| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Unclaimed.
4
   |
Posted - 2013.06.16 04:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
With speculation on throwing the nerf-ball at off grid boosting I would like to propose a sort of compromise to those who are for and against the changes.
While off-grid boosting does pose a large problem for fleet pvp, in other cases it is almost an invaluable mechanic. Most notably for miners and non group pve. Forcing industrialists to put a rorqual and more likely, an orca, directly on grid would have a very negative impact on production (at least in 0.0/Lowsec). While the juicy kill ails and delicious miner tears seems very enticing, these changes would render the rorqual almost useless in regards to fleet boosting (not so much the orca since it is already seen on grid with its miners, though not nearly as much in low/null). The same thought applies to capitals (Carrier, Super Carrier, Titan). These larger ships can't always keep up with their smaller counterparts and often enough are left in one place while the sub caps go off and chase their quarry.
Solution? Go ahead and kill OGB for sub-capital ships (possibly the orca as well) but allow capital ships to continue broadcasting their links across the system. This saves industrialists a mighty headache and in turn gives an FC two options to play with: does he want constant boosting no matter his fleets location? Or does he want specialized and increased bonuses to give himself an edge in the fight, at the risk of losing those very boosts midway through the brawl? Decisions, decisions...
Now, it may not be necessary to give this a ability to Carriers or the Orca. But it wouldn't be too much a compromise since the only non-industrial capital ships that can fit gang links, do not receive special bonuses for them (aside from the titans weird fleet bonus).
Opinions? Comments? Lets hear what you guys think. And if I missed any details I'll be happy to flesh them out or explain in more depth. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
Trans-Stellar Industries
341
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 05:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
So, what limitations to put on this?
Can't boost from within POS shields?
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that? |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Unclaimed.
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 06:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ruze wrote:So, what limitations to put on this?
Can't boost from within POS shields?
I want to say yes, but mostly for the combat gang links. We run into the problem again of having a rorqual pilot having to expose himself to the elements, but that might just might be how it's going to have to work. Unless the industrial core could somehow overcome "force field interference" |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation
MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 21:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sounds good for me. Not a POS? Okay, but at least not an anomaly!
Rorq is defenceless in deployed mode, unless there's a carrier nearby (never tried that, though). I don't like being that much of a target, and... well, why won't capital ships have some advantage? |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 22:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rowells wrote:With speculation on throwing the nerf-ball at off grid boosting I would like to propose a sort of compromise to those who are for and against the changes.....
Why create a special exception for the mining profession and not for exploration, PvP, generic PvE etc? Exceptions always and invariably lead to the abolishment of the rules into which they were included.
Why not ask for a special command processor that transmogrify's the bonuses of any ship wielding it into those relevant for mining?
* Could even, down the road, be expanded to all links so Eos could become adept with armour links for instance.
Why not ask for mining link bonuses to be added along side any and all of the racial bonuses?
Why not ask for mining to get its overdue revamp and have CCP include changes that mitigate or outright removes the link part of direct yield benefit .. ie. decrease laser cycles/increase laser yields and have bonuses apply to related but not "essential" parts?
In short: Exceptions are bad. The second you realise that you'd like/need one, you should automatically start looking for alternative solutions to avoid them. |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc
Unclaimed.
174
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 00:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
a rorqual can have the bite of a carrier.
5 sentries ar 20% bonus=10 sentries. same as a carrier.
but!
the rorqual needs to deploy for bonuses. thats the down side.
we have had several threats on the rorqual in the past 2 weeks.
some topics were to drop the need for deployment for links. this would allow the rorqual to be like the orca. it would only have to deploy to compress.
this one fix would change alot.
3 rorquals in a triangle at 50km away with sentries dropped and remote shield reppers can hold off a pretty descent amount of damage for a while. not indeffinately, but for a bit. depends on if caps show up. a pyramid for 4 etc.
here's the thing. drop the bonus to that of the orca for non deployed mode. we could stay in the field, sentries dropped to protect the miners, tractor to pull in the cans and then go to the pos to compress once cargo is full.
another one spoke of the rorqual being able to bridge miners like a titan or BLOPS. that way they can hit the fields without having to fly gate to gate and tip anyone off.
another was to use the rorqual as kind of a temp pos when deployed. miners can get in the shields until safe.
another was to give the rorqual 4x normal shields when deployed so it can hold off bad guys until its deployment cycle timer expires.
just search em. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
386
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 01:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
I hate miners. I have yet to meet a miner that isn't a complete jerk, some kind of intolerable fuckwit or a crude, lowbrow sort of person with the overal mentality of the average 13-year-old. This has admittedly colored my opinion of mining in general and of how mining ships should be balanced.
However, even I who cannot stand miners think it would be a good thing to see an industrial ship that can actually stand up against other ships in a fight. The reality of EVE is that industrialists don't have support/defense fleets and are generally regarded as a cancer that actively hurts alliances and should be purged from all areas of space forever. They don't get any help from combat pilots. If barges, exhumers and Orcas cannot be allowed to defend themselves or survive attacks, then perhaps the Rorqual should be able to do it for them.
Let the Rorqual have the defensive capacity to handle being shot at and the offensive ability to make the enemy bring more than just one lone carrier. For godsakes, something in the ORE lineup needs some kind of teeth! |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
Trans-Stellar Industries
344
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 02:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I hate miners. I have yet to meet a miner that isn't a complete jerk, some kind of intolerable fuckwit or a crude, lowbrow sort of person with the overal mentality of the average 13-year-old. This has admittedly colored my opinion of mining in general and of how mining ships should be balanced.
However, even I who cannot stand miners think it would be a good thing to see an industrial ship that can actually stand up against other ships in a fight. The reality of EVE is that industrialists don't have support/defense fleets and are generally regarded as a cancer that actively hurts alliances and should be purged from all areas of space forever. They don't get any help from combat pilots. If barges, exhumers and Orcas cannot be allowed to defend themselves or survive attacks, then perhaps the Rorqual should be able to do it for them.
Let the Rorqual have the defensive capacity to handle being shot at and the offensive ability to make the enemy bring more than just one lone carrier. For godsakes, something in the ORE lineup needs some kind of teeth!
I have yet to meet a pvp player who didn't have a trader, mining or mission running alt.
For the rorqual and orca, probably not a bad idea to have good tank. Especially the rorqual.
If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that? |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Unclaimed.
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 05:13:00 -
[9] - Quote
You're probably right about the exceptions Yoshida. I think that the Rorqual needs a revamp before any OGB changes.
So, aside from the Rorqual's need for a revamp (which I will delegate to the already existing posts), would there be any other issues that need to be addressed with this system? |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
714
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 07:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mole Guy wrote:...here's the thing. drop the bonus to that of the orca for non deployed mode. we could stay in the field, sentries dropped to protect the miners, tractor to pull in the cans and then go to the pos to compress once cargo is full...
Why drop the bonus at all?
It is a big fat 2.5-3B ISK hull with barely anything beyond tank going for it handing out non-combat related bonuses. I think Eve can survive it giving the full bonuses .. Orca can then be the lower tier but more survivable link platform.
Rowells wrote:You're probably right about the exceptions Yoshida. I think that the Rorqual needs a revamp before any OGB changes.
So, aside from the Rorqual's need for a revamp (which I will delegate to the already existing posts), would there be any other issues that need to be addressed with this system?
Would personally (ie. my alt) prefer for mining as a whole to be more scintillating .. seems wrong that one has to mine in hostile territory just to get ones juices flowing, there should be something in mining itself that can achieve that. 
Mix'n'Match exploration with mining so that some rocks turns out to have formed around derelict jumpgates or have small hidden pirate installations imbedded in them to be hacked and so forth .. anything to break the tedium that made mining something to do while doing chores around the house (unless it is a large drunk mining OP, those are fun!). |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Unclaimed.
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 12:52:00 -
[11] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Mix'n'Match exploration with mining so that some rocks turns out to have formed around derelict jumpgates or have small hidden pirate installations imbedded in them to be hacked and so forth .. anything to break the tedium that made mining something to do while doing chores around the house (unless it is a large drunk mining OP, those are fun!).
Careful now, CCP might try and give you a mining mini-game
But I agree. Mining needs to be something that's a little more involved. But alas, that's a discussion for another thread. |
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard
Bright Side of Death
93
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 12:55:00 -
[12] - Quote
Blah blah blah.
OGB = paid alt.
Because of this OGB in eve forever. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation
MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 11:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Shade Alidiana wrote:Sounds good for me. Not a POS? Okay, but at least not an anomaly!
Rorq is defenceless in deployed mode, unless there's a carrier nearby (never tried that, though). I don't like being that much of a target, and... well, why won't capital ships have some advantage? Why should it be required to siege to wield links, ever asked that question? It sort of makes sense that the compression bit would require a ship to anchor or something to achieve a homogenous end product, but to make basic data transmissions? Also, why has no one asked for the Rorq/Orca to get some more oomph? The old railroad crews/companies had veritable army's travelling around with them to ensure their safety in 'hostile' territory .. is it wrong to assume that a vast industrial ship/city of the future does not have more bite than a lowly cruiser?
Not requiring deployed mode to boost is nice, too.
But! You're talking about a cruiser.. I usually face crews of several t3s or BSs. If Rorq could stand against that, it'd become a carrier and so just a little bit too powerful, I don't want the disadvantages that'll most likely appear (higher price etc). The only solution I can see now is training capital industrials V to be able to pay for escort. Not sure that's a solution, though. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Unclaimed.
8
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 13:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote: But! You're talking about a cruiser.. I usually face crews of several t3s or BSs. If Rorq could stand against that, it'd become a carrier and so just a little bit too powerful, I don't want the disadvantages that'll most likely appear (higher price etc). The only solution I can see now is training capital industrials V to be able to pay for escort. Not sure that's a solution, though
I don't think it would make it too powerful at all. I mean considering the base cost can run up to twice that of any of the carriers. And for the most part, I don't see multiple rorquals deploying to the same location, so the ship needs to be self reliant and still be able to take good care of its miners. It's role is more demanding than a carrier as it performs (or its supposed to) almost all the non-mining tasks associated with the fleet. It has to provide reps, boosts, and haul ore all at the same time.
If you separated boosts from Indy core and gave it immunity to warp scram/disrupt (gasp!) you would see it getting out it the belts WAY more often. |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
229
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 14:01:00 -
[15] - Quote
So even though command ships have much less ehp than an orca or rorqual it, shouldn't have the same penalty? That is a load of risk adverse BS. If some OGBing stays, all of it should.
"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
404
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 14:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Rorqs aren't carriers. Carriers can dock. The Rorq is effectively a supercarrier. Let it more closely resemble one. |
Malik Atild
Fleetworks
Silent Infinity
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 20:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Rorqs aren't carriers. Carriers can dock. The Rorq is effectively a supercarrier. Let it more closely resemble one.
I'm not sure if your saying the rorqual can't dock or if it shouldn't. But I think as an industrial ship it has a weird place in the capital progression line. Somewhere between supers and regular caps. Especially when comparing tank and utility. Rorqual can get about 700k ehp when fitted for tank, which is still about half as much as even the weakest carrier (niddy). And unlike other capitals which rely mostly on other capitals, the rorqual will most likely be the only capital (Excluding Orca) that would be on site.
And I think Rowells mentioned that the orca wouldn't receive this bonus since it is more of a sub capital when compared to ships of similar attributes. It wouldn't be a bad idea to kill OGB for the rorqual as well (since it has special bonuses) but it needs to be changed before it can do that or else it will never happen. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |