Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
 

[March] Rorqual and Mining changes

First post First post First post
Author
Top Tier
#261 - 2017-02-24 02:01:15 UTC
So many other ways to approach this change then straight out nerfing stuff into the ground.


  • Make Battleships Viable Again
  • Encourage more huge fights and objective taking
  • Change other aspects of mining rather then making it pointless again
  • Introduce new structures that require lots of minerals that provide good bonuses to those who can make them, rather then another station to dock and ship spin in




Just stop making people want to quit your game
Caldari State
#262 - 2017-02-24 02:02:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ltcartial
1. Rorq's right now can mine about 150m/200m isk worth of ore per hour. About the same as a Hel ratting balls out. Those numbers are high considering the rorq has to move alot, drone travel time, time spent out of core, nuet activity and so on.

2. Double nerfing the drones both yield and more trip time back and fourth, So you have 12b worth of a rorq in core mode ready to be jumped on and ganked. 12B would take 60hrs worth of 200m ore isk/hr with having the high risk of losing it. Not good ,,not good at all.

3. The amount mined is also not liquid isk like ratting..you have to turn that ore into things that you usually sell at a lose of total isk worth you mined.

PS: It seems like you are making these changes based on non indy toons, or someone how reads non indy toons thoughts of the rorq and not the actual ppl that use them.

Final thought, Making the main materials for the excavator drones drop mostly in drone region space is complete insanity, drone region space already has higher bounty due to npcs not droping loot, now you give them extra isk for the elite drone AI and drone augments that drop more in drone region space then other space.

All I can say is I will differently be playing other games coming out when these changes take affect as it will not be beatifically for the Risk to award equation. First Nerf already had me not wanting to play, now this will make me shut down all 10 of my accounts until something else in eve is exciting and brings me back but I doubt it.
Rate My Ticks
#263 - 2017-02-24 02:05:53 UTC
What's the point of a 10 billion + investment for a ship and even more for a character if you can make the same amount now in a carrier which can be nearly fully insured and 1/5th of the cost or AGAIN NEARLY RUNNING INCURSIONS THE SAFEST THING IN THE ENTIRE GAME.

Stop making changes to things that require people to actually have some risk as a side to their isk making.
#264 - 2017-02-24 02:08:12 UTC
Mason Odell wrote:
So many other ways to approach this change then straight out nerfing stuff into the ground.


  • Make Battleships Viable Again
  • Encourage more huge fights and objective taking
  • Change other aspects of mining rather then making it pointless again
  • Introduce new structures that require lots of minerals that provide good bonuses to those who can make them, rather then another station to dock and ship spin in




Just stop making people want to quit your game


Translation, please either work on something else or find another change to make to fix my super amazing minerals faucet other than nerfing it...
#265 - 2017-02-24 02:10:13 UTC
Removed post discussing forum moderation.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

#266 - 2017-02-24 02:10:36 UTC
zzzbowlcutmcgee zzz wrote:
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
The very fact you had do to this so soon... shows this nerf is wrong. very wrong.


It's almost, almost as if a giant blanket nerf to literally every single aspect of a ship is not appreciated by literally anyone except those who don't use it.

Almost. but don't worry ccp will delete the "rants" so they can push the change through and not give a damn as per usual.


Nerfs are very rarely popular with people who use a ship, that doesn't make them bad or unnecessary though.

The fact that the ISDs had to go through and remove at least a full page of posts says that people can't react to things and make their views clear in a calm, rational, and respectful manner. Let alone present a rational and well supported argument in support of their views.
Goonswarm Federation
#267 - 2017-02-24 02:10:51 UTC  |  Edited by: zzzbowlcutmcgee zzz
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mason Odell wrote:
So many other ways to approach this change then straight out nerfing stuff into the ground.


  • Make Battleships Viable Again
  • Encourage more huge fights and objective taking
  • Change other aspects of mining rather then making it pointless again
  • Introduce new structures that require lots of minerals that provide good bonuses to those who can make them, rather then another station to dock and ship spin in




Just stop making people want to quit your game


Translation, please either work on something else or find another change to make to fix my super amazing minerals faucet other than nerfing it...


Translation: treat indy ships like EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE GAME when nerfs happen. Imagine if t3 ships all got a 30% ehp reduction, 30% dps reduction, no more instawarp, no more covert ops config, AND more mass for "wormhole balance"

The same people who have their heads up their asses would be crying enough salt to supply every mcdonalds in the world.

And that's NORMAL. "blanket nerfs" where you hit literally every aspect of a ship in terms of its mainuse + survivability, people have issues with it. Because it's ********.
inPanic
#268 - 2017-02-24 02:14:08 UTC
Ltcartial wrote:
1

Final thought, Making the main materials for the excavator drones drop mostly in drone region space is complete insanity, drone region space already has higher bounty due to npcs not droping loot, now you give them extra isk for the elite drone AI and drone augments that drop more in drone region space then other space. .

well, we also get no loot most of the time... and **** salvage...
#269 - 2017-02-24 02:15:44 UTC
zzzbowlcutmcgee zzz wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mason Odell wrote:
So many other ways to approach this change then straight out nerfing stuff into the ground.


  • Make Battleships Viable Again
  • Encourage more huge fights and objective taking
  • Change other aspects of mining rather then making it pointless again
  • Introduce new structures that require lots of minerals that provide good bonuses to those who can make them, rather then another station to dock and ship spin in




Just stop making people want to quit your game


Translation, please either work on something else or find another change to make to fix my super amazing minerals faucet other than nerfing it...


Translation: treat indy ships like EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE GAME when nerfs happen. Imagine if t3 ships all got a 30% ehp reduction, 30% dps reduction, no more instawarp, no more covert ops config, AND more mass for "wormhole balance"

The same people who have their heads up their asses would be crying enough salt to supply every mcdonalds in the world.

And that's NORMAL. "blanket nerfs" where you hit literally every aspect of a ship in terms of its mainuse + survivability, people have issues with it. Because it's ********.


Dude look up cade's post history. He only posts on forums to flame people for wanting risk vs reward in ANYTHING but pvp ships. Seriously don't bother talking with him on anything regarding balance, he will just sarcastically tell you how you're just greedy/carebear to justify ccp making his life easier.

Which is hilarious.

In regards to these changes: Lol CCP. Lol


inPanic
#270 - 2017-02-24 02:20:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Grognard Commissar
someone did the math, you'll loose fully 25% of ur optimal yield...
http://pastebin.com/8WbfwhGU

i don't think i've ever seen CCP take such massive nerfbats to anything... maybe CCP should try nerfing carriers 25% dps, see how that goes over
Amarr Empire
#271 - 2017-02-24 02:22:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarrchecko
Are there any immediate plans concerning excavator drone prices?

I know the "rorqs shouldn't be used without 1/3 of new Eden's super fleet next door to defend you, you pathetic pubbie" argument that a lot of people like to throw around... but 11 billion isk for the hull, a cheap fit, and just 1 flight of drones... with a ton of super specialized skills required... to make what? 150m/hr in ore that still needs to be refined and used to build something? How is that an acceptable risk reward balance?

Carriers rat for direct isk, so no monkeying around with refining or hauling or building in order to realize personal gain, for more isk/hr than that (40-50m ticks plus escalations and whatnot) all over null and only risk 1-2 bil after insurance... and the risk is pretty small because of not being immobile and the carrier skills translate directly into PVP use to boot!

Or do you think the risk reward balance is OK already, or that prices will drop from less demand due to this yield need potentially reducing the number of active rorq pilots?
#272 - 2017-02-24 02:23:27 UTC
Grognard Commissar wrote:
someone did the math, you'll loose fully 25% of ur optimal yield...
http://pastebin.com/8WbfwhGU

i don't think i've ever seen CCP take such massive nerfbats to anything... maybe CCP should try nerfing carriers 25% dps, see how that goes over


The only equivalent shitstorm would need to affect the "el1t3 peeveep33 which would be a 50% reduction to t3 cruiser dps (initial rorq + this nerf) oh. AND drop all t3 optimal/missile travel time by a solid 40% or so.

Can you imagine? like that one guy said, this is brilliant, the same people making every excuse in the book about how "lol rorqs deserve this free win ships shud die" would IMMEDIATELY begin a thread-rage storm that'd probably clog the forum servers.

It's like....there's a double standard....or something. Shocked
Rate My Ticks
#273 - 2017-02-24 02:30:33 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mason Odell wrote:
So many other ways to approach this change then straight out nerfing stuff into the ground.


  • Make Battleships Viable Again
  • Encourage more huge fights and objective taking
  • Change other aspects of mining rather then making it pointless again
  • Introduce new structures that require lots of minerals that provide good bonuses to those who can make them, rather then another station to dock and ship spin in




Just stop making people want to quit your game


Translation, please either work on something else or find another change to make to fix my super amazing minerals faucet other than nerfing it...



translation, i have no idea what the **** im talking about but i have 888 likes kek
#274 - 2017-02-24 02:47:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Somatic Neuron
Are you going to make T1 and T2 versions of the Capital Mining Drone??? With the cost of Excavator's, with the reduced capacity, it's going to lower the risk vs reward factor of having a multi-billion ISK ship out there. Not saying that we won't still have them out there, just that the rvr is skewed more now.

And before everyone complains, I am talking meta 0 and meta 5, with lower outputs than the faction ones
Goonswarm Federation
#275 - 2017-02-24 02:48:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hello again folks. Got another set of changes today for your feedback.

PANIC Module:
We have been keeping a close eye on potential issues related to the PANIC module for a while, and although we are overall quite happy with the module we are interested in reducing the power of a few uses, primarily use for fleet tackle and cyno lighting, as well as an escape method for entosis operations.
To reduce the power of the PANIC module in these situations while also preserving all of its power for defending mining Rorquals and their fleets we are currently planning the following change:
[list]
  • Initial activation of the PANIC module would require the Rorqual to have an active target lock on an asteroid.

  • Why not just change values on tackle mods so you can't fit them on the Rorq in the first place. This change is a half ass attempt.
    Goonswarm Federation
    #276 - 2017-02-24 02:51:27 UTC
    Here we go again..... Making massive changes without even CONSIDERING some of the repercussions.... And then mocking people when the point it out.. I guess if taking peoples ISK with tricks and then pulling out the rug from underneath them and trying to thin out the game is CCP's goal, they're doing a good job of it...........
    Minmatar Republic
    #277 - 2017-02-24 02:57:55 UTC
    So you expect people to risk a 10-13b isk ship, that sieges its self, for little to no reward? Do you even play this ******* game? If you want to fix mineral prices, how about make battleships useful again, the only time they are used now are in mass pvp battles that don't actually happen as often as they should. As well as balance ore anoms so people don't have to over-mine for ship production, noc and zyd are practically just by-products now.

    The fix to PANIC is absolute garbage, I get it, even making the rorq unable to ewar during panic, doesn't keep people from dropping multiple rorq's and panic'ing once they hit structure.. However you CAN make it to where a rorq cannot use a panic for several minutes after using EWAR... Or simply make ewar modules unfittable to a rorq... FFS if you dont want it to be a combat ship, then Dont allow it to be one in the first place.... This whole " you must have an asteroid targeted" crap is just opening rorqs up to even further risk/trolling by allowing hotdroppers to simply wait until the anom is about to be popped to hotdrop and kill everything... What the hell is it with CCP and hating its industry player base?

    I guess it makes sense tho, first you ruined sov mechanics, forcing people to literally conduct sov warfare with small ****, now its time to ruin industry as well... Congrats fozzie, you are slowly completing your end-game goal of making people uninstall the game.




    Get Off My Lawn
    #278 - 2017-02-24 03:00:07 UTC
    Personally I dont think there is enough salt here being spread to get into the minds of CCP.

    I also agree that burning Jita for a month or longer till all of high sec feels the burn that is being placed on null space. This alone will make the price of minerals go north if that is what CCP wants. Maybe all of null should join in and pick a place or a region in high sec to burn.

    This way the only real value will be left in the hands of the null sec players...............join or die. evil laugh :)

    Corps and alliances have sunk massive amounts of isk into structures to make their home better to keep up with the JONES or die trying.

    Members that are all part of eve have paid tons of isk into buying skill injectors and the most of it has gone to fly the massive capital ship called the rorqual, in addition to the ship itself and the expensive mods and rigs, now lets add the massively over priced drones that I am sure tons of plex was bought to pay for it.

    Members who bought plex, renewed their accounts and or in one form or another put our real money to enjoy this game called EVE are feeling quite burnt by CCP.

    It is the old members who are your base players who fund your great game, it is the returning players who want back in to enjoy what they have been missing, and you now have a new members coming in who want to see this awesome game has to offer.

    Grayscale left us high and dry after he had his fun with us and we were hoping we would see a more moderate person STEP UP; and this is not the case as we have seen.

    I have been playing with 2 characters for 10 years and have watched trit prices go from .8 isk to 6 plus to what it is now. Another example is megacyte at 5k plus to less than 1k to its current price. there is nothing wrong with the mineral pricing as it is all player driven.

    The proposed changes on the Rorqual for now the second time are beyond belief.

    When was the last time any of you have seen CCP engage with its player base in game???? for me it is never.

    When Band of Brothers was around in days of ol' many of CCP members were players also and could see first hand the changes they made both good and bad effected the mood of its players and in many cases the loss of its player base.

    IF the rorqual is to be a capital mining ship then stop f'in it up. Many are lost daily in EVE and are replaced based on its value.
    What value do you CCP propose it is worth now after impliment the new and up and coming changes???? about the same prior to making the RORQUAL a viable in game ship.....and it was about damn time too only to have it tossed to the scrap heap.

    Now then, as an old player and from my own point of view. I have not mined nor ratted in this game in about 6 to 7 years as it was a complete waste of my time to do anything but do PVP.

    I have found a new found love of indy by making capitals and its mods, I have mined a bit in the big toy and love it and have even found my way to a super that i would have not be sitting in if it was not for Capital mining ship.

    I was probably with in months of leaving this game with both accounts due to utter boredom.

    Time will tell in your wallet if this is a good decision.
    inPanic
    #279 - 2017-02-24 03:01:36 UTC
    also, please note, at least the PANIC changes are live on SIS, as I discovered today
    #280 - 2017-02-24 03:06:43 UTC
    Removed post discussing Forum moderation.

    Its really easy to keep your post here. CCP tells you what you cant do.

    ISD Max Trix

    Lieutenant

    Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

    Interstellar Services Department

    Forum Jump