|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
126
   |
Posted - 2014.10.31 01:18:11 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The feedback in the update thread was on the side of keeping the range bonus, yes. However, it's impossible to tell from that whether that's because majority opinion is on that side of the fence or simply that the people who wanted the damage bonus read the first post, were satisfied and didn't bother to reply.
Seriously? You can justify pretty much anything by saying "there are probably people who are satisfied who didn't bother replying." If you're going to introduce easily avoidable cognitive biases like that, you diminish the quality of feedback you receive.
CCP Greyscale wrote:The only way we'd get feedback from the people who want the damage bonus is if we said we were taking it away, and then if there was significant outcry we'd probably have to switch it back again, and we want to avoid flip-flopping on these things wherever possible, mainly because it just confuses people.
No, that's not the only way. You could have made a separate thread specifically putting both options on the table and asked which one players would have preferred. You don't just throw up your hands and say "well people who didn't post could be on board with this idea, so we don't know what they want".
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
126
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 05:00:42 -
[2] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Querns wrote:Akita T wrote:As per how somebody else explained some time ago, NOT having ALSO a ship-based jump fatigue stat will mean large alliances can still move their supercap fleets around at will thankyouverymuch by simply switching PILOTS on the ships between jumps.
And don't give me the "but, but, packaging" excuse - the ships most affected by this can't (or at least shouldn't) be packaged anyway. I would like to see this actually happen. If it does in a major way, we'll clamp down on it, just as we will with any of the other suggested workarounds should they actually see widespread use. Oh really? What if players preposition both ships and pilots. Then power is projected by logging into the proper account and selecting the proper alt. How will you clamp down on that? Restrict all players to one account with just one pilot?
Here's a thought: CCP could make this game subscriber based so that it would be way too expensive to do this.
Oh wait.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 17:03:58 -
[3] - Quote
Edit: Nevermind, I see it now.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
130
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 18:31:21 -
[4] - Quote
It means you're in the wrong thread.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
233
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 01:08:56 -
[5] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Update on the Rorqual metrics front, now that I've found time to poke at it: it looks like it's definitely being used as a mining support ship substantially more than it is as a PvP ship (somewhat unsurprisingly). I'm not sure what (if anything) we will do in the short term; the ship's clearly in a wonky state, but we don't have the balance bandwidth to look at it right now. This is all you need it to do to make it a somewhat better ship: Quote:Capital Industrial Ships skill bonuses:
- -5% reduction in fuel consumption for industrial cores per level
- 10% bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman warfare links per level when in deployed mode
- 50% bonus to the range of Capital Shield Transporters per level.
20% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints per level.- 50% Bonus per level to Mining drone Yield when in deployed mode.
Role Bonuses: - 900% bonus to the range of survey scanners
- 200% bonus to the range of cargo scanners
- 100% Bonus to Mining drone velocity
Can fit Clone Vat Bay Can use 3 Warfare Link modules simultaneously 5 LY Base jump range (10 LY) Quote:Industrial Mode:
- Reduce to 30 or 60 second cycles.
- Potentially give it a resistance bonus to the ship's shield (15-20%?)
With all level 5 and 3 mining drone rigs (2 Tech II), you would yield about 1500/minute, about a hulk with T1 strips and boosts. it would suffer due to the drones having to travel, thus not actually equaling a hulk in practice.
No. No, no, no. It's simpler than that.
Remove the drone bonus, add the fatigue bonus, add the 5 LY base jump range, and change "10% bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman warfare links per level when in deployed mode" to "10% bonus to effectiveness of mining foreman warfare links per level".
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
338
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 03:07:46 -
[6] - Quote
There are only three things you have to do to make the Rorqual a worthwhile ship.
- Give it the same jump range as jump freighters.
- Remove its drones and drone bonus.
- Change its mining foreman link bonus to one that is always active on the ship, instead of only while the industrial core is active.
This is not hard. This is something you could do in minutes. And it's something that you know needs to happen.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
|
|
| |
|