EVE Search - Sticky:[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 78 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 38 post(s)
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 8517	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:01:00 - [811] - Quote [quote=CCP Greyscale]Before I start with specifics: The general intent here is to be as sure as possible that we achieve our goals over the long run, while placing as few limitations as possible. There are various ideas being thrown around, of varying degrees of plausibility, for circumventing these changes. Some may actually end up being practical, most probably won't. Rather than nerfing everything into the ground up front, we'd rather catch the really obvious stuff first and then see how the game plays out. You can HG-Ascendency a super to move it around, sure, but by the same token you can get an officer neut to fit on a Curse. We like it when people occasionally do weird, unexpected things with the tools we give them, but we step in when such cases become both common and counter to goals. If any of these things become commonplace, we will very likely nerf them. Here's a list of things that have been up, some reasons as to why we're skeptical of their utility, and a sample of the sort of nerf we'd be likely to do to counter them: - Setting up caches of ships and jump cloning to them -- Difficulty and cost of setting up and maintaining caches of sufficient size and density -- Limit jump clone usage furtehr - Ascendancy capitals -- Risks involved, rarity of key items -- Reduce bonuses hyperspatial whatsamajigs give to supers - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus - T1 hauler redeployment -- Risk of moving your whole fleet in T1 haulers, bridging or no -- Nerf hauler fatigue bonus - Using JFs to move your fleet -- Requires everyone to train for and own a JF, requires you to fly round in an unescorted fleet of JFs -- We're going to nerf JFs evenutally, if we have to tackle this in the meantime we'll think of something - Blockade-runner/black ops fleet movement -- Need to have BO stationed everywhere to pull it off -- Nerf BR bonuses - Roaming fast-warp carrier gangs -- It's a gimmick, there's probably a good counter -- Delete carriers from game (kidding, unfortunately, but we'll think of something) #1 it seems y'all still underestimate the lengths your players are willing to go to to avoid the intent of your game designs. #2 is a question. You've been doing this (developing EVE) for a while I know. Has a 'reactive nerfing' stance (aka 'emergent gameplay wackamole when people figure out ways around you guys game design) ever succeeded in helping you attain the goals you want to see for the game? I ask that honestly, because from where I'm sitting (as a layman and outsider) it really doesn't seem so.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 519	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:03:00 - [812] - Quote Dwissi wrote: To throw something completely different into the entire discussion i would like to quote something from Eve - The book Vers.1.4: 'In an average binary system the jump gate has a range of around 5 light-years, provided the jump gate is constructed on the third resonance node.' The 5 LY distance isnt something CCP just popped out of nothing - its a basic part of the lore and history Eve is build on. And I also just realized that it makes sense that Jump Freighters and Black Ops have longer range than 5LY from a lore standpoint: they're both T2 ships, so it makes sense that their jump drives would be more advanced. Now, if only CCP would merge the lore with the changes, I think people would have a much easier time swallowing them. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 897	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:03:00 - [813] - Quote Yun Kuai wrote: Rational people wouldn't put all their eggs in one basket either but hey you guys just keep doing what you're doing. See that right there is the problem with you null bears, you are exactly the kind of people who expect easy, instant gratification...moving that kind of value, I.e. 35bil a piece, should never have anything but beyond impossible tagged to it. The fact that you can move that kind of value from highsec out to nullsec with such ease just validates the point that it should be significantly harder and put at significantly higher risk. Here's a novel idea, given the size of freighters and the massive cargo hold of them, why not take into consideration all of the m3 of the contents being moved inside the freighter in addition to the freighters mass. It would make Titan bridging freighters or having them jump through a JB cost a about a billion in fuel. It's rather ironic that you used the word "egg," because an egg is exactly what I meant by 35b -- the top tier outpost upgrade platform (the monument) is a single item that is 750k m^3 and costs 14.4b, and it looks like an egg when you deploy it in space. You have no choice but to use freighters to get this item into nullsec. You have to put all your egg (singular) into one basket in this case. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Pen Ris Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 3	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:03:00 - [814] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: If you want nullsec industry to take off, it needs to be easy to move goods within your own territory, and to encourage that growth it needs to be hard to import materials into nullsec from empire. A better test would be making more design changes then increasing JF ranges to 100au and finding that none of JFer pilots want to go to empire.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1010	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:05:00 - [815] - Quote Querns wrote: Yun Kuai wrote: Rational people wouldn't put all their eggs in one basket either but hey you guys just keep doing what you're doing. See that right there is the problem with you null bears, you are exactly the kind of people who expect easy, instant gratification...moving that kind of value, I.e. 35bil a piece, should never have anything but beyond impossible tagged to it. The fact that you can move that kind of value from highsec out to nullsec with such ease just validates the point that it should be significantly harder and put at significantly higher risk. Here's a novel idea, given the size of freighters and the massive cargo hold of them, why not take into consideration all of the m3 of the contents being moved inside the freighter in addition to the freighters mass. It would make Titan bridging freighters or having them jump through a JB cost a about a billion in fuel. It's rather ironic that you used the word "egg," because an egg is exactly what I meant by 35b -- the top tier outpost upgrade platform (the monument) is a single item that is 750k m^3 and costs 14.4b, and it looks like an egg when you deploy it in space. You have no choice but to use freighters to get this item into nullsec. You have to put all your egg (singular) into one basket in this case. yeah, and the other 20b is in the other egg freighters that have to accompany it plus, an outpost egg alone is like 25b and must be freightered
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1010	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:06:00 - [816] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: A question for CCP Greyscale: If one of the goals of these, and future, changes is to get nullsec industry to become more self-sufficient, wouldn't it make sense to focus more on limiting the moving of goods (i.e. changing hauler movement mechanics) between empire and nullsec than to focus on limiting the movement of goods period? If you want nullsec industry to take off, it needs to be easy to move goods within your own territory, and to encourage that growth it needs to be hard to import materials into nullsec from empire. No particular suggestion here, just a question/observation. this is dumb the issue is there is no cost-effective way to get the materials locally (and for many materials, no way period)
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 898	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:07:00 - [817] - Quote I would say that it isn't so much any particular rivulet of entitlement making us pack so much value into a freighter as it is actual game mechanics forcing us to do so. But, hey -- don't let me stop you from spouting a completely uninformed opinion that falls flat in the face of reality. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kismeteer GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 740	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:20:00 - [818] - Quote I'm still worried about the view that the drone bonus is more important on the Rorqual than it's jump range. One thing that I think is overlooked is the fact that newbies lose their pods. A lot. And they can't fly interceptors to get through gate camps and such. I think that the new cloning changes unfairly hurt them. I wish you could have two sets of rules, one for players under 3 months, another for players over 3 months. This is from their character age, not their account age or their SP. (Account age might be hard to measure, SP is stupid because 800k cyno clones) Under 3 months, change clone at will to anywhere. Maybe even if they don't have an office there, let them be silly. Let them get around the universe with ease, not like they can fly much more than a BC competently anyway. Maybe you just count rookie corp members under this group, permanently. After 3 months, they should know better by then, they're restricted to the current location and their home newbie station. I really would like to see this expanded, since people with jump clones (ie established null secers and mission runners) are unfairly advantaged. But Eve is extremely unfriendly to solo newbies so I understand the nerf.
Zifrian Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance 1569	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:21:00 - [819] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Zifrian wrote: Can someone explain to me why jump freighters and rorquals jump ranges limit "force projection"? I just don't get why they are part of these changes at all. We've specifically avoided using the term "force projection" because it carries a lot of baggage with it. They're part of the changes because a) we want jump systems to work in a unified way, and b) we were originally of the opinion that this was a good opportunity to rein in their power too, which we've since changed our minds on. a) still stands, though. Thanks GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 154	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:21:00 - [820] - Quote For nullsec industry to take off, we need the following things: -Null Ore anomalies need less high end ores, and more low ends (specifically those that provide mexallon) -We need to be able to build all station components, rather than components being NPC only items from highsec With those two changes, null will be able to take off for all regions. The logistical nightmare of upgrading stations is not fun or beneficial for anyone. When is the last time an egg has been killed in transit? If anyone in null is able to build station components from their location, that opens up a plethora of opportunities to organize meaningful mining operations and give goals to anyone that lives in nullsec. Once people in nullsec are able to source meaningful amounts (and distribution) of the most basic of t1 materials, then nullsec industry will take off. The ability for people to build stations locally will enable them to upgrade their space without having to have multiple titans to bounce NPC goods from highsec.

Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 520	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:24:00 - [821] - Quote Retar Aveymone wrote: Bronson Hughes wrote: A question for CCP Greyscale: If one of the goals of these, and future, changes is to get nullsec industry to become more self-sufficient, wouldn't it make sense to focus more on limiting the moving of goods (i.e. changing hauler movement mechanics) between empire and nullsec than to focus on limiting the movement of goods period? If you want nullsec industry to take off, it needs to be easy to move goods within your own territory, and to encourage that growth it needs to be hard to import materials into nullsec from empire. No particular suggestion here, just a question/observation. this is dumb the issue is there is no cost-effective way to get the materials locally (and for many materials, no way period). hence, the absolute necessity of importing materials for a while null industry had no advantages that made it worth importing materials instead of just finished products since it was easier to build in empire, but that's now changed a little bit That was kind of my point, albeit in a roundabout way. Limiting the movement of goods can only encourage local industry if there are sufficient local materials. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content.
Rahelis Tris Legomenon 120	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:27:00 - [822] - Quote Much respect for CCP Grey and his team - keep up your vision of EVE and make it real. I appreciate that you even discuss matters with the players - this is the attitude I wanted to see. I know that many vet players have deep insight into the game and can be assets to improve EVE - if they are heared. Some ppl on the other hand will try to twist everything for petty reasons - so live game design is always a difficult balance. Keep it up - great efforts so far! I for the first time are now interested in null and living and producing there.
xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 401	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:30:00 - [823] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus How about just dropping the pointless combat bonuses and give it logistical bonuses for the time being. Mr Omniblivion wrote: For nullsec industry to take off, we need the following things: -Null Ore anomalies need less high end ores, and more low ends (specifically those that provide mexallon) -We need to be able to build all station components, rather than components being NPC only items from highsec Don't forget: Ihub upgrades Regional moon materials Regional Ice And to a lesser extent (as they're much easier to import): Implants High-meta level gear Blueprints
Speedkermit Damo GeoCorp. Curatores Veritatis Alliance 352	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:32:00 - [824] - Quote Odelll wrote: Anyone else concerned by the new black ops concessions? Here is what I fear; Fleets of T3 refitting to covert ops to use the 8AU range of BOP Cloaky Haulers being used to transport logistics bridge all the way to friendly/NPC station and refit back into combat -90% reduction on the hauler fatigue -50% on the t3 90% of all fleets these days are T3+Logi The Black ops are more accessible than titans, this looks to make long distance travel of T3 fleets much easier. Most of the supporting fleets these days are not capital but sub-capital t3 to bluster defensive fleets. Onto the 90% reduction of fatigue for haulers, as most doctrine ships can fit inside a hauler with fittings and ammo I fail to see why jumpbridges just don't have a 10% fatigue instead. Yes, this will be abused to hell and back. Power projection was nerfed for a few heady days, now it's back to stagnation and ever declining subs Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Speedkermit Damo GeoCorp. Curatores Veritatis Alliance 352	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:34:00 - [825] - Quote Retar Aveymone wrote: would one of the many idiots who think an industrial through jump bridges will ever be faster than a taxi interceptor post a video proving it i look forward to the utter lack of videos as you discover an interceptor will always be faster in any reasonable situation Can interceptors carry ships, fittings and ammo in their cargo bays? Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 106	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:38:00 - [826] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Rather than nerfing everything into the ground up front, we'd rather catch the really obvious stuff first and then see how the game plays out. Couldn't agree more. So why was the first devblog so focused on nerfing it all into the ground? Just to get a rise out of the community? Because now we have those who were happy with nerfing it into the ground being made to feel like you are "caving in", when in fact you are taking a logical, methodical approach. But before that we had to experience the threadnaught where those who saw it as unnecessarily aggressive were forced to point out a lot of very obvious issues. Glad you finally got to this point, but not sure it had to take this path
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 900	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:39:00 - [827] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: would one of the many idiots who think an industrial through jump bridges will ever be faster than a taxi interceptor post a video proving it i look forward to the utter lack of videos as you discover an interceptor will always be faster in any reasonable situation Can interceptors carry ships, fittings and ammo in their cargo bays? No, but jump freighters can. They're much more efficient at the task, too. Also, you can't have it both ways -- the travel Wreathe being posted here has a staggering 13k m^3 cargo. Deep Space Transports can better manage the hauling needs, but they are extremely slow to align and warp, even when fit for the task. (Doing this, incidentally, comes at a significant cost to their ability to tank and travel.) This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 154	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:40:00 - [828] - Quote xttz wrote: Mr Omniblivion wrote: For nullsec industry to take off, we need the following things: -Null Ore anomalies need less high end ores, and more low ends (specifically those that provide mexallon) -We need to be able to build all station components, rather than components being NPC only items from highsec Don't forget: Ihub upgrades Regional moon materials Regional Ice And to a lesser extent (as they're much easier to import): Implants High-meta level gear Blueprints I would add Ihub upgrades, but regional moon materials and ice are not issues. Moons are conflict drivers and drive trade, regional ice isn't in a high enough demand to seed everywhere (the price is just going to continually tank until a meaningful change is made). The difference with ore and raw minerals is that there are "infinite amounts" already in nullsec, but the distribution of that infinite amount is heavily skewed towards high ends and severely short in mexallon. This is why zydrine has taken an absolute dump and why megacyte is trending to be less valuable than nocxium. The surplus of zydrine and mega has made Arkonor - supposedly the most rare and valuable ore in the game- one of the worst ores to mine, if not the worst.

CCP Greyscale C C P C C P Alliance 3475	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:46:00 - [829] - Quote Retar Aveymone wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus just out of curiosity let us suppose the battle rorqual fleet was deployed how long do you think we'd have to play around with it before it got nerfed :sun: Depends how funny we found it, I think.

Yroc Jannseen Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 55	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:47:00 - [830] - Quote xttz wrote: Mr Omniblivion wrote: For nullsec industry to take off, we need the following things: -Null Ore anomalies need less high end ores, and more low ends (specifically those that provide mexallon) -We need to be able to build all station components, rather than components being NPC only items from highsec Don't forget: Ihub upgrades Regional moon materials Regional Ice And to a lesser extent (as they're much easier to import): Implants High-meta level gear Blueprints Also tiny in volume but, people often forget that salvage, from rats at least, is also regional. Try getting armor plates or alloyed grit bars in Dek.

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 900	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:50:00 - [831] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus just out of curiosity let us suppose the battle rorqual fleet was deployed how long do you think we'd have to play around with it before it got nerfed :sun: Depends how funny we found it, I think. What kind of funny are we talking here? Like, does it count if we paint clowns on the side of the rorqual? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Yun Kuai Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 220	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:51:00 - [832] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus just out of curiosity let us suppose the battle rorqual fleet was deployed how long do you think we'd have to play around with it before it got nerfed :sun: Depends how funny we found it, I think. I think we just found the new end boss on the forums --------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 383	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:53:00 - [833] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: afkalt wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: Speedkermit Damo wrote: The status quo will now be maintained. The blue donut and vast rental empires will stay as they are. Good job CCP. I guess placating mittens is more important than saving your game and your company after all. Another good example of the bad thinking I'm preaching against, mainly because it displays no willingness to entertain the idea that the changes could have made the "mittens" and "blue donuts" of the EVE world WORSE than they are right now. At the very least, the 'loosening' of the jump range nerfs means that NPC null doesn't get the super shaft that was aimed at it. You know what would help a LOT, actually, is if CCP actually alluded to the other things that they have planned for later. It would probably help everyone as it is literally impossible to take part 1 of a 3 phase plan and hold it on overal merits if we do not know parts 2 and 3 even loosely. Specifics are not required - just something of the greater plan we can hold these changes up against. At this point (to use a crappy TV analogy) we are basically arguing about whodunnit after watching part 1 of a 3 part TV murder mystery show! We're not ready to share more than what's already in the blog, sorry. Fair play, appreciate the honesty.
Azami Nevinyrall Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 2091	Posted - 2014.10.10 16:55:00 - [834] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: Is there any idea when you'll allow Carriers into Highsec? Can it be done by Phoebe? No, it's technically trivial, the main work is in working through all the likely consequences and resolving any problems, and that'll take time. Can you be more specific? The only advantage to having a Carrier is the Drones and Capital modules...(unless I'm wrong.) Prevent anything involving the word "Capital" in its module name from being activated in Highsec. Just like bombs and interdiction probes. Prevent Fighters and more then 5 regular drones being deployed in Highsec. ....and the only warning was the last line of the patch notes, which said. "Oh yeah, we also shuffled Moon Goo around!" Show your support, move Moon Goo with Power Projection changes!-á
Overlord Invictus The Graduates Forged of Fire 10	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:00:00 - [835] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: afkalt wrote: You know what would help a LOT, actually, is if CCP actually alluded to the other things that they have planned for later. It would probably help everyone as it is literally impossible to take part 1 of a 3 phase plan and hold it on overal merits if we do not know parts 2 and 3 even loosely. Specifics are not required - just something of the greater plan we can hold these changes up against. At this point (to use a crappy TV analogy) we are basically arguing about whodunnit after watching part 1 of a 3 part TV murder mystery show! We're not ready to share more than what's already in the blog, sorry. So we have to believe in you that what we are going to get in part 1 of the trilogy will be exonerated by parts 2 and 3? When you've already rolled back on parts of part 1 because you were narrow minded. and when you've openly said you cannot fathom the effects of part 1, 2 and 3 combined and if it will fix things or break them even further. Because doing so is boring. im so so so sorry that sometimes your work has dull and 'hard' elements to it Greyscale. CCP Greyscale wrote: If we can predict the consequences of changes we make, players will be able to (some of you are always smarter than us), and changes that can be predicted are changes that can be solved, and solved problems are boring. If we can know what the exact consequences will be for changes we're making, we've already failed.
ElectronHerd Askulf Reasonable People Of Sound Mind 11	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:02:00 - [836] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: (Jump freighter depowering is necessary but not sufficient for nullsec near-self-sufficiency.) A very succinct summary of the situation, to be annoyingly alliterative. Very much looking forward to seeing the rest of the nullsec industry picture.
The Cue Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 32	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:03:00 - [837] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: Darryl Brown wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Black Ops fatigue is a value we're happy to tune, within a reasonable range. Make a case for a number and we'll listen :) Oooh, ooh, pick me! Combat black ops drops (e.g. Falcon tackles Rattlesnake in a Sanctum, lights covert cyno, two Panthers and a Sin jump in and kill Rattlesnake) are great fun. They add value to Eve because ratting with neuts or reds in local should be risky. They're not perfect; the target might be pre-aligned to a safe, loaded with warp core stabilizers, handy with an AB and MJD, or bait for a counter-drop. Blops drops depend upon stealth, patience, and mobility. The primary weapon is surprise - and jumping to the hunter cyno is essential for the surprise to work. Here's how things work currently: The hunter roams through a region, dodging gate camps and looking wistfully at shiny ships in POSes. At last! He spots a target in an anomaly. Things happen quickly - decloak, tackle, cyno, blops bses jump in, target dies, cyno down, scoop the loot, leave the scene. The black ops battleships wait for jump cap and then return to the staging system via jump. The hunter moves on in search of the next target. Here's how things would work with a 5ly jump with these revised changes: Hunter cyno goes up, Blops ships jump in, kill the target, and wait for 1+2.5 minutes before the jump cool-down expires. If they jump 5ly to the exit cyno after 3.5 minutes with 3.15 fatigue they get 3.15 x 3.5 = 11.025 fatigue and are done for the day. If they choose to wait in the system for at least 25 minutes, their fatigue drops below 1 and the next jump isn't quite so painful. Assuming they're adaptive folks - they have abandoned the practice of always returning to the staging system and instead wait to jump directly to the next target. Either way - there is no point in continuing to hunt for 20+ minutes until the combat blops pilots' fatigue is reduced. This is not fun. Although I suppose the hunter could go around and do "catch and release" fishing for a bit. How about taking gates? Combat blops ships are certainly better than most ships at navigating bubble camps (better speed while cloaked, can fit MJDs), but they're also pricey and fragile. Plus, they warp at 2.2au/s, so warping from in-gate to target is not feasible. I think a -50% fatigue factor is better than the original proposal but still extremely constraining. The added range (8 vs. 7.5ish) is nice, but this iteration would still mean 1-2 potential kills per session. Currently the limiting factors are all based on player behavior: Can you catch someone? Did they use their intel network and successfully avoid you? Counter-point to what I just said: If the blops jump drive (or covert bridge) receives a gentler nerf than this current iteration (as I think it should), it could potentially serve as a work-around for the consequences of other changes to movement in Phoebe. This is already the case for Jump Freighters-as-taxis (and industrials?), but Blops ships are considerably cheaper and more accessible (and covert bridges would be even more accessible). In conclusion, I would be really sad if Phoebe removed the viability of blops drops from EVE. I am in favor of the vision behind Phoebe, but I really don't want blops ships to be collateral damage and I hope that you don't, too. Excellent, thank you :) Might I suggest that instead of a decrease in fatigue accrued bonus, BlOps receive a nullification of fatigue for so long as they jump back to the system that they left without changing systems inbetween. What I mean is, BlOps is in system a, target is in system b. jump 1 takes the BlOps from system a to system b. This jump gives them normal fatigue. If jump 2 takes them from system b to system a and they haven't moved systems inbetween(so they're just returning to base), they don't gain any fatigue from jump 2. This basically doubles the number of BlOps drops achievable in a casual sitting without giving any bonus that can be gamed to power projection beyond the 50% bonus that's already been suggested.
Drak Fel Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 86	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:08:00 - [838] - Quote CCP Greyscale wrote: - Setting up caches of ships and jump cloning to them -- Difficulty and cost of setting up and maintaining caches of sufficient size and density -- Limit jump clone usage furtehr - Ascendancy capitals -- Risks involved, rarity of key items -- Reduce bonuses hyperspatial whatsamajigs give to supers - Battle rorqual -- Lots of cross-training for questionable value and the certainty that we'll nerf it anyway -- Reduced/removed drone bonus - T1 hauler redeployment -- Risk of moving your whole fleet in T1 haulers, bridging or no -- Nerf hauler fatigue bonus - Using JFs to move your fleet -- Requires everyone to train for and own a JF, requires you to fly round in an unescorted fleet of JFs -- We're going to nerf JFs evenutally, if we have to tackle this in the meantime we'll think of something - Blockade-runner/black ops fleet movement -- Need to have BO stationed everywhere to pull it off -- Nerf BR bonuses - Roaming fast-warp carrier gangs -- It's a gimmick, there's probably a good counter -- Delete carriers from game (kidding, unfortunately, but we'll think of something) So basically what you're saying is, don't do anything that can give you an advantage or we will nerf it to the ground. Not much of a sandbox.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force Cult of War 148	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:11:00 - [839] - Quote I still think allowing Doomsdays in Low sec will result in absolute chaos but the rest of it I can live with for now. I do, however, strongly advise all of you at CCP to pull your bloody finger out and not simply reform sov but enhance the risk vs. reward ratio of 0.0 compared to living anywhere else in Empire with the utmost urgency. If you want it to be hard as hell to live there, it has to be worth it. Right now it, quite frankly it is not and these changes should have been the end of the null sec overhaul, not the beginning.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 900	Posted - 2014.10.10 17:12:00 - [840] - Quote Drak Fel wrote: So basically what you're saying is, don't do anything that can give you an advantage or we will nerf it to the ground. Not much of a sandbox. I'd say it's more "expect something that gives an outsized, game-breaking advantage to get toned down." This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 78 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.