Salvage Needs Love

Industry Gameplay Center Mining & Extraction
1

We need new salvage ships and mechanics. Why? Because hardly anyone takes the time to salvage, and its basically a dead aspect of the game.

First off, a frigate or destroyer salvage ship for intro and small salvage runs. Ideally a new ship hull, or reuse the venture. Similar bonuses to the noctis, but watered down accordingly.

Second the noctis needs a new look, and better mass/agility to put it in line with the porpoise. Its painfully slow and should be more of a slower but much more effective ship compared to the salvage frigate.

Third, call me crazy, but an orca hull or new hull for large scale salvage. Toss in an industrial core, or salvage core to turn it into a stationary salvaging vacuum. Bonuses to tractor beam reach/speed, and bonus to salvage speed. Maybe even a fun automated tractor beam role bonus that allows the beams to auto target wrecks and pull them into salvaging range.

All hulls should ideally have a salvage drone bonus towards drone speed and salvage speed.
Maybe even rename them to fit a grave yard theme. The salvage drones already look like flying coffins, so why shouldn’t the new ship models look mildly spooky? For funsies through in comedic holds like a corpse hold. How interesting would it be for salvaging ships, or maybe just the capital to have a scarp metal reprocessing module that allows for reprocessing ship equipment with better efficiency based on scrap metal processing?

It would reinvigorate a basically nonexistent part of eve into something that could be more appealing aesthetically, for roleplay, or even for income if the ships can turn a profit from what’s salvaged via reprocessing modules that are worth more broken down with high efficiency, than selling them as is.

1 Like
2

What’s the purpose of such a ‘large scale salvage ship’ when the dedicated ‘medium scale salvage ship’ the Noctis barely has a role ever since MTUs were introduced?

I agree that salvage needs love.

I would love to salvage more, but:

  • when I can choose between a cheap agile frigate or destroyer versus a dedicated salvaging ship like the Noctis, the Noctis isn’t worth it because of the existence of MTUs.
  • when I can choose between salvaging or doing another activity that gives me ISK or salvage (like relic sites), any other activity gives me better value for my time because salvaging a combat site for T1 salvage hardly is worth the effort

To me it is clear what needs to be done to make the role of salvaging purposeful and to make the dedicated salvage ship useful:

  1. Nerf MTUs tractor speed severely, so that people can still salvage and loot automatically if they are willing to wait an hour, but can do it faster in a Noctis
  2. Rigs industry balance pass to require more salvage, to increase salvage demand and to make salvaging worthwile
  3. Nerf relic site salvage amount equally, to compensate for point 2 so the ISK value payout stays the same as it is now for relic sites. We want to buff active salvaging after all, not relic sites which already are valuable but also provide salvage.
  4. Noctis buffs so the tractor beam range equals or exceeds MTU tractor range, unlike now where MTUs simply outshine the Noctis for gathering and looting a combat field which makes the Noctis rather useless at it’s intended purpose
  5. New fast and agile salvage and looting ships which can quickly clean a still hostile grid after a large fight happened. When dozens of vultures are trying to loot and salvage the remains of a dread battle or T2 ships you do not want to have a “bigger larger salvage ship” to clean it which will in no time be reduced to salvage itself, you wish to fly something fast like the T1 exploration frigates with their large hold and salvage speed bonuses. Give me that, but a more specialised T2 salvage frigate.
  6. Increased wreck duration, to allow players a bigger window to salvage their sites. Wrecks last for 2 hours, if this could be doubled to 4 hours people have a much bigger window to create, find and salvage combat sites and the remains of player battles. It also allows players to still gather their site automatically even if the MTU is heavily nerfed in tractor speed.

I agree, salvage needs love.

Make salvaging worth it again!

6 Likes
3

When i was doing missions before joining usia, id still use a noctis with mtus. Drop an mtu go to next room drop one, come back with noctid with 8 salvagers and pick up loot/mtu. Especially helpful with enemies abound or extravaganza missions

1 Like
4

It does not salvage automatically.
I think you got a good thing here : add the automatic salvage to MTU. Makes sense.

hmm… actually, yes.

Noctis can fit several tractor beams while MTU only has one. But yes, range should be higher on noctis. Tracting speed is already higher. Maybe increase noctis targeting range and speed too.

1 Like
5

It gathers and loots. The third thing, salvage, is still something the Noctis can do, but any other ship with 8 high slots like a destroyer can do just as well.

The only thing that sets the Noctis apart is that it can salvage and group a grid of wrecks into one pile to be salvaged. Half that job is taken by MTUs, the other half can be done cheaper by other ships.

Yes, I think that would be good buffs for the Noctis.

However, I still think the MTUs should receive some speed nerfs if CCP ever wants the Noctis to become an attractive active alternative.

6

You always want to nerf what you don’t like.
Does not mean it’s a good idea.
Making a gameplay even more tedious is not a intelligent design. What does it change ? People will adapt. And you will cry for another nerf. Until there is no gameplay at all because you made it ■■■■.
So no, making a gameplay tedious is never an acceptable idea.

I agree that noctis should be the main use case for salvaging, instead of MTU+destroyer.
I disagree that MTU should be reserved to botters.

7

If you want to nerf :

  • reduce to 4 high slots on destroyers (give them +100% racial damage to compensate … or not because that would reduce the price of polarized catalysts too much. Only +50% and a +50% bonus to range)
  • and/or give them a malus to salvage cycle (so like +100% salvager duration on destroyers)
  • increase the range at which a MTU or tractor pulls the wrecks, like 10 km so you still need to move to the wrecks (would also nerf tractor for mission so bad idea but you don’t care since you only want to nerf nerf nerf)
8

I don’t want to nerf or touch destroyers, I think they are fine. And their role as salvager is fine too.

The problem is that the Noctis currently doesn’t do salvaging much better than destroyers, because “use tractor beams to gather the grid into one pile to loot and salvage” is not useful in a game where MTUs exist.

This is why I want to nerf MTUs. Not because I do not like MTUs, in fact I am glad the option to use MTUs exists for the people who do not wish to manually gather a grid.

I just want the Noctis to be a good alternative to MTUs.

To accomplish this there needs to be a balance between the automation of MTUs that gathers a field and the manual work done with the Noctis. To compete with automation this means there needs to be a large enough advantage for people to use the Noctis instead.

This cannot only be achieved with buffs to the Noctis because no matter how fast you tractor a grid together right now, it’s still simply easier to put down a MTU and wait some minutes instead of spending those minutes in a Noctis.

Therefore the main way to balance this competition between the Noctis and MTU is to give MTUs a handicap. This handicap can target various factors of the MTU. Their main stats are tractor speed and tractor range, as well as some minor stats like signature radius, price, size, cargohold.

I do not wish to reduce MTU range as this creates more manual work for people who like MTUs, because people would not like it that they have to put multiple MTUs on grid to gather everything as creates a lot of micromanagement for something that is supposed to be an automated tool.

The other main stat of MTUs is therefore a better option nerfed: their tractor speed.

If a MTU takes significantly longer than today to automatically gather a grid into one pile, people could make the decision to bring out the Noctis to do it much faster.

To make the Noctis relevant, MTUs need a tractor speed nerf.

9

Yes, it can. Just because you don’t like the balance for personal reason does not mean there is none.
What cannot be done without nerf to the MTU is removing them from being a viable choice. So THIS is what you are trying to do.

No it’s not.
Just because you can’t think of one, does not mean none exists
What’s more, nerfing by making tedious is making the game worse.

No. They will just do more sites before scooping and salvaging. Nothing changes. It will be more tedious because it will require more MTU. So it will ONLY result in a worse gameplay.
You are not making the noctis better. You are only making MTU more tedious.

Also it will make MTU present longer on the field, which means people will lose more statistically. the only cases where it changes anything is

  • when the cargo space is limited
  • where there is active MTU hunting. So you are actually trying to make MTU hunting more valuable. It’s already too much.
10

here is another proposal : make a pulsed high slot module that tractors ALL the wrecks/cans owned and not being tracted in range, at a tenth of the tractor speed. can only be fitted on orca, noctis, rorqual.
30s cycle duration, to avoid server load.
Lower range than tractor beam on a noctis (half a MTU ?) so you still have work to do for those too far away (or can place yourself better).

Then give a +100% bonus to salvage drones velocity and -50% bonus to salvage drones cycle to the noctis, making it a form of “automated salvage”

Another proposal : make the elite wrecks non tractable by MTU. So you still need to tractor them, or warp to them while the MTU tractor the other ones. This can be done with eg a mass attribute on the wrecks and a maximum mass attribute on the MTU. Of course you can also place the MTU on the elite wreck directly, there is very rarely more than one.

11

You are right that this would make MTU hunting more viable by letting MTUs stay in space a little longer. It’s not much of a difference, because MTUs can stay in space for 2 days during which time they are hunted. Extending the time MTUs need to be in space with another half an hour doesn’t change much on that timescale, I think?

Anyway, I am not saying more MTU hunting is good or bad.

You however seem to think it is bad. Why?

I get the feeling that your love for the MTU maybe clouds your objectiveness on this topic?

1 Like
12

It is a difference, because it would FORCE them to be in space more.

It’s not the topic. In a word : no consequence, too easy. So imbalanced gameplay.

Yeah personal attacks.

13

Not a bad idea, but how does this work when multiple people are trying to salvage the same grid?

With a single targeted tractor beam you can see who is pulling what, but with your suggestion everyone on grid is pulling all the wrecks at the same time. I don’t think this results in good gameplay when multiple people are trying to clean up after a big fleet battle.

14

This side-effect may not be the main topic of this thread, but personally I think it may be a beneficial side effect.

More MTU hunting means more interaction between players, which means more content. People could make more money doing MTU hunting and an increased amount of MTU hunters makes baiting those same players also more viable.

Interaction and content in an MMO is a positive thing in my book.

15

I answered precisely that in that post -.-

ALL the wrecks/cans owned and not being tracted in range

So, it does not affect those someone is already tracting, or those you don’t own.

That’s dogmatism.
You are trying to push your agenda under the pretense of the topic. That’s toxic.
You don’t want to nerf the MTU to make the game better. You want to nerf them to make your activity more interesting. That’s hypocritical.

Nope.

Non sequitur. MTU hunting is a gameplay spoonfed by CCP to lazy griefers.
There is no interaction, no danger, no requirement for any form of intelligence, to remain cloaked for 20 min in a system until you see 5 MTU on dscan that you can then probe in your T3C.

MTU hunting is ■■■■ gameplay.
And before you say they need to be destroyed for the market : they can be destroyed in the ship transporting them already.

16

Well that’s a bit unbalanced, don’t you think?

Five people come to salvage a big grid of T2 wrecks, first one to arrive can pull all the wrecks while the rest sits twiddling their thumbs with modules that refuse to work?

You are quick to call something toxic when it is in line with someone else’s preferences, but also quick to inject your own preferences. Hypocritical much? No don’t answer, I don’t wish this to devolve into yet another mud slinging contest. Let’s focus on the topic instead.

Personal preferences. I’ll pretend you didn’t try to push your agenda.

Can we stay on topic please?

1 Like
17

Do you understand what OWNED means ?
There is only ONE person who owns the can/wreck.

You try to avoid the argument with personal attacks again.
My point still holds.
Your argument is toxic and hypocritical. You liking the MTU hunting gameplay is not making the salvaging better.
Instead, you are trying to make a gameplay worse with the goal to make your own activity better. That’s hypocrisy.

I am not pushing any agenda. None of my proposal changes the gameplay of MTU hunting(AFAIK), while yours do, under the hypocrite pretense of improving gameplay - which they don’t.

As I wrote, it’s not the topic but this is what you are actually trying to push.
On the contrary of your claim, it’s possible to change the balance in favor of the noctis without your claimed requirement to make MTU hunting better for you.
If anything, it proves that your claim to REQUIRE the MTU speed reduced is wrong. And that you keep pushing it for plain vested interest.

So as much as I agree noctis should be better than MTU+destroyer, your dogmatic will to nerf the MTU speed is plain hypocritical. At best it would change nothing, at worse it only serves your own interest.

edit : I’m not saying you are wrong to propose it. I’m saying you are wrong to insist on it while your sole argument is that it would be beneficial for you, and disguise that argument with hypocritical nonsense and personal attacks.

18

What is this thing of “owned wrecks”?

Sorry, but only a portion of the playerbase lives in HS space. For the rest of us a wreck is a wreck.

1 Like
19

How would it be beneficial to me? I am not a MTU user nor a MTU hunter.

I just wish the job of salvaging and salvage-specialised ships to get a proper place again in the game.

20

That’s why you said you need salvaging on a barge in LS, remember ? Turns out you actually know of that mechanism already.

Mechanisms don’t change regarding owning a wreck depending on the security status -.-
What change are the mechanism to interact with it.