Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
648
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 11:09:00 -
[91] - Quote
Paynus Maiassus wrote: While details may vary, this type of thinking is the only thing that would ever get anyone to put a Rorq in a belt. Yeah, it would be total game changer for mining. But nothing short of this will cause any kind of change.
Still not a good idea. I mean it's "here's a target the only problem with it is you've got to wait a bit longer before you can engage it". In reality here's what will happen:
(1) Nobody will use a Rorqual. (2) ...
|
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
16
|
Posted - 2014.06.04 00:53:00 -
[92] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Paynus Maiassus wrote: While details may vary, this type of thinking is the only thing that would ever get anyone to put a Rorq in a belt. Yeah, it would be total game changer for mining. But nothing short of this will cause any kind of change.
Still not a good idea. I mean it's "here's a target the only problem with it is you've got to wait a bit longer before you can engage it". In reality here's what will happen: (1) Nobody will use a Rorqual. (2) ...
My opening clause was "details may vary". Basically, all the various POS bubble ideas are telling us the Rorqual will need some kind of 'god mode' in order to ever go into a belt. You can't give it more tank or more drones or whatever. It will need a god mode. There have been a number of various ideas about what some sort of POS bubble would be like:
- Whether other ships would be able to enter the bubble/benefit from the god mode, and whether said ships would only be industrial ships or whatever.
- What sort of activities the Rorqual could engage in from within the bubble/while the god mode is active. Can it tractor from within it? Can it remote shield rep from within it? Can it target ships and send drones from within it?
- Will the bubble/god mode be attached to the Industrial Core or not?
- What would the activation/deactivation mechanics of the bubble/god mode be? Can it align from within it? Can it keep it's god mode going a couple seconds after 'deactivation' in order to warp or cyno out?
- How intense should the god mode/bubble itself be? Total invulnerability? Millions of EHP and reinforcement timer?
The bullets above are all open to debate. I am not specifically defining all the details of any sort of POS bubble or other type of god mode. However, I am just saying that adding standard offense and defense and tweaking speed/alignment, etc. will not change the Rorqual's situation. Any change to the Rorq much tilt the risk/reward factor down to something like 1% risk, massive reward, if it is going to be used in belts. Various incarnations of the bubble/god mode involve a reinforcement timer so that a Rorqual deployment could actually be a conflict generator. Others just remove the Rorqual from the risk/reward play style that Eve is known for. But in the case of the Rorqual, would it be such an egregious sin to force the combat pilots to go shoot something that can shoot back?
The Rorqual will need to introduce a radical new variable in order to completely change the landscape for low sec and null sec mining if there's doing to be any change to the mining dynamics in PvP space at all.
Short of a god mode for the Rorqual I am just going to keep sitting in low sec surrounded by virgin ice fields. That's just a fact. |
Binah 369
Ripshitz and Killit LLC
4
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 16:10:00 -
[93] - Quote
I personally don't see what all the hub-bub is about. I think all ships of industry should be put in as much harm's way as possible. I think JF's should ONLY be able to cyno into enemy POSs, where they have to sit there and tank a deathstar; waiting for the Calvary to show up. Jumping to a friendly POS or station is for whimps. As for the Rorqual.....I think the core cycle should last 25mins, and during that time the ship should broadcast a beacon across the entire region with a jump portal generated right next to it that anyone can jump on. /end sarcasm.
CCP....forcing a Rorqual out into a belt is the WORST idea ever. end of story, morning glory.
Fozzie....are your friends seriously whining so much about killmails that you have to feed them crap changes like this? Tell them to man up and go fight a real fight. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
1035
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 19:35:00 -
[94] - Quote
Ok so Fozzie says the changes will make you "WANT" to take a Roqual into a belt. Not it will force you to, but it will be so worthwhile you will want to.
We can also look at other industrial ships to see how far they might be willing to go.
We know that the change will not make a Roqual invulnerable, or impossible to kill, that would be equally unbalanced.
So what changes could be made to the Roqual, that will not only make it worthwhile to bring into a belt, but leave it vulnerable to attack at the same time?
if we find that answer, we have our update. Why not make the Roqual a viable, if not sub-par, combat ship.
Really, if you stop to think about. What is the problem with an industrial ship being able to be fit for PVP. Perhaps that is the real answer.
Say for example a Skiff could be fit with a very respectable PVP fit. Not better than a ship designed for it, but enough to make gankers stop and think, is this miner worth my time?, possibly a PVP fit ship, it could just be a trap? Or even give it both, maybe allow strip miners to target other ships,do damage, or tackle, perhaps disabling their warp drive, or preventing capitals from jumping. Something to add combat utility.
the same for a Roqual, give it combat viability, by sacrificing industrial utility it could be a real threat in combat, not just a very expensive pinata
Ok, so that could result in Roqual's and mining ships being used in PVP. So what, does it really matter? Would having additional options really be a bad thing? What difference would it make if a perfectly viable PVP ship was primarily intended to be a mining ship, or other industrial ship. let the lines blurr, let industrial ships be viable for PVP, even if it is at the expense of their primary purpose. After all, i have seen some pretty impressive PVP fits for ventures, even the new DST's can be fit for low level mission running, with comparable DPS to the ships normally used, but a way stronger tank, and a huge cargo hold. anyone remember the battle badger, or try running low level missions in a Bustard, two light missile launchers, and a 100k ehp, or very good active tank. going toe to toe with most frigates, or even some cruisers, this thing could win. and you won't run out of room for loot.
My point is, if the Roqual was changed in a way that made it viable as a PVP ship, really, why would that be a problem. the same has already been done with other industrial ships, why not the roqual, and for that matter why not all mining ships?
As long as it was not superior to the ships it would be competing with, I don't see a problem. Sure its primary design will always be geared to ward industrial use, but that does not mean it can not have a potential alternative use for PVP. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3837
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 22:11:00 -
[95] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: My point is, if the Roqual was changed in a way that made it viable as a PVP ship, really, why would that be a problem. the same has already been done with other industrial ships, why not the roqual, and for that matter why not all mining ships?
As long as it was not superior to the ships it would be competing with, I don't see a problem. Sure its primary design will always be geared to ward industrial use, but that does not mean it can not have a potential alternative use for PVP. The main problem would be granting it abilities that are reasonable in a mining context, but potentially overpowered in a PvP context.
Example: The Rorqual can run a Capital Shield Booster without capacitor via three cap injectors. The Rorqual's huge cargo compared to other capitals makes this tactic viable.
Some real creativity will be required to give the Rorqual abilities that make it both useful and balanced. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
920
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 23:12:00 -
[96] - Quote
The industrial core just needs to die. 90% rorqual problems solved right there. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3665
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 10:08:00 -
[97] - Quote
Just want to mention I'm keeping an eye on this thread, carry on citizens, those are not the dro+»ds you were looking for. |
|
Mashka Cybertrona
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 10:49:00 -
[98] - Quote
rorqual to become a capital sized exhumer?
give it a capital sized ice/stripminer. Its function then would be to boost/haul/mine. I'd like to see the industrial core reworked so the rorqual can deploy for much longer periods of time and essentially become a small deployable station for industrial/mining purposes. Think of it like a large mobile deport designed to assist miners.
It would have to have some kind of reinforcement mechanic to prevent it from just dying to hotdrops all over new eden. Maybe even able to dock 2-3 players inside it, keeping the same restrictions of industrial class ships.
It would be very cool to be able to have real mining expeditions in eve. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
661
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 10:54:00 -
[99] - Quote
Listen, any/all ideas that involve making the Rorqual a "viable PvP ship" still fail due to something called escalation. Blops, wrecking ball, 10 supers, 50 Titans, you have absolutely no idea what's going to come through that cyno. Well OK you do if you have a spy in his coms.
So no. Absolutely no combat or shield related addition to the Rorqual would make me want to keep it around in a belt. Here's what would:
(1) Much faster align and warp time (2) Bigger bonus for its gang links when on grid (3) No requirement to siege it to get (2)
Basically all of those 3 things together would make putting one on field worthwhile. The way the miner works is he mines and watches/listens closely to intel. If there's a red 3, 2 or 1 jump away he'll GTFO. If he's in something that can't GTFO, it's probably going to die, so he'll only ever have put one into a field once before in his Eve career and it's probably on his KB.
But here's the question:
Why can I put a Damnation next to a POS shield and get full bonuses from its hull, whereas in order to get a full bonus for mining I have to fly this massive fat 2.5b capital? It makes absolutely no sense. |
Ealon Musque
Veldspar Industries Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 13:43:00 -
[100] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Absolutely no combat or shield related addition to the Rorqual would make me want to keep it around in a belt. Here's what would:
(1) Much faster align and warp time (2) Bigger bonus for its gang links when on grid (3) No requirement to siege it to get (2)
Basically all of those 3 things together would make putting one on field worthwhile. The way the miner works is he mines and watches/listens closely to intel. If there's a red 3, 2 or 1 jump away he'll GTFO. If he's in something that can't GTFO, it's probably going to die, so he'll only ever have put one into a field once before in his Eve career and it's probably on his KB.
This thankyouverymuch. |
|
Lilith Shea
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 14:35:00 -
[101] - Quote
Just throwing it out there, we actually have a thread going with some good ideas in the Features and Ideas section
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=356048&find=unread
Just a few things we were talking about to make you want to bring a rorq out in the field, the ability to mine, industrial only jumps for black ops mining, mining drone bonuses, specialized mining drones... like a carrier's fighters. Maybe these threads can feed off of each other and we can all come out on top as this thread seems more combat based and mine is more indy based. |
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
36
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 18:01:00 -
[102] - Quote
I tried to post here, but the post was too long. I therefore published it to the web.
The Only Thing That Will Work |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3840
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 19:02:00 -
[103] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote: Listen, any/all ideas that involve making the Rorqual a "viable PvP ship" still fail due to something called escalation. Blops, wrecking ball, 10 supers, 50 Titans, you have absolutely no idea what's going to come through that cyno. Well OK you do if you have a spy in his coms.
So no. Absolutely no combat or shield related addition to the Rorqual would make me want to keep it around in a belt. Here's what would:
(1) Much faster align and warp time (2) Bigger bonus for its gang links when on grid (3) No requirement to siege it to get (2)
Basically all of those 3 things together would make putting one on field worthwhile. The way the miner works is he mines and watches/listens closely to intel. If there's a red 3, 2 or 1 jump away he'll GTFO. If he's in something that can't GTFO, it's probably going to die, so he'll only ever have put one into a field once before in his Eve career and it's probably on his KB.
But here's the question:
Why can I put a Damnation next to a POS shield and get full bonuses from its hull, whereas in order to get a full bonus for mining I have to fly this massive fat 2.5b capital? It makes absolutely no sense.
Actually, one is more likely to put an Orca in a belt, and accept any losses.
Go back to my post #13:
CCP Fozzie wrote:So the goal here will be to make a ship that is the kind of thing you want to put into a belt, with extremely strong defensive bonuses, and the ability to not only protect itself but its friends, and the ability to provide also a strong benefit to your mining fleet. Get these things out where they're in a bit of some danger, but also where that danger is manageable, where it is actually sane to put them into that danger. The last sentence is key.
My proposals (in several threads) have been for improvements that reduce risk, but don't eliminate it.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4598337#post4598337 |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
663
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 22:09:00 -
[104] - Quote
Is it going to have fitted a system wide cyno/covert-cyno jammer? If not, it's BS.
|
Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
29
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 01:57:00 -
[105] - Quote
Looking at on grid use only, the Rorqual's current Risk vs. Reward is a 2.5B isk ship that is stuck in on spot for 5 minutes that is a massive hauler.
If CCP decreases the risk, the best option is to disconnect the boosting bonus from the Industrial Core. This only gets rid of the 5 minutes stuck in one spot, leaving you with a 2.5B isk hauler with 350k m3 of hold. Any increase in defense, whether it is a reinforced mode or POS bubble, it will just force escalation and extend the inevitable.
If CCP increases the reward, there are a couple of options. The first being the addition of mining capability. The restriction here is that they cannot give it a yield that exceeds that of a boosted Hulk or else everyone will stop using exhumers and switch to Rorquals. If Rorqual pilots will not risk their ships for a fleet of exhumers, why would they risk it for one mores yield?
The second option is to add a targettable Remote Mining Booster. These modules would target other ships to increase their yield. They would act similar to the carrier's RR modules, receiving a bonus while the Rorqual is deployed. They would have limited strength due to the number that could be fit to a ship. They would also make it so a Rorqual itself cannot out mine any ship, but by having it on grid you can make significant isk.
Hypothetical numbers (actual numbers would need to be balance for decent Risk vs Reward): Doubles targets yield, 3 modules fit per ship without ganking its current fit too heavily.
1 Skiff mines about 164k m3/hr * 3 Skiffs * 100% increase = 493k m3/hr 1 Hulk mines about 216k m3/hr * 3 Hulks * 100% increase = 647k m3/hr
Using a rough estimate of 255 isk/m3 for ore mined, that is 120m/hr using Skiffs and 165m/hr using Hulks. |
Ireland VonVicious
Vicious Trading Company
324
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 02:11:00 -
[106] - Quote
Let it use more drones at once. Increase bandwidth and drone bay.
Give it a bubble so it can lock down targets.
Make it force cap ships to commit to the fight or atleast a serious BS fleet.
Risk needs to go both ways.
Let it give the good buffs without the core on.
End off grid boosting or atleast put a hard cap on it at 150k
Rorquals would start showing up in every deep null area.
Problem solved. |
Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
29
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 03:18:00 -
[107] - Quote
Ireland VonVicious wrote:...
End off grid boosting or atleast put a hard cap on it at 150k
...
The problem with removing OGB is that it would require your entire mining fleet to be in the same belt or have a booster at each belt. The concept is fine for combat since each boosting ship still has the capability to provide competative DPS, but with mining none of the boosting ships provide much yield.
If CCP added barge/exhumer level yield to boosting ships then I would totally buy into the removal of OGB. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
664
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 06:00:00 -
[108] - Quote
Ireland VonVicious wrote:Let it use more drones at once. Increase bandwidth and drone bay.
Give it a bubble so it can lock down targets.
Make it force cap ships to commit to the fight or atleast a serious BS fleet.
Risk needs to go both ways.
Let it give the good buffs without the core on.
End off grid boosting or atleast put a hard cap on it at 150k
Rorquals would start showing up in every deep null area.
Problem solved.
It's a capital industrial, not a capital interdictor. If CCP want such a thing they should release a capital interdictor. I see no problem with the enemy's blob committing to a fight. In fact they'll be all over it and it'll be dead in 3 minutes. Off grid boosting is needed because mining fleets split over belts.
It's a ship without a role and especially so when Crius-a-river gets released. I'm thinking it should be removed from the game and replaced with an off-grid boosting, smaller variant that doesn't have all of the industrial crap with it, which clearly isn't needed any more.
|
Marox Calendale
Human League
22
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 10:25:00 -
[109] - Quote
Bsically good Idea, but I wouldn-¦t like having a rorq in a belt without an active mining role. Also the point that the only way to get out of PvP will be by jumping out is a great mess, as Jumpdrives do not work in Wormholes.
This Thread is maybe the best one to merge all rorq change ideas, as CCP is already watching it. So please apologize the double posting here also.
That is what I would prefer to be changed at the roqual:
Capital Industrial Ship Skill Bonuses: - 5% Reduction in Fuel Consumption for industrial cores per level 10% bonus to effectivness of mining foreman warfare links per level when in deployed mode 20% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints per level 10% bonus to capital shield booster amount and capacitor need reduction per level Can deploy 1 additional Capital Mining Drone per level
Role bonuses: 900% bonus to the range of Survey Scanners 200% bonus to Drone Control Range 100% Bonus to Mining Drone Yield and Capital Mining Drone Yield
Can carry Capital Mining Drones Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously
3000 m-¦ dronebay, 250MBit Dronebandwith 3.000.000 m-¦ Ship Maintenance Bay (for about 15 Hulks or defense ships, so not industrials only)
Capital Mining Drone: 250m-¦ Volume, 25Mbit Bandwith, 10 of them will mine as much as 1 hulk does (incl. the Bonus to their yield the roq would have), 2750m-¦ Ore Bay so they only have to come back when 1 Jetcan (27500m-¦) is full.
Industrial Core: Duration 60, Consumption 100, increases all resistances by 30% like a bastion module does. Ore compression is still possible.
Instead of having Clone Vat Bays for ships I would add Clone Vat Arrays for posses. But I am not sure how important they are for titans or any other ship which can fit them.
The idea is, that the roqual will be able to switch their drones when its getting attacked while it would have a very strong tank. The miners have to get back to switch to their combat ships and defend it until its Cap is empty or no attackers are left. Dronebay would be big enough to carry 10 Capital Mining Drones and 10 Geckos or other Combat Drones, but too small for any fighter, while the Capital Mining Drones would be too big for any other Mining Ship. Bandwith would be enough for 10 Capital Mining Drones or 5 Geckos or other Combat Drones. Survey Scanner, Capital Tractor Beam and Drones would have a range near to 200km. So while mining the ship could stay outside the belt, pull the cans and compress the ore. If anyone is attacking it, it will have a tank like Marauders have in Bastion Mode.
This all is written from my point of view as a wormhole miner. I know there are different circumstances in low or Nullsec. This suggestion could be even too hard for wornhole and maybe too weak for K-Space. But I am not a developer and it is in CCP-¦s responsibility to have a good balance between all kind of spaces. So the main thing I want to tell is how my vision of the role of a rebuilded roqual is.
|
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
664
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 10:45:00 -
[110] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote: This all is written from my point of view as a wormhole miner.
Indeed as you've pointed out it just won't work in null. You're unlikely to get dropped by a Nyx or twenty in a WH. This is why I think anything other than a very fast GTFO time makes it impractical for use in a belt. This implies the industrial core doesn't "siege" and that it's align and warp times are comparable to that of a Hulk or Mackinaw. Fine if that requires creative module and rig fitting skills but anything other than "warp to safe pos" is just a 2.5b kill mail. |
|
Seldjan
Cryptologix Inc. Bounty Hunter Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 13:42:00 -
[111] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Mordred Banks wrote:Idea: Rorqual with Reinforced mode. When it gets to 30% shield-> goes into reinforced for half an hour.
That would prevent Titan insta-blaps and would force Gangs to either stick around or to come back later. It also gives time for the Rorq pilot to batphone for help.
Cool. That means only people who're able to bat-phone for help will be able to make use of one. Are there many indy toons or renters with a bat phone?
Actually many more than you think. Your argument is like saying: I can't build my capitals in Delve to supply the local market because people will shoot my tower and i don't have batphones!
If you have the ISK to be risking a rorqual in space, you have the potential to cut deals and make arrangements that benefit both parties |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance
523
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 13:59:00 -
[112] - Quote
I quite like the Grid wide (cov)cyno jammer when the industrial core is active.
Add the ability to store lots of new mining frigates and better boosts for its correct use.
The more sandbox uses of a grid cyno jammer would be more interesting though. |
Durbon Groth
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
106
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 14:03:00 -
[113] - Quote
Wasn't there some suggestion that the rorq would at some point be used for building new stargates? Perhaps I'm just rememberinng that wrong. Anyways I agree with the poster above that offensive bonuses should be kept well away from this ship, it's just not what it was intended for. Defensively, could keep in theme with smaller ore ships, have a built in warp core stab. Meaning if pointed by an interceptor or 2 it could still cyno back to safety. Alternatively I reckon it would be fun if whilst deployed in industrial mode it would have a short reinforce mode, maybe half an hour or less which gives it survivability based on the response of the pilot's corp or alliance. If they can't respond to save the rorq in time, well sucks for them. But it would help protect this expensive defenseless ship from marauding gangs of interceptors and hotdrops. Industry wise, I'd love to see a rorq with a capital mining laser but I can imagine a year down the line where every nullsec home system is filled with afk mining rorqs... And that would not be good imo.
P.s yellow bee-striped rorqs ftw |
TheSampler
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 15:22:00 -
[114] - Quote
CCP, please turn off the requirement for Heavy Water for the Rorqual for the 22nd release. As compression is being basically null-n-void from the rorqual - you're giving it to a POS with no additional fuel costs to the POS. Do you not think, rorqual pilots need at least one benefit in flying their ore hauler? Thanks.
TheSampler |
Marox Calendale
Human League
22
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 15:34:00 -
[115] - Quote
Just another Idea:
Why don-¦t think about the Mining Role itself? Not only for the Roqual, but for all Mining ships. Why do we always have to be the harmless sheep's running away, if anybody with an evil face is just looking at us? Why can-¦t we be the (weaker) wolf in sheep-¦s clothing?
What I mean is, much miners are getting attacked or ganked every day without having a chance to strike back. So here is my idea: add 2 or 3 launcher slots ( as mining laser and strippers do need turret slots) to every mining ship in New Eden. Add a little bit more to CPU and PG so that all can be fitted and then let miners strike back!
2 Miners could be able to fight against 1 ganker (T1 Ship) and may be win. I would think about having nearly same dps like follows:
2 Venture = 1 T1 Frigate 2 Prospect = 1 Destroyer 2 Barges = 1 T1 Cruiser 2 Exhumer = 1 T1 (Battlecruiser(Combat)) 2 Orca = 1 T1 Battleship 2 Roqual = 1 Carrier or so
OK you wouldn-¦t probably never see 2 Roquals in 1 Belt, but that-¦s not the thing. Thing is, it wouldn-¦t probably change much to low or large scale PvP Fleets (except some interesting new trap strategies), but single Ganker may have problems to fight against Hole Mining Fleets. This could solve the afk cloaky problem in K-Space as it could also force Miners all over New Eden to work together (So more sheeps on the field to kill). If you want to force miners to pvp, then give them teeth. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
664
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 16:37:00 -
[116] - Quote
Seldjan wrote: Your argument is like saying: I can't build my capitals in Delve to supply the local market because people will shoot my tower and i don't have batphones!
No. I don't think a Rorqual is very much like a POS at all actually. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3849
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 17:17:00 -
[117] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote:Just another Idea:
Why don-¦t think about the Mining Role itself? Not only for the Roqual, but for all Mining ships. Why do we always have to be the harmless sheep's running away, if anybody with an evil face is just looking at us? Why can-¦t we be the (weaker) wolf in sheep-¦s clothing?
What I mean is, much miners are getting attacked or ganked every day without having a chance to strike back. I take it you haven't heard of a battle-Skiff. |
Arronicus
Caldari Navy Reconnaissance
1089
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 20:08:00 -
[118] - Quote
1) Allow the industrial siege cycle to be broken at any time That alone, would be enough for some of us to use it in the belt 2) Force all npcs to target the rorqual while it is in industrial siege 3) Allow the rorqual to loot any containers within 150km or even 50km while in siege.
Top three that would, in my opinion, make the rorqual very much worth sitting in the belt. Or even reduce the indy core cycle time to 30 seconds. |
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
36
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 22:55:00 -
[119] - Quote
TheSampler wrote:CCP, please turn off the requirement for Heavy Water for the Rorqual for the 22nd release. As compression is being basically null-n-void from the rorqual - you're giving it to a POS with no additional fuel costs to the POS. Do you not think, rorqual pilots need at least one benefit in flying their ore hauler? Thanks.
TheSampler
Compression is not null and void for the Rorqual. The heavy water requirement for compression is fairly insignificant, and not having to maintain a separate POS for compression and not having to buy a compression array which will take up PG/CPU in my POS or force me to play an annoying online/offline module game when using my POS is actually valuable. I plan on using my Rorqual for compression where it is convenient to do so.
The compression array is mostly for high seccers with no Rorqual access.
If you're really an industrialist who has a Rorqual and operates in null or low, there is no reason for you not to have realized this fact. Trust me, you'll still be using your Rorqual for compression. Especially during mining ops in systems where you don't have a POS with a compression array set up. If they don't jack up this Rorqual rebalance, mining ops may just be able to have mining ops and use the Rorq where you don't have a POS at all. |
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
36
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 22:59:00 -
[120] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote:Bsically good Idea, but I wouldn-¦t like having a rorq in a belt without an active mining role. Also the point that the only way to get out of PvP will be by jumping out is a great mess, as Jumpdrives do not work in Wormholes.
I changed the document to reflect giving the Rorq the option to warp out for the benefit of the wormhole dwellers. Not sure how long it takes Google Docs to update the published version.
I'm glad you took the time to read the document. I fear many will be dissuaded by the wall of text. I'm passionate about the idea or at least an idea that provides the Rorq with an equivalent god mode.
Unfortunately, I don't share your view that there Rorqual should be a miner as well as a mining foreman vessel. But thanks for reading my idea and giving a thumbs up. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |