Calendale
Voices of War - Research and Production
Evictus.
#248 - 2016-10-07 08:25:41 UTC
Will the Panic Field relay to the ship or to the Pilot? Will I be able to leave a Panic Barge and warp off with my pod? If not, this field will not work very well in Wormhole Space, because my Cavalry are mostly sitting in other Barges next to me, ready to warp back and change to pvp fitted clones and ships.

How do the excavator drones work? do they still have to fly back to the rorqual to drop the ore or will they drop jetcans like other pilots will do?

What is the highest range of (Capital) Tractor Beams on the rorqual? I didnĀ“t see any special (role) bonuses, like I think it now has.
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#249 - 2016-10-07 10:22:55 UTC  |  Edited by: 13kr1d1
Consumables, invulnerability, consunmed boosters that make mining temporarily better.

All very bad ideas.

You need to learn how to make the game more productive for people working together from a purely mechanical standpoint. In PVP, people working together can crush a single person, with more efficiency, as there's less risk to anyone on the attacking side being blown up, and the effects of their modules are multiplicative, when someone can bring webs and target painters and someone else can bring a scram and whatever you want.

One of the problems is that people are lazy and crying for an easier time. if ore is mined faster on the basis of ship bonuses, all that will happen is prices will drop and people will need to mine more of it, further pushing low level corps or solo miners behind. There's already corp asset ships, they're called covetors and hulks. Ironically enough, these things are corp level because they're inefficient, like the Solo PVPer, but in a GANG, such as C/H+hauler, they're hugely more efficient.

You want corps or even loose gangs to be more relevant? HALVE the ore holds of all mining frigs, barges, and exhumers. You want to PUSH that LONG align/warp time of mining ships to encourage the use of haulers.

No matter what ships you put in, you're still on a 1 for 1 basis with regard to those ships. In real life, the reason people create companies is because there's a food/hunger incentive to slave yourself to a corporation for fractions of profits. There's no such incentive in eve since the whole immortal/not starving bit. Because of no needs, people can demand a higher price from corps or go it solo, thinking its better to be alone than give some of your profit to a corp. On the 1 for 1 basis, 1 player is an entire mining operation unto themselves. Their ship is digger, conveyor belt, sorter, refiner (yes, the ore is refined from dirty to pristine), and hauler all on their own. That's what 1 for 1 means, when real mines require a larger number of people to perform the same tasks. Not to get too I-Robot here, but we've assumed total automation, which makes it harder to be successful as a mining corp. If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp?

Back to PvP and the multiplicative way people improve the outcome by banding together. Ship buffs do that but are quite a tacky way. I prefer to see a purely mechanical way of that being done (e.g. no ship buffs, but the modules and collaboration of each individual player mechanically improve resource gathering).

As it stands there's also still one glaring issue which is that people have a bad attitude. Corp based mining can already be quite lucrative but people think that there's no benefit except to go solo. Changing the game before people figure the game out won't help the low enders. High enders don't need more power, because they know all the tricks.

The way I see it, these changes are like turning softball into T-ball because the players can't figure out a business model that works.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#250 - 2016-10-07 15:22:42 UTC
You know what would be really cool? If a capital tractor beam worked on asteroids. With asteroids being scoopable.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#251 - 2016-10-07 15:47:23 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose.
You will want to fit those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP!

Good luck with that, as the drone bonus only applies when the core is active, and you are stuck in one spot.

I know, and I'm absolutely fascinated about that. I will definitely try this as soon as I can, and I didnt mine for years. TBH, the best mining experience I had was during those hulkogeddons some kids might not remember. Yeah, I like it spicy.
The Economist
Logically Consistent
#252 - 2016-10-07 16:01:27 UTC
While you're looking at the rorqual and related modules:

Any chance of allowing capital tractor beams to work on all wrecks regardless of ownership (at least in 0.0)?

The loot whorqual has been sub-optimal for too long!
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#253 - 2016-10-07 16:07:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
13kr1d1 wrote:
(skipping wall of text)
If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp?

Because you want to hang out with ppl? To learn some tips and tricks and just to chit-chat. Furthermore, you've acknowledged that mining in a fleet provides some benefits - and it really does.

Anyway. I can kinda understand your point, but where is the constructive part of your criticism? What do you suggest?

EDIT:
Let me bring in my vision on the fleet mining and why it is not that popular.
You are comparing mining fleets to PVP fleets. Yet, there is a big difference. The in-game purpose of PVP fleet is either to destroy/capture or to defend some target. In fact, most of the time you just destroy and defend. If you capture, you've got a real trouble. The drama behind the distribution of money moons, for example, is beyond hilarious. Even if an enemy jumps out of his ships (it happens once is a while, to safe his pod or smth) - the comms just explode! People start yelling if we should finish the ship to make the killboard green, or we should take it - and if we do, who will take it: either FC, or a hero tackler, or the poorest newbie in the gang. But at least we have killmails, and those killboards give somewhat estimate of people participation and this can be used as a tool to distribute those captured targets.

Now imagine a mining fleet, the whole purpose of which is to acquire goods. If someone takes responsibility to lead this fleet, he has to settle so many issues with the little wealth they generate. Look, that dude is slacking - let's reduce his share! Hey, another dude joined halfway through, he doesnt deserve the full reward! That little newbie in a venture is no match for my mighty Hulk! Your Orca doesnt really count, I could bring mine too! Ore hauling is too easy, those folks should've better brought barges... And so on. With that much pressure, an FC of mining fleet does not have even the basic tools! He cannot even monitor how much ore does each of the fleetmates mine. It's not logged anywhere.

Well let's escalate further, and look at the corporations as means of generating profit - through mining, refining, production, trade, anything. Are there any tools for accounting? Maybe there are a few, but comparing to the sheer diversity of EVE economy, they are absolutely lackluster. But fixing it requires a huge efforts. I hope we see them, someday. But for now, they're fixing the Rorqual. And they're doing it great.
Athril Ostus
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#254 - 2016-10-07 16:22:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Athril Ostus
Going to be buried at this point....

The Rorqual ship maintenance bay needs review. It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce. Especially since you can suit case a carrier/dread and drag any fit ships you want. It needs balanced to not challenge the role of jump freighters but at current the limitation on the ship maintenance bay seems needlessly restrictive in contrast to a carrier/dread.

Also just a note, Ii think leadership V should be a requirement for mining director 1. The only point of mining director 1 is to use the links. The links themselves require Leadership V.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#255 - 2016-10-07 17:12:06 UTC
Athril Ostus wrote:
The Rorqual ship maintenance bay needs review. It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce.

You will see what is odd when daddy PL starts using them as ghost riders.
BTW, can I fit a bunch of heavy scramblers and tackle those titans while being invulnerable under the PANIC mode?
Mole Guy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#256 - 2016-10-07 17:39:47 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. We are currently leaning towards allowing cyno lighting and watching closely to see if this causes problems. If needed, we can change the effect to prevent cyno lighting and prevent ships with an active cyno from receiving the P.A.N.I.C. effect.


Just say no to invulnerable cynos. If you want to light a cyno for reinforcements, it should be done on the Rorquals, not on a invulnerable Procurer.

So, since Rorquals cannot receive the PANIC effect, they should be able to light the cynosural field to bring in the reinforcements. Ships with an active cynosural field should not receive the PANIC effect. Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field.

I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual.


the rorqual does receive invul mode. they just cant receive it from someone else. they have to jump in and lite it themselves or lite it from the belt. their rorqual and the mining fleet is protected. other rorquals in the belt are not.
Mole Guy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#257 - 2016-10-07 17:44:43 UTC
scenario:
we jump to a new system to ninja mine.
i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff.
before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies.
we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships.

we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up.
its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO.

what do we do with the spare ship???

and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that.
or "its a designed feature/draw back"..


and 5 light years is beautiful.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#258 - 2016-10-07 18:10:27 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:
scenario:
we jump to a new system to ninja mine.
i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff.

Are you sure a Rorqual is supposed to be good at ninja mining? I thought that's what the mining frigates are for.
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#259 - 2016-10-07 18:50:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Vald Tegor
Athril Ostus wrote:
It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce.

It does that just fine. Throw cargo expanders in the lows and you have 105,706m3 of cargo space without even using cargo rigs and a 40km3 fleet hangar. That is already better than a suitcase for ships you produce, which are not yet assembled. You also get double the jump range and -90% fatigue.

Carrier ship bays are for relocating combat fit craft.

Skia Aumer wrote:
BTW, can I fit a bunch of heavy scramblers and tackle those titans while being invulnerable under the PANIC mode?

You can fit T1 haulers with a prop mod, rack of scramblers, Nosferatus and a token armor tank to help survive bridging until panic is applied. Bonus: Alpha clone friendly.
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#260 - 2016-10-07 20:07:57 UTC  |  Edited by: 13kr1d1
Skia Aumer wrote:
13kr1d1 wrote:
(skipping wall of text)
If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp?

Because you want to hang out with ppl? To learn some tips and tricks and just to chit-chat. Furthermore, you've acknowledged that mining in a fleet provides some benefits - and it really does.



EDIT:
Let me bring in my vision on the fleet mining and why it is not that popular.
You are comparing mining fleets to PVP fleets. Yet, there is a big difference. The in-game purpose of PVP fleet is either to destroy/capture or to defend some target. In fact, most of the time you just destroy and defend. If you capture, you've got a real trouble. The drama behind the distribution of money moons, for example, is beyond hilarious. Even if an enemy jumps out of his ships (it happens once is a while, to safe his pod or smth) - the comms just explode! People start yelling if we should finish the ship to make the killboard green, or we should take it - and if we do, who will take it: either FC, or a hero tackler, or the poorest newbie in the gang. But at least we have killmails, and those killboards give somewhat estimate of people participation and this can be used as a tool to distribute those captured targets.

Now imagine a mining fleet, the whole purpose of which is to acquire goods. If someone takes responsibility to lead this fleet, he has to settle so many issues with the little wealth they generate. Look, that dude is slacking - let's reduce his share! Hey, another dude joined halfway through, he doesnt deserve the full reward! That little newbie in a venture is no match for my mighty Hulk! Your Orca doesnt really count, I could bring mine too! Ore hauling is too easy, those folks should've better brought barges... And so on. With that much pressure, an FC of mining fleet does not have even the basic tools! He cannot even monitor how much ore does each of the fleetmates mine. It's not logged anywhere.

Well let's escalate further, and look at the corporations as means of generating profit - through mining, refining, production, trade, anything. Are there any tools for accounting? Maybe there are a few, but comparing to the sheer diversity of EVE economy, they are absolutely lackluster. But fixing it requires a huge efforts. I hope we see them, someday. But for now, they're fixing the Rorqual. And they're doing it great.



Then tell the masses who want to get rich solo through mining and think corps will cost them money.

To point one, PvP and Mining should share a similar property; having more people on grid increases effectiveness mechanically, or thanks to combining the efforts of modules fitted to the ships, rather than continuing to lean super hard on that "give more ships and more buffs" crutch that they've been on since T2 cruisers.

Point two, I'll give you my second tier idea. Not my first, that's mine alone. Second tier idea says you get the ore's market values at current time in a big spreadsheet. Then you pay the person that mined such ore that value. Now, youre only paying them the market price, say there's a 15-16 veld spread and you give them 15.5. Because they can sit there and mine continously, they aren't having to set up hauling (and pay for it), or buy a hauler (although this is a one-off unless ganked), and spend TIMEAKAMONEY to haul their own stuff or set those contracts up.

If there's a problem ACCOOUNTING for people's value, there's not enough buckets on the line.

There's a wealth of information regarding how real mining works, and CCP and players ignore how those companies work and what the requirements are.

Take anom ore sites as an example where CCP decided to reduce content by making it "easy" to find them. No more do you need a probe scanner, and the "aggravation" of getting your alt out or hiring someone else.

Key point at the end there, hiring someone else. Could you imagine if this game was dynamic enough to allow for "exploration services"? A corporation who's only goal is to discover things in Eve for other players to make use of, and therefore be able to profit from being that kind of individual?

But no, CCP pruned this because people complained, just as they're complaining now, about things which they were annoyed to need alts for. People whine because they need alts to run their mining fleets. But they're spending lots of money IRL to be able to multibox those fleets, and in doing so they're doing the literal work 15 other people could be doing with them. They're cutting themselves out of player generated content, then crying, then CCP is making new ships and superbuffing the Rorq. Im sure CCP made it so you don't need probes because people hated the "minigame requirement" of using probes and scanners to find ore, especially since that meant getting their alt out or having another ship in system to do the probing.

In actuality PEOPLE are the problem with the game. People who want to be able to SOLO THE UNIVERSE, and are either willing to spend lots of money on multiboxes or just use alts+their own main to probe things down so they can profit from it, and, not willing to share that profit, do not want to involve other players or collaborate, and thus call probing a "time wasting mindless chore thats not fun" until CCP changes it.

People's attitudes are the problem. I heard there was an awesome game where it is against the EULA to have alts, or to dual box, etc. That game sounds amazing, because it enforces the need for people to rely on others rather than making alt armies to produce their own ships, mine their own ore, etc. If things keep going this path, I wonder how many subs it'll start stealing from Eve.

CCP seems to be designing this game to encourage people to get around cooperative gameplay. Pirate mains going full carebear using alts for market comes to mind.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices