Six months down the line they’ll nerf the new Avalanche, as people start using it in fleets as DPS lootships and even gankers have one on standby at the star gates.
That’s a very optimistic outlook on CCP response time to ship imbalances they create. Rorquals, Muninns etc. took years to address. Basically CCP tends to wait until everyone who possibly could want one has bought several, paid for the skills, flown them to the point of boredom, and finally switched to using something else out of sheer desperation for a change in the meta.
Avalanche says " so long gankers, time you learned some real PvP!".
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1ctwfes/why_haul_with_anything_else_in_highsec_other_than/
3 Likes
People wont be able to sell off their old haulers fast enough, as the market in them crashes. As for real PvP, from what I can see the Avalanche will itself be a competent real PvP ship…and may end up being used more for PvP than for hauling.
If CCP’s going to crush the old freighter market, they should at least offer trade-ins.
And a new set of rims! Or some pimp lights, maybe.
2 Likes
Sold my freighter and made a profit.
3 Likes
QQ QQ QQ
Complete sentence…
You sold it to Aiko for 1 single ISK? 
1 Like
Nah. Sold it for profit and paid for game time.
I actually have extra isk left over and am trying to gift it to the pilot who had made my desktop background.
It’s been 12 hs and they didn’t respond.
Perhaps I’m just a scary pilot who they don’t understand my roleplay
2 Likes
That’s not too much time, maybe they are just busy or something, not everyone logs in on a daily basis either, give it a couple days even.
2 Likes
Here comes the new Avalanche pvp fleet meta. If it launches without any changes to the current stats it’ll be a much bigger problem than Rorquals and Carriers were, back in the day. They can also fit 3 Keepstars in their hold!?!
The problems the Avalanche will cause for the hi-sec gankers is just the tip of the iceberg.
I don’t think so, you may think it is over-powered, I don’t, but to make out that it would be a bigger problem then the massive efficiency hike of the Rorqual makes your argument looks silly.
If I get this right you envisage a massed fleet of Avalanches lumbering around doing PvP with inflated EHP due to dead-space modules and high level implant spewing out BS level damage. Do you know what, I look forward to seeing that, it would be amusing and funny.
But for PvP it is a silly comment because they are so slow and lumbering they are only going to be used to structure bash in hisec apart from meme fleets in nullsec, but high sec structures are so easy to kill they will make no difference at all in terms of that. At least I can find it amusing…
As for hisec gankers, I will buy one and have it fitted and implanted, but what the hell does that matter, gankers have had it too easy in terms of freighters for a long time. And because it will take time to develop enough hulls at a reasonable price I don’t expect to have one for at least a year after introduction.
So much for being a bigger issue than Rorquals…
The only thing I wondering about is the passive moon mining structure, I am expecting the normal top tier Eve players supported by their massed F1 fleets to plonk these down all over the map on the best moons, but it depends on the price, and its vulnerability cycles and how easy it is to steal from. If CCP gets that right then it should not be an issue. Problem is expecting CCP to get that right…
I am wondering if the other changes to sov and production will result in the big blocks moving against the few unaligned alliances that hold sov for their renter empires…, it might have already started?
1 Like
Oh, those moon structures look fun. First, they’re supposed to be medium structures, so don’t expect them to pop up like weeds any more than Tatara have. They’re also not replacing anything, so any structures where these are going to go will have to be taken down first, with subsequent loss of rigs, which will be pricey for the more established 64s. If I’m understanding what CCP has said about it, it’s basically an automated Tatara with slighly lower output than an Athanor on the same pull. The best part comes direct from the “Reinvigorating Nullsec” article:
Metenox moon drills are vulnerable to attack, only having a single, short reinforcement timer. Any materials will be trapped inside reinforced moon drills, allowing aggressors to provoke engagement or loot resources for themselves should they be able to destroy the structure.
Looks to me like it’s going to generate a bit of content. Slap that on your 64s and you may see them all reinforced and looted if you’re not careful. Weekend Metenox bashing roams look to be a high probability if I remember what I heard on the stream properly. Short reinforcement timer was mentioned at being less than 48 hours, so a very real probability of reffing it on friday night and coming back saturday night to try finish it off, but definitely sunday night.
I’m also looking at the new Transports and anticipating bringing along haulers to loot the structures that aren’t just going to be someone’s alt.
1 Like
Good to hear, thanks for your thoughts on this. I hope CCP do not change this.
We still need to wait and see how Equinox impacts various groups gameplay. And while I hope for the best, with CCP I’m always prepared for the worst. That way anything that turns out well is a lovely surprise, and anything horrible is just ‘business as usual’.
That said, a fair bit of CCP’s efforts in the past year or so do make it look like they’re really paying more attention to the overall player experience and creating better systems within the game.
Still plenty of room for them to improve of course, but things like the latest Equinox news update look pretty decent:
2 Likes
I’m not sure how accurate this is. If you’re talking about the sov hubs, it’s pretty clear that CCP is giving these for free to the residents, along with whatever upgrades were in the old IHUB. They state so here, around minute mark thirty-six: Twitch The sov-holding alliance then gets to choose when they activate it within that six month grace period. There’s no discussion of how it could be stolen until that happens. So essentially, if you own sov on June 11th, you might be “invulnerable” against toasting attempts until you decide to turn on the sov hub.
If you’re talking about the skyhooks (new POCOs), they state that you’ll be able to directly upgrade these from the existing POCOs. No news about how much this will cost, yet. Assuming that they will cost as much as a Medium Citadel or Refinery because someone said they were rated as Medium structures is speculative at the moment. Medium structures is as much a mechanical definition as an economic one; by way of analogy, cruisers and battlecruisers are both medium hulls, but they have quite disparate build costs.
Personally, I don’t expect it to be that expensive. Doing so would make it virtually impossible for small to medium size groups to hold any sov at all, because you’d be needing to immediately sink 5-10B into a system just to get it operational, on top of war costs.
Blocs have the advantage of resource pooling, timezone coverage and large amounts of isk to put these things into action quickly.
Suppose a small alliance (Alamo) of 50-70 guys, 85% of whom are in one timezone, decide to take space. They look around and find a cluster of three systems that, between them, are able to support one solid hub for the type of activity they like. They move in, spend indeterminately large amounts of isk placing the bare minimum of necessary structures to function, and start to focus on raising the ADM so they can install upgrades.
A neighboring alliance (Bob), who was looking at expanding into this cluster themselves, decide they want to take it. Their membership is roughly the same size, but covers US tz, EU tz and CN tz equally. Previously they would have had to toast the sovhub and take a fight on the enemy’s tz, operating at a disadvantage due to larger fleet sizes. Now they can hit the new skyhook supply lines in a form of guerilla warfare, draining the reagents that Alamo needs to keep their upgrades online.
Alamo now has to ship in reagents from HS. The Bob agents may not be able to take on Alamo one on one in a pitched battle, but they can scout their trade route and try to gate camp the haulers. They can also follow the current “war of attrition” tactics, constantly reinforcing Alamo’s structures so that they have to field response fleets daily to cover the repairs. On top of this, it was mentioned at some point that there might be other ways to disrupt workforce supply chains, which are even harder to work around.
Alamo is spending time and isk hauling; they’re spending time and isk (on doctrines) defending their structures. They have less and less time to make isk. Their members are getting more and more worn out by the constant CTAs, their wallets are getting thinner and thinner. How long can they last? Their only option becomes taking the fight to the enemy, placing even more CTA requirements on their members to play in hours that are out of their timezone. Suppose they have the isk and time to conquer Bob’s space and evict them, despite Bob putting their timers. Alamo now has to spend even more isk building up infrastructure in these systems, overextending themselves and painting a target on their backs for even more nearby groups to hit them.
By contrast, blocs have groups that cover every timezone. They have the resources to enter pitched battles, and to withstand wars of attrition indefinitely. A larger pool of players also means they can respond to CTAs with moderate forces and still have a collection of members bringing in isk and materials to fund the war machine. And given that we can expect nullsec to produce a net surplus of reagents (since they’re expected to provide them to LS/WH guys who want to run their own moon drills), more systems under their control means it will be harder to disrupt their supply lines.
Yes, this will require more upkeep from everyone involved. Blocs will have to bring “fuel” to the moon drills and the sov hubs, likely on a monthly basis… just like they do for all their stations. This isn’t adding more complex or demanding gameplay in that regard, it’s just adding more of what people already deal with. Blocs will be able to scale up that hauling operation without major issue, especially with access to the new Upwell Haulers.
Requiring small groups to field more necessary infrastructure targets without giving them a way to protect them against larger groups, or attrition-style tactics, just makes it harder for small groups to prosper. Blocs can still come in and roffle-stomp them on their own timers. Trolls can still come in when everyone’s asleep and ref everything daily until the alliance gives up and moves out. All this does is increase the startup costs for investing in your own system, and requires you to be part of an alliance that claims a group of systems, rather than a single one.
2 Likes
Btw, note that most of your example was about how a group that doesn’t have good timezone coverage will be in trouble taking sov, rather than a group who is small being in trouble.
If Bob was smaller, and outnumbered but not overwhelmed in NATZ and EUTZ, but had some people in CNTZ as opposed to none for Alamo, the result doesn’t change.
Also, note that the traditional problem of Null, which is ‘However, Bob knew some people from the old BoB and a couple of other supercap heavy groups, and they knew Alamo had no working batphones, so they just rolled in, reinforced everything and negotiated terms’.
Not possible. Skyhooks cant be placed in hisec
Yeah, but they’ll be shipped to Jita from places they can be placed.
1 Like
and that makes them different from literally every other commodity in the game, how?