EVE Search - Sticky:[November] Rorqual Changes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Sticky:[November] Rorqual Changes

» 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 .. 18 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 14484	Posted - 2016.10.04 13:39:11 - [1] - Quote Hey folks! This will be the specific feedback thread for the Rorqual revamp coming this November! You can check out the dev blog here for the whole context. Other feedback threads are available for the Porpoise, Orca, and the mining foreman gameplay as a whole. Here's the current plan! RORQUAL Capital Industrial Ship bonuses (per skill level): 5% bonus to Mining Foreman Burst Strength and Duration 3% bonus to Shield Command Burst Strength and Duration 5% reduction in fuel consumption for Industrial Core 10% bonus to drone hitpoints, damage and mining yield -10% reduction in drone ice harvesting cycle time Role bonus: 400% bonus to Remote Shield Booster optimal range 90% reduction to effective distance traveled for jump fatigue Can fit Clone Vat Bay Can fit Industrial Core Can operate Excavator Drones Can fit three Command Burst modules Can fit one Pulse Activated Nexus Invulnerability Core 50% bonus to Command Burst Area of Effect Range 5x penalty to Entosis Link cycle time 900% bonus to Survey Scanner range 200% bonus to Cargo Scanners range Slot layout: 8H (+2), 7M, 4L (+1) Fittings: 420,000 PWG (+115,000), 1200 CPU (+280) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 90,000 / 60,000 (+30,000) / 300,000 (+50,000) Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 40 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 35 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge / cap per second) : 67,500 (+12,940) / 4500s (+600) / 15 (+1) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 60 / 0.07 (+0.02) / 800,000,000 (-380,000,000) / 77.63s (-4.16) Warp Speed: 1.5 au/s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 6000 (+5700) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 200km (+40) / 75 / 7 Sensor strength: 115 Magnetometric Signature radius: 11500 Base jump drive range: 5ly (+2.5) Jump drive fuel consumption: 2000 Oxygen (+500) Cargo Hold: 40,000m3 Ore Hold: 300,000m3 (+50,000) Fleet Hangar: 40,000m3 Ship Maintenance Bay: 1,000,000m3 Fuel Bay Capacity: 10,000m3 Cost: ~2.3b isk Max Yield (no Industrial Core): ~3000m3 per minute + drone travel time Max Yield (with Industrial Core): ~18400m3 per minute + drone travel time Max DPS (no Industrial Core): ~1000 dps Max DPS (with Industrial Core): ~2000 dps Industrial Core II: Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5 Duration: 5 minutes Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water Enables Ore and Ice Compression Movement Effects: -100% Rorqual velocity +900% Rorqual mass Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering Assistance and Electronic warfare: 100% remote repair impedance (prevents other ships from repairing the Rorqual) 80% remote assistance impedance (reduces the effect of remote assistance modules like remote sensor boosters) 80% sensor dampener resistance Full ECM immunity +120% Scan resolution Mining Foreman Burst Bonuses: +30% Mining foreman burst strength +200% Command burst range Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range Drone Damage and Mining Bonuses: +100% Drone damage and hitpoints +30% Drone MWD speed +500% Drone mining yield -80% Drone ice harvesting duration P.A.N.I.C. Module: Requires Invulnerability Core Operation skill level 1 Duration: 5 minutes base, up to 7.5 minutes based on skills 200km range Applies to all mining and industrial ships within the same fleet, except other Rorquals Runs once and then burns out Limit of one module per ship Bonuses to all affected ships: +99.99% Shield Resists -90% Shield recharge duration (increases passive shield regen rate) All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0 +100% Mass -50% velocity Prevents warp, cloak, jump, dock, tethering (if already tethered do not apply) [*] -75% scan resolution Game Designer \| Team Five-0 Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie


CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 14484	Posted - 2016.10.04 13:39:17 - [2] - Quote We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. We are currently leaning towards allowing cyno lighting and watching closely to see if this causes problems. If needed, we can change the effect to prevent cyno lighting and prevent ships with an active cyno from receiving the P.A.N.I.C. effect. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie


CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 14484	Posted - 2016.10.04 13:39:22 - [3] - Quote Reserved Game Designer \| Team Five-0 Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Mandor M Sawall Whiskey Tango Zulu 4	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:20:21 - [4] - Quote First!
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 456	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:26:32 - [5] - Quote rofl the panic button is a consumable.. the rorqual is soo fawked not everyone in regions will be able to use this.. you killed the rorqual fozzie.. you really have.. unless you add some more power to this thing.. its nothing but a Super and Titans' snicker bar. miners better get your snickers candies now.
Cade Windstalker 567	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:27:51 - [6] - Quote Few quick questions: How much are you expecting the PANIC module to cost per-unit? Does the jump restriction on PANIC'd ships include Wormholes? What happens if a ship under PANIC is bumped out of the initial range? Have you considered making a mass change to ships under the effects of PANIC? Are there any restrictions between a PANIC module and the Industrial Core? Does being PANIC'd block refitting from Mobile Depots or other ships? Does the PANIC module burn out at the start of the cycle or the end? I ask because if it's the start I foresee someone hitting it and immediately refitting another in via Mobile Depot. Does being PANIC'd affect mining yield? What happens if a PANIC'd ship drops fleet, disconnects, ect? Really like the look of these changes. They address most of the concerns that I've been hearing, especially after the change to Rorqual docking. I'm also personally in favor of allowing them to use Cyno's while PANIC'd. Should create some interesting potential for bait and other fun, besides if you restricted it you'd end up with things like people spitting out cyno Skiffs, jumping in them, and then lighting the Cyno that way. One more question though, since you've actually introduced a reason for Rorquals to be out in a belt, why remove the tractor beam bonus? It seems like it might actually see use now.
Querns GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2509	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:28:38 - [7] - Quote The increase of the rorqual to 10 LY jump range (with JDC 5) is very much appreciated. I'm happy to see the emergent role of the rorqual as a hauler for hostile space isn't being discarded with the changes. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Cade Windstalker 567	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:28:48 - [8] - Quote Milla Goodpussy wrote: rofl the panic button is a consumable.. the rorqual is soo fawked not everyone in regions will be able to use this.. you killed the rorqual fozzie.. you really have.. unless you add some more power to this thing.. its nothing but a Super and Titans' snicker bar. miners better get your snickers candies now. If you don't have the money or logistics to get a replacement module for this thing then you probably shouldn't be fielding a 2b ISK mining ship in the first place... just stick to the Orca.
Nasar Vyron S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore 153	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:41:07 - [9] - Quote The rorq/ships that are under panic would have to be allowed to light a cyno else the entire point of the module goes out the window since if the enemy fleet is upon you, there is little to no chance a response fleet would actually make it to you in time before it wore off without being bridged/jumping on top of you. I still have massive feelings against requiring this ship to siege to provide max boosts (removing the tractor bonus to boot, so now even the haulers have to slow boat to your static position). It's yield is pretty dang high for a single ship so that gives it reason to be in a belt, but not so much to actually want to siege still. The risk is still far too high for nearly every region in the game to do so. We will have to wait and see how it plays out I guess. Can you please tell us the speed of these new drones? Because if they're anything like the current mining drones they may have that much yield a minute but we may be looking at 2-5 minute round trips. So that great yield turns very ******, very quickly.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 14486	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:41:20 - [10] - Quote Milla Goodpussy wrote: rofl the panic button is a consumable. It's not a consumable. It burns out like an overheated module and can be repaired with nanite paste, for free with a structure tether, or in a station. Cade Windstalker wrote: Does the jump restriction on PANIC'd ships include Wormholes? Yes Cade Windstalker wrote: What happens if a ship under PANIC is bumped out of the initial range? The effect keeps running no matter what happens with the ship ranges (just like command bursts). Cade Windstalker wrote: [Have you considered making a mass change to ships under the effects of PANIC? Considered it, but it would lead to some odd bumping edge cases. Cade Windstalker wrote: Are there any restrictions between a PANIC module and the Industrial Core? Does being PANIC'd block refitting from Mobile Depots or other ships? Nope and nope. Cade Windstalker wrote: Does the PANIC module burn out at the start of the cycle or the end? I ask because if it's the start I foresee someone hitting it and immediately refitting another in via Mobile Depot. The burnout works just like the emergency hull energizer modules. Cade Windstalker wrote: Does being PANIC'd affect mining yield? Mining remains unaffected. Cade Windstalker wrote: What happens if a PANIC'd ship drops fleet, disconnects, ect? They'll sit there. Once started the effect lives on the affected ship and doesn't care about fleet or character status. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie


Zira Happy Ape ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:43:32 - [11] - Quote I believe the industrial core will not be used much following the change. I understand the purpose of the change, and the logic that everything is EVE has to carry some risk. But a Rorqual is a 3 billions ISK ship. And you can give it all the tanking and P.A.N.I.C mode you want, when a 50 men gang of T3 cruisers will arrive in the belt your 3 bil ship will be dead. And the 7.5 minutes of invulnerability will not help (especially if cynos are not allowed to be lit, nobody will have time to formup and jump several gates in such a short time). Maybe you will see some industrial cores running during peak time (evenings in EU and US TZ, Weekends) when there is a chance a fleet can come to defend, but most of the time it will not be used. I like this change, but unless the price of the Rorqual drops significantly (let's say, 800M for the hull) there's no way I will use it with the industrical core... :)
Kismeteer Bat Country Pandemic Legion 887	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:49:55 - [12] - Quote Thank you for increasing the hold and the jump range on the Rorqual, this might make combat logistics livable again!
ISD Max Trix isd community communications liaisons 377	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:52:01 - [13] - Quote Removed a post of being off topic. This is a thread about the coming changes to the Rorqual not a thread about Cloak Camping. ISD Max Trix Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department *I do not respond to Evemails.*
Joten Koldani Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:59:07 - [14] - Quote I always mined w/ my Rorqual @ 0 anyway! Fax alts ftw! BUT I HAVE TO KNOW. CAN THE EXCAVATORS MINE GAS? WANT TO DOUBLE MY BLUEPILL EMPIRE TO 32 TOWERS KKTHX. -Koldani
Coelomate Gilliomate Corp 55	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:59:23 - [15] - Quote Perhaps consider removing the drone mining bonus from the industrial core, and then compensate by further increasing the command bonus it provides. The optimal setup isn't going to be rorq + fleet, it's going to be a gigantic fleet of rorqs all using siege to clear the entire belt/anom in one cycle. This will generate billions of isk per hour for multiboxers, and the risk will be tiny considering the rorqs can be cyno'd around citadels, logged on after a scout sets up bookmarks, and logged off after pulling in infinity ore. If the siege module gives crazy bonuses to other ships, it might coax expensive toys onto the field for mining op. Content! If the siege module turns the rorq into a mining ship that is 5x better than any other mining ship, it's going to get immediately and permanently multiboxed to death. Love, ~Coelomate
Samantha Udan Rubicon Mining and Manufacturing 2	Posted - 2016.10.04 17:59:45 - [16] - Quote Has there been any review with allowing the Rorqual into High sec?
Aldran Gentlharp I Maicar Mordo Invictum. 6	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:01:32 - [17] - Quote basicaly i like the changes of the rorqual and the stats of the panic module exept one thing. Preventing all affected ships from warp makes this panic module and the rorqual rather useless.
Sue Post The Scope Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:07:30 - [18] - Quote Really would like to see this ship in High sec too - or give the orca / or a new style high sec mining capital - the same stats for mining in high sec.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 551	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:10:19 - [19] - Quote From Devblog (and your post): Quote: Industrial Core II: [...] +500% Drone mining yield -80% Drone ice harvesting duration +500% means factor 6 (1 + 5 = 6) -80% means factor 5 (1 / 0.2 = 5) Intended?
Aker Krane OMEGADYNE LABS Rising Darkness 25	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:10:42 - [20] - Quote If a Rorqual can fit through a WH with similar mass to a freighter....then it is possible to bring them into HS. Is that intentional?

Kole Rollard Astrotech Syndicate DRONE WALKERS 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:15:52 - [21] - Quote I love this change, the booster pilot will actually have to play the game to some extent. couple of things. 1. What is the bandwith of the GÇÿExcavatorGÇÖ Mining Superdrones ? I assume 25mbits? 2. Does the panic button make the rorqual invulnerable too? 3. I don't really understand the need to freeze the mining ships, surely they warp out quickly enough to make it a moot point? Unless of course you are not watching intel/local etc. If someone warps into your mining fleet in a belt you must be doing something wrong right?
Zintex The Dead Councle's Revenge 7	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:16:03 - [22] - Quote when will it be on the test server for players to play around with the new stuff
Frostdragon Dallocort EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:20:43 - [23] - Quote The problem with the changes is that it only helps large corporations as they will have the resources and combat pilots to help a besieged Rorqual. Most large corporations also have large regions of space that they control and should have ample warning to get their operations to safety. Smaller corporations that have Rorquals in places like Syndicate are screwed. Basicically CCP is charging ahead regardless of smaller organizations just as long as they please the Sov corps. So will smaller corps get refunds on their Rorquals and skill points. I can hit the "panic " button all I want in syndicate but no helps coming.
Grimulfr Meinfertr CAS Traitors CAStabouts 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:20:48 - [24] - Quote This still does nothing to address large scale fleet boosting for newer players just getting into the game. This is a huge boost for players with 10 accounts mining in high sec (aka locust fleets) but useless for open mining fleets such as CASMA as it completely cripples the ability of their fleet boosters to provide a boost to all of their miners (unless players all crowd into one asteroid belt and the boosters constantly micromanage the whole thing). This is going to make life far more difficult for new players to get the isk necessary to get started in the game. This is a SAD day for the solo single account miner.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3112	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:21:26 - [25] - Quote Hold up guys...you hear that? It's the sound of a thousand Russian renters stripping entire regions clean in a day.
Evira Ryuken Das Raumfahrer Syndikat The Volition Cult 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:26:39 - [26] - Quote When we can try the changes on sisi?
Lord Bistro Ullr Juggernauts Of Annihilation The Volition Cult 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:26:43 - [27] - Quote This is the way i thought mining worked when i got my first Orca. When we got hotdropped i learned you did not have to boost on grid. Now things are going back to the way i thought they were when i trained for capital industry. Thank you CCP for getting the Orcas and Rorquals out of the POS. Now i might actually need to use my cap industry ships, instead of bumming boosts out of a POS. About the cyno. If the PANIC module stops miners from lighting cyno it should stop EVERYONE from lighting a cyno. A Rorqual fleet should not have to watch 100 capitals/cov ops jump in while their friends can't. How would the mining fleet keep a cyno up after that? It does not take long for a few supers to destroy everything on grid. Cyno lighting should be equal for both parties, not one sided. Thanks -Lord Bistro Ullr
Adaahh Gee Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 161	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:28:22 - [28] - Quote One option for high sec would be the reduction/removal of some bonuses if operated in high sec, taking it below Orca for bonus, but allowing it to gate jump to high sec for moving ships around or passing from region to region.
xioshin kaiire Corwan Academy Kanen Federation 1	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:29:30 - [29] - Quote Are you guys going to allow the Rorqual in HighSec? There's a drastic difference between a drone Orca mining yield being the equivalent of an exhumer and a drone Rorqual mining yield being the equivalent of 5 exhumers. ** Yes, mining in NS/LS is higher risk so should = higher reward. But looking over the numbers, an Orca = 1 exhumer yield vs a Rorqual = 5 exhumer yield is a pretty large gap!
Adaahh Gee Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 161	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:29:45 - [30] - Quote Also, will the Rorqual still be limited to carrying only industrial ships in it's ship hanger? As a good defense option is for people to reship to combat ships if you get jumped.

Sal Askiras Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 16	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:29:54 - [31] - Quote Aker Krane wrote: If a Rorqual can fit through a WH with similar mass to a freighter....then it is possible to bring them into HS. Is that intentional? Cap ships can already jump though some WH, and are still unable to enter HS.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 551	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:31:45 - [32] - Quote Frostdragon Dallocort wrote: The problem with the changes is that it only helps large corporations as they will have the resources and combat pilots to help a besieged Rorqual. Most large corporations also have large regions of space that they control and should have ample warning to get their operations to safety. Smaller corporations that have Rorquals in places like Syndicate are screwed. Basicically CCP is charging ahead regardless of smaller organizations just as long as they please the Sov corps. So will smaller corps get refunds on their Rorquals and skill points. I can hit the "panic " button all I want in syndicate but no helps coming. Rorqual Insurance Payout after cost: ~1.8b. Rorqual hull price: ~2.3b. Rorqual fit n such: ~500m? Rorqual Yield: ~250-400m ISK/hr or something like that Time to pay it off, calculating it's gonna explode sooner or later: 3 hours. "Buh-huh, little people can't use it!"
Samantha Udan Rubicon Mining and Manufacturing 2	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:35:11 - [33] - Quote Adaahh Gee wrote: One option for high sec would be the reduction/removal of some bonuses if operated in high sec, taking it below Orca for bonus, but allowing it to gate jump to high sec for moving ships around or passing from region to region. What's the point on using a Rorqual then if a Orca has better boosts and cheaper? I would like to see it be able to come to high sec because without having a large defence fleet to back it up you would have to be crazy to use this on grid in null.
Joten Koldani Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:37:51 - [34] - Quote Never not mine at zero. Stuff like this happens: https://zkillboard.com/related/30000311/201609211300/
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 451	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:40:10 - [35] - Quote Grimulfr Meinfertr wrote: This still does nothing to address large scale fleet boosting for newer players just getting into the game. This is a huge boost for players with 10 accounts mining in high sec (aka locust fleets) but useless for open mining fleets such as CASMA as it completely cripples the ability of their fleet boosters to provide a boost to all of their miners (unless players all crowd into one asteroid belt and the boosters constantly micromanage the whole thing). This is going to make life far more difficult for new players to get the isk necessary to get started in the game. This is a SAD day for the solo single account miner. Boosters are part of the active fleet. Instead of 1 person benefiting a whole system, now you have an opportunity to provide active gameplay for CASMA with multiple people filling that role for each mining operation in progress. Seems like a much better role for an actual EVE player to fill vs. someone who logs on in the morning and sits AFK all day...
Adaahh Gee Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 161	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:43:52 - [36] - Quote Samantha Udan wrote: Adaahh Gee wrote: One option for high sec would be the reduction/removal of some bonuses if operated in high sec, taking it below Orca for bonus, but allowing it to gate jump to high sec for moving ships around or passing from region to region. What's the point on using a Rorqual then if a Orca has better boosts and cheaper? I would like to see it be able to come to high sec because without having a large defence fleet to back it up you would have to be crazy to use this on grid in null. It would give it the same option as a jump freighter, where you cyno to a high sec gate and jump through, or to a low sec station and warp to high sec gate. Useful for logistics of moving ore/mining fleet between areas, but not used as an OP miner in high sec.
Leeloo Killik Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN 71	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:46:04 - [37] - Quote So, If I mine the best null ice, I can basically make 1.7B per hour with just Rorqual
xioshin kaiire Corwan Academy Kanen Federation 1	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:46:21 - [38] - Quote Sue Post wrote: Really would like to see this ship in High sec too - or give the orca / or a new style high sec mining capital - the same stats for mining in high sec. Yeah I'm having a hard time agreeing with the Rorqual having the mining yield of 5 exhumers and the Orca having the mining yield of 1 exhumer. While the Rorqual isn't allowed in HS. I understand the needed gap between NS and HS mining but 5:1 is a broken gap differential.
Zifrian Distortion. Circle-Of-Two 1779	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:47:30 - [39] - Quote All these changes really aren't any different than what you said a few months ago. Why the long wait to get a dev blog out? Anyway, I wasn't really impressed then and not now either. The jump changes and orca buffs are nice but, maybe I'm missing something but the Rorq is still pretty boring to fly and doesn't support a dedicated pilot to use. Most people will still use Alts due to the cost and literal boring gameplay. While the drone bonus is nice, it still just sitting there doing little (Yes, I get that mining isn't exciting already). As far as the core, if you are set on five minutes of immobility, then at least reduce the timer to 3-4min on a tech 2 variant. I doubt anyone is going to use it much because it's an easy kill. You should be able to cyno under the effect of panic. Hot drop fleets are common, and defending against one should be common also. If you mine seven systems away from friendly fleets, they'll never make it to you to defend in time but a hostile fleet could jump on you immediately. Overall, I guess I was hoping for more but this is about what I expected, changes to existing items and bonuses but not much else. Not interested in mining anymore honestly and this doesn't nothing for me. GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do.GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie Industry guy, third-party developer, jack-of-all-trades - master of none Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!
Zifrian Distortion. Circle-Of-Two 1779	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:55:14 - [40] - Quote Leeloo Killik wrote: So, If I mine the best null ice, I can basically make 1.7B per hour with just Rorqual Until several people do it and the markets crash. All this bonus yield to mining will just be ate in the market and we'll all reach a new price equilibrium. There needs to be more skill involved in mining yield and these changes don't do it. GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do.GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie Industry guy, third-party developer, jack-of-all-trades - master of none Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Aliana Heartborne Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 26	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:56:45 - [41] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Grimulfr Meinfertr wrote: This still does nothing to address large scale fleet boosting for newer players just getting into the game. This is a huge boost for players with 10 accounts mining in high sec (aka locust fleets) but useless for open mining fleets such as CASMA as it completely cripples the ability of their fleet boosters to provide a boost to all of their miners (unless players all crowd into one asteroid belt and the boosters constantly micromanage the whole thing). This is going to make life far more difficult for new players to get the isk necessary to get started in the game. This is a SAD day for the solo single account miner. Boosters are part of the active fleet. Instead of 1 person benefiting a whole system, now you have an opportunity to provide active gameplay for CASMA with multiple people filling that role for each mining operation in progress. Seems like a much better role for an actual EVE player to fill vs. someone who logs on in the morning and sits AFK all day... The problem with casual/social fleets like CASMA is that the skills are low for most people as they are new players, so a lot of the job falls to a few people, not just in terms of boosting but also helping the new people not leave in a rage because they get murdered at every corner. In my case i don't have the time to or energy to be active much, so for me personally ill just drop down to alpha clone most likely and do nothing but help people with information in terms of chat which really takes out a bit of the fun The largest thing CCP fails to realise is that it is a social/casual fleets doesnt have any tools to help lessen the load of boosters and organizers, like we cant even see how much stuff how much a single person mines reliably as the fleet history log is a joke, and if you DC these horrible logs are lost as well because no autosaving like every other log. Now CCP please improve the new player experience ;s
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 2389	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:57:54 - [42] - Quote Grimulfr Meinfertr wrote: This still does nothing to address large scale fleet boosting for newer players just getting into the game. Did you think it was going to? The intent of completely removing system-wide boosting, and all the consequential changes implied therein, was made absolutely crystal clear. It wasn't addressed because it's intended. Not everything that gets changed or removed gets a replacement. Quote: This is going to make life far more difficult for new players to get the isk necessary to get started in the game. This is a SAD day for the solo single account miner. If you really care about the welfare of the solo single account newbie, maybe steer them toward something other than the most dreadfully boring and horrendously slow means of making isk available. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Aker Krane OMEGADYNE LABS Rising Darkness 25	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:59:13 - [43] - Quote Sal Askiras wrote: Aker Krane wrote: If a Rorqual can fit through a WH with similar mass to a freighter....then it is possible to bring them into HS. Is that intentional? Cap ships can already jump though some WH, and are still unable to enter HS. True, but the largest ship you can get through a HS hole is a freighter 1 B jumpable mass. Other capitals (Current Rorq included) cannot pass through to get into HS (they are greater than 1B jumpable mass). A Rorqual at 800M jumpable (new stats) mass can come through those holes. Frankly I think this is awesome. By making these changes to the Rorqu, you have to allow them in HS also. If you did not, high end mats would collapse and low ends would skyrocket. Well played Fozzie!
Zappity Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 3024	Posted - 2016.10.04 18:59:57 - [44] - Quote I wish the Rorqual super drones were fighters. The fighter interface is soooo much better than the drone interface and is much more fun to use. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Soldarius O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore 1533	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:00:07 - [45] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Milla Goodpussy wrote: rofl the panic button is a consumable. It's not a consumable. It burns out like an overheated module and can be repaired with nanite paste, for free with a structure tether, or in a station. You cannot repair burned out modules with nanite paste. But I get your point. It can be repaired. Also, 6000m3 drone bay? Holy crap. What in the name all that is holy are you gonna do with a 6000m3 drone bay, when you can only field 125Mb of it at a time? Sure that's not a typo? 600 maybe? http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 552	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:00:24 - [46] - Quote Aker Krane wrote: Sal Askiras wrote: Aker Krane wrote: If a Rorqual can fit through a WH with similar mass to a freighter....then it is possible to bring them into HS. Is that intentional? Cap ships can already jump though some WH, and are still unable to enter HS. True, but the largest ship you can get through a HS hole is a freighter 1 B jumpable mass. Other capitals (Current Rorq included) cannot pass through to get into HS (they are greater than 1B jumpable mass). A Rorqual at 800M jumpable (new stats) mass can come through those holes. Frankly I think this is awesome. By making these changes to the Rorqu, you have to allow them in HS also. If you did not, high end mats would collapse and low ends would skyrocket. Well played Fozzie! Why would lowends skyrocket?
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 305	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:01:27 - [47] - Quote Please Increase Heavy water in nullsec ice and reduce the ozone please!
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 2389	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:04:45 - [48] - Quote Soldarius wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Milla Goodpussy wrote: rofl the panic button is a consumable. It's not a consumable. It burns out like an overheated module and can be repaired with nanite paste, for free with a structure tether, or in a station. You cannot repair burned out modules with nanite paste. But I get your point. It can be repaired. Also, 6000m3 drone bay? Holy crap. What in the name all that is holy are you gonna do with a 6000m3 drone bay, when you can only field 125Mb of it at a time? Sure that's not a typo? 600 maybe? I don't really see any reason why there would have to be an inherent relationship between m3 and MB, even if they normally are the same value. Excavators could have substantially larger volume, would be my guess. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Grace Tolentino Pilipino Corp Circle-Of-Two 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:05:34 - [49] - Quote Adaahh Gee wrote: Also, will the Rorqual still be limited to carrying only industrial ships in it's ship hanger? As a good defense option is for people to reship to combat ships if you get jumped. I would also like a change to grant the Rorqual the ability to carry other ship types. Is there a reason why they shouldnt ? It would also give the Rorq the added value of being a ship transporter; something every other capital ship can do.
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 346	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:09:45 - [50] - Quote Tiercide: full speed astern! With that mining yield, all other ships are outright useless.

Zappity Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 3024	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:09:58 - [51] - Quote PANIC absolutely must allow a cyno to be lit. Why would you restrict a response fleet to subcaps? It doesn't make sense for a capital ship's defence to be limited to subcaps. Just silly to not allow a max defence. Have you considered bringing back mining sigs? Being stationary for 5 min at an anomaly or belt is a hell of an ask. As someone who is more onto PvP than mining (as in no mining at all) I would like to see them return. Mining sigs would strongly encourage use of the siege module and be more interesting for hunters as well as miners. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Aldran Gentlharp I Maicar Mordo Invictum. 7	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:12:53 - [52] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Also, 6000m3 drone bay? Holy crap. What in the name all that is holy are you gonna do with a 6000m3 drone bay, when you can only field 125Mb of it at a time? Sure that's not a typo? 600 maybe? I think 6000 is a good ammount you need to think about that the drones are the rorquals dps. and 3 or 4 sets of combat drones are fast killed
TheSmokingHertog Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium 431	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:13:57 - [53] - Quote cant we get the Rorq in HS without core support? "Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X "Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron -= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 346	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:14:31 - [54] - Quote And you folks seriously under-estimate the safety of deep nullsec. The drone regions once supplied dirt-cheap minerals, and looks like the history's repeating.
Joten Koldani Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:15:45 - [55] - Quote But FC: Can it mine gas?
Vivace Naaris OpSec. Wrong Hole. 2	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:17:22 - [56] - Quote How does CCP intend to balance large fleets of Rorquals such that attackers don't land to a gang of Rorquals that can essentially perma-P.A.N.I.C. each other? It sounds a little over the top in my train of thought but... well miners will be miners.
Aldran Gentlharp I Maicar Mordo Invictum. 8	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:18:52 - [57] - Quote the panic doesn't affect other rorquals
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 347	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:23:27 - [58] - Quote Samantha Udan wrote: Has there been any review with allowing the Rorqual into High sec? Oh yeah. And mine in NPC corp with 100% defense from wardecs, suicide gankers and even bumpers. Ah, the dreams!
MicDeath Titan Titans Guild The Amish Mafia 119	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:25:14 - [59] - Quote With the mining super drones being drones, it allows for large scale multiboxing, if they are switched to mining fighters instead, it would limit how many a single person can reasonably field. During the introduction of fighters it was shown ships can have both fighters and drones out at once and function just fine. for the overall health of the mining industry please switch the super drones to fighters. On another side of the coin, thank you for giving the mining drones high mining volume for the rorqual, this will average out and function just fine due to the nature of mining drones of distance traveled, dump ore state, return to mining state, and orbiting. On paper the amount seems absurd, but real world use will see the numbers average out to lower amounts. If players wish to get the most and best of the best, hugging 'roids at 0m just gives attacking forces a means of locking down a Rorqual by pinning it against the 'roid. A great example of risk vs reward in play. As a Rorqual pilot I do approve of these changes. Slots 5 lows instead of 4 would open a much larger spectrum of fitting options. Armor fits, super hulk tankers, extra regen items to support logi functions, etc. With 3 or 4 it really limits it down to a select few modules. Reducing the high slots to compensate for the 5th would work great.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 452	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:29:01 - [60] - Quote Aliana Heartborne wrote: Obil Que wrote: Grimulfr Meinfertr wrote: This still does nothing to address large scale fleet boosting for newer players just getting into the game. This is a huge boost for players with 10 accounts mining in high sec (aka locust fleets) but useless for open mining fleets such as CASMA as it completely cripples the ability of their fleet boosters to provide a boost to all of their miners (unless players all crowd into one asteroid belt and the boosters constantly micromanage the whole thing). This is going to make life far more difficult for new players to get the isk necessary to get started in the game. This is a SAD day for the solo single account miner. Boosters are part of the active fleet. Instead of 1 person benefiting a whole system, now you have an opportunity to provide active gameplay for CASMA with multiple people filling that role for each mining operation in progress. Seems like a much better role for an actual EVE player to fill vs. someone who logs on in the morning and sits AFK all day... The problem with casual/social fleets like CASMA is that the skills are low for most people as they are new players, so a lot of the job falls to a few people, not just in terms of boosting but also helping the new people not leave in a rage because they get murdered at every corner. In my case i don't have the time to or energy to be active much, so for me personally ill just drop down to alpha clone most likely and do nothing but help people with information in terms of chat which really takes out a bit of the fun The largest thing CCP fails to realise is that it is a social/casual fleets doesnt have any tools to help lessen the load of boosters and organizers, like we cant even see how much stuff how much a single person mines reliably as the fleet history log is a joke, and if you DC these horrible logs are lost as well because no autosaving like every other log. Now CCP please improve the new player experience ;s There was a lot of information in the devblog but if you are looking at newer players, the Porpoise does appear to fill that role with a lower skill requirement than an Orca for high-sec boosting. CCP is handing you a progression by which players can train and provide a valuable skill while participating in the mining fleet. I can appreciate the position as organizier looking to provide a service to new players but a better service is being provided by CCP by giving players in the boosting role an active role thereby filling it with an active player instead of a passive organizer.

Aldran Gentlharp I Maicar Mordo Invictum. 8	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:32:27 - [61] - Quote There is another Thing that bothers me. Get the Excavation drones a rework to? right now they need a bandwith of 200 so no ship can launch them. And after the Patch the Rorqual is stil not able to launch them.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3624	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:37:31 - [62] - Quote This new module requires a new rank 8 skill called Invulnerability Core Operation that requires Tactical Shield Manipulation level 5 and Capital Shield Emission Systems level 3 to train. CCP, Please look at Tactical Shield Manipulation. Right now training this skill actually hurts any passive shield tanking because the closer you are to 30% shield the higher your regeneration rate. So by making TSM V a requirement you are asking people to train a NEGATIVE skill. The fact it's a negative skill to train in the first place is silly, since to maximise your passive shield tank you actually want it to start to leak as close to peak regen as possible, so any skill levels in this skill past 1 actually hurt your tank (you just use faction mods at 1 rather than T2).
Grace Tolentino Pilipino Corp Circle-Of-Two 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:37:39 - [63] - Quote Since compression arrays are common together with citadels and the new industrial structures, would it be unreasonable to let the rorq compress ore without activating the core ? The reality is no one will field a rorq in hostile space anyway so a compression option will probably be available in the home space where you are mining, and thus, compression will be available to your fleet even without using the core. why not just let the rorq compress right on the spot ? This would certainly help the 1st pillar of the mining foreman.
Kaaeliaa Tyrathlion Interstellar Rote Kapelle 96456	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:43:13 - [64] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: This new module requires a new rank 8 skill called Invulnerability Core Operation that requires Tactical Shield Manipulation level 5 and Capital Shield Emission Systems level 3 to train. CCP, Please look at Tactical Shield Manipulation. Right now training this skill actually hurts any passive shield tanking because the closer you are to 30% shield the higher your regeneration rate. So by making TSM V a requirement you are asking people to train a NEGATIVE skill. The fact it's a negative skill to train in the first place is silly, since to maximise your passive shield tank you actually want it to start to leak as close to peak regen as possible, so any skill levels in this skill past 1 actually hurt your tank (you just use faction mods at 1 rather than T2). 100% agreed. TSM is ludicrously counter-intuitive to shield mechanics and could use a look. Not that I think too many people will be rushing to fly Rorquals and using the PANIC module, but I suppose this is a good time to bring that skill to attention.
Aliana Heartborne Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 26	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:44:26 - [65] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Aliana Heartborne wrote: ... There was a lot of information in the devblog but if you are looking at newer players, the Porpoise does appear to fill that role with a lower skill requirement than an Orca for high-sec boosting. CCP is handing you a progression by which players can train and provide a valuable skill while participating in the mining fleet. I can appreciate the position as organizier looking to provide a service to new players but a better service is being provided by CCP by giving players in the boosting role an active role thereby filling it with an active player instead of a passive organizer. 18 days just to get into the porpoise is a pretty big investment for newer players that might not even know if mining is for them in the long run. Its btw is the same time as an Orca, im a bit sleepy but the way i see it porpoise is only there if you dont want so risk the iskies the orca costs
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3624	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:50:15 - [66] - Quote Vivace Naaris wrote: How does CCP intend to balance large fleets of Rorquals such that attackers don't land to a gang of Rorquals that can essentially perma-P.A.N.I.C. each other? It sounds a little over the top in my train of thought but... well miners will be miners. It's already blocked. PANIC will only do 'yourself plus subcaps/orca's'. Not other Rorquals in fleet.
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 347	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:54:47 - [67] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: This new module requires a new rank 8 skill called Invulnerability Core Operation that requires Tactical Shield Manipulation level 5 and Capital Shield Emission Systems level 3 to train. CCP, Please look at Tactical Shield Manipulation. Right now training this skill actually hurts any passive shield tanking because the closer you are to 30% shield the higher your regeneration rate. So by making TSM V a requirement you are asking people to train a NEGATIVE skill. The fact it's a negative skill to train in the first place is silly, since to maximise your passive shield tank you actually want it to start to leak as close to peak regen as possible, so any skill levels in this skill past 1 actually hurt your tank (you just use faction mods at 1 rather than T2). I have no idea what you're talking about. But you have skill extractors.
Khaelian Osiris Deviate 1	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:55:39 - [68] - Quote IMO the PANIC module should disable target locks and should disable impacted ships' fleet hangars from being accessed. Disable Hangar I'm envisioning the Battle Rorqual becoming much more common after this. Imagine a Rorqual and a number of DSTs loaded up with Cap Booster 3200 charges, nanite paste, ammo, whatever. The Rorqual blows the PANIC module and the DSTs are now free to offload their cargo into triage, machs, etc. Disable Lock Secondly, the Rorqual can now start repairing friendly ships while invulnerable.
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 622	Posted - 2016.10.04 19:56:28 - [69] - Quote As this is being promoted as the best mining ship ever (quite rightly btw) Here's the 3b isk question...... Will the Excavator Drones be able to mine Mercoxit? Or would we have to fit a Deep Core Strip Miner? For the best mining ship ever not to be able to use the drones for the best ore makes no sense. Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want." Welcome to EVE.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 554	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:00:13 - [70] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: As this is being promoted as the best mining ship ever (quite rightly btw) Here's the 3b isk question...... Will the Excavator Drones be able to mine Mercoxit? Or would we have to fit a Deep Core Strip Miner? For the best mining ship ever not to be able to use the drones for the best ore makes no sense. In case it can't: That's what the poor guys who can't afford a Rorqual in their Skiffs are for.

Borat Guereen Chao3 Chao3 Alliance 68	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:01:58 - [71] - Quote Zira Happy Ape wrote: nobody will have time to form up and jump several gates in such a short time)... You are right for the large alliances that waste space by not really using it and living in it. For those living in it, 5mn to 7mn is plenty enough to scramble a defense force. Join our Minarchist Revolution!
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 347	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:03:02 - [72] - Quote Grace Tolentino wrote: Since compression arrays are common together with citadels and the new industrial structures, would it be unreasonable to let the rorq compress ore without activating the core ? The reality is no one will field a rorq in hostile space anyway so a compression option will probably be available in the home space where you are mining, and thus, compression will be available to your fleet even without using the core. why not just let the rorq compress right on the spot ? This would certainly help the 1st pillar of the mining foreman. This makes sense. Alternatively, they can nerf stationary compression equipment. Tbh, I prefer the later.
Khaelian Osiris Deviate 1	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:03:49 - [73] - Quote I feel like CCP is honestly going a bit overboard on the mining power of this ship. If they are going to be able to eat ore at such a ridiculous rate, can we at least make it not be passive? Make the Excavator drones drop their ore in cans. Now the Rorqual pilot will have to actively tractor in the cans for 5 different drones at the same time. If you'd rather save the slots for something other than a tractor beam, you could always park a Noctis next to the Rorqual. They've been needing a decent role lately.
Kreimhild IMPERIAL EAGLE 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:03:52 - [74] - Quote This does nothing but boost the corporations that have the resources and pilots to protect or replace such an asset. I understand that you want to add more risk vs. reward to the mining experience but that's not what is going to happen. This will chase even more mid-range and small corporations back into high sec space. This helps the already annoying one person locust fleets of 16 alts blobbed around a freighter in high sec space. Now for a corporation to even get a foothold in low sec they are going to need billions of ISK to replace the ships they know they are going to lose. So the orca will become a high sec dream ship for locust fleets and the rorqual will be a distant dream for smaller corporations. In all fairness this should come with a refund of skill points. I've invested millions of skill points and several months into something that has now become virtually useless to me. I now won't be able to use a Rorqual because neither I nor my corp can afford to replace it every few days. With these changes I will probably end up dropping at least 2 of my accounts and probably more when it's all said and done. For those saying that I was just afk on my boost pilot couldn't be more wrong. I do box my accounts but they all have separate inputs from me and are all in full view at all times. I almost feel like I deserve a refund of my subscription fees and no, I don't generally plex my accounts. I pay for them.
probag Bear Xiong Offices 93	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:04:31 - [75] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: I have no idea what you're talking about. The skill Tactical Shield Manipulation is actually detrimental. Training it is bad. It makes your ship / fit weaker. Skia Aumer wrote: But you have skill extractors. Having TSM V is a pre-requisite for using the Rorqual's Industrial Core (by the way, the Rorqual is a shield-tanked ship). You cannot both extract this skill - to avoids its negative effects - and use a Rorqual.
Kaaeliaa Tyrathlion Interstellar Rote Kapelle 96460	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:12:31 - [76] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: This new module requires a new rank 8 skill called Invulnerability Core Operation that requires Tactical Shield Manipulation level 5 and Capital Shield Emission Systems level 3 to train. CCP, Please look at Tactical Shield Manipulation. Right now training this skill actually hurts any passive shield tanking because the closer you are to 30% shield the higher your regeneration rate. So by making TSM V a requirement you are asking people to train a NEGATIVE skill. The fact it's a negative skill to train in the first place is silly, since to maximise your passive shield tank you actually want it to start to leak as close to peak regen as possible, so any skill levels in this skill past 1 actually hurt your tank (you just use faction mods at 1 rather than T2). I have no idea what you're talking about. But you have skill extractors. Peak shield recharge is at ~30-33%, it falls off progressively underneath that. In a lot of cases, especially in passive shield fits, bleeding the damage to hull is actually a better option. TSM preventing the bleed hurts you in a lot more situations than it helps you. The only reason it's taken to 4 is for access to T2 hardeners/AIFs, because the skill levels themselves are a net negative. This is counter-intuitive to what you'd think, and that's why TSM is bad.
Am Staff Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 6	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:14:43 - [77] - Quote you should not be allowed to cyno while under the P.AN.I.C Function as this will just aid in the cyno been put up and a hostile cap fleet being able to jump in and defend the Rorq that is being attacked and there is nothing you can do about it. So basically in 2 words "It's Broken" Am Staff
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1718	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:19:01 - [78] - Quote Jezus multiboxing Rorquals are going to be a thing now. I'm already seeing orders from people ordering 7 of these things at a time. I love all these changes when they're applied to single characters, but I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals with T2 industrial cores and strips and entire system in no-time. This might be a bit too much. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 347	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:21:41 - [79] - Quote Kaaeliaa wrote: Peak shield recharge is at ~30-33%, it falls off progressively underneath that. In a lot of cases, especially in passive shield fits, bleeding the damage to hull is actually a better option. TSM preventing the bleed hurts you in a lot more situations than it helps you. Ah, this. Afaik, the bleed is so miserable that you dont feel it anyway. probag Bear wrote: Having TSM V is a pre-requisite for using the Rorqual's Industrial Core (by the way, the Rorqual is a shield-tanked ship). You cannot both extract this skill - to avoids its negative effects - and use a Rorqual. You only need the skill itself, not prereqs.
Quriel Arjar School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 7	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:24:10 - [80] - Quote I am worried that with these changes Orca will outclass all exhumers as a high-sec mining ship. Sure, it will most probably have smaller yield than Mackinaw and Skiff, but it won't have to leave the belt for an hour, if not more, because of truly massive ore hold (Mackinaw is already crying in the corner) and won't care about gankers that much, because of giant tank (Skiff is getting mad). For a price of lesser yield, it's a little too good. In case of Rorqual this is non-issue, because of it not being able to go to high-sec (so, more importantly, Concord home).

Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 348	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:24:56 - [81] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50.
Dirk Stetille Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 8	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:36:34 - [82] - Quote In my opinion, these changes will be interesting to play with, and I'm especially hyped for the Porpoise for wormhole gas and ice mining operations - also curious to see how we will be able to apply the Porpoise for use in PvP. That said, I think the ability to use cynosural field generators whilst under the influence of a Rorqual's P.A.N.I.C. module will be exceptionally overpowered. In effect, it allows a cynosural beacon to be lit whilst also stopping attacking forces from primarying the cyno ship to prevent hostile forces, potentially including supercarriers and titans, from jumping in. This allows null-sec players a decided advantage over wormholers, above and beyond the current advantages they enjoy. Not only do wormholers not have the ability to own super-capital class vessels, but in general, we are prevented from excessive n-plus-one gameplay by mass restrictions. Our only counters currently to capital-class warfare when out in K-space are to deploy a mobile cynosural inhibitor (which only functions when deployed BEFORE the cyno is lit, and does not shut off an already active beacon), or to kill the cyno ship before anything jumps through, a difficult enough task already. This does not need an additional challenge added to it by making the cyno ship invulnerable for the majority of a beacon cycle. I would suggest that if you insist upon allowing ships protected by P.A.N.I.C. to light a cyno, the activation of that beacon should automatically end the protection that P.A.N.I.C. provides - basically, if you light a cyno, it should be possible for you to lose that ship.
Basil Vulpine Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass 69	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:49:45 - [83] - Quote Two things, First a consistency question. Going from T1 Siege -> T2 siege in a dread is the same amount of base stront usage despite the module having better effects. Going from T1 Triage -> T2 Triage in a fax is actually a reduction in base stront usage despite the module having better effects. For the industrial core going from T1 -> T2 is a 50% increase in activation cost? I get that there's some differences in usage pattern since in theory if you are sieging a Rorq you are going to be sieging it for a long time unlike combat capitals but that still seems a pretty hefty increase. Second (and most definitely not least!): Absolutely, positively, 100% necessary - having an entosis link active needs prevent benefiting from the PANIC module.
Scythian Revenant Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:51:07 - [84] - Quote Looks like an impressive set of changes coming up for the industrial side of things this November! As far as the Rorqual's PANIC ability and Cyno usage goes, I feel that it would be abused in more than a few situation. An example that comes to mind are large fleet fights where a 2-3 bil Rorqual can be seen as expendable as means to provide a full 5-7.5 minutes of cyno invulnerability. This would enable an uncontestable means to jump in a fleet into a system during an engagement and as such would provide an unfair (non-counterable) advantage to groups that have enough disposable income to sacrifice a Rorqual for each engagement. The only way to prevent this type of action within the current mechanics would be to use the cyno jammers to prevent the initiation of the cyno in the first place, which would require relying on the old POS mechanics and deployables. My recommendation would be to either not allow cyno under the protection of a PANIC field or create a new command burst type module that can be used to close active (non-covert) cyno's (within a set range of course). If you make it a command burst module it will require a dedicated slot on any command ships to utilize so forethought is required on the part of the defenders and you will need to be on grid with it to utilize the effect. This means that there is risk on both sides of the engagement and would add to the list of de-buff's that are being added to the game so no new mechanic will be needed post patch. I would suggest covert cyno's could be immune to this burst since they are immune to other jamming means and only allow a relatively limited response (Black Ops Battleships and recon-esq ships) when compared to capital ships. Just a few ideas and some feedback on the new PANIC field and how to work around the protected cyno aspects of it. Regards, Scythian Revenant
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3627	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:54:08 - [85] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: I have no idea what you're talking about. But you have skill extractors. To explain for the people who don't understand shield tanking. Shield regen is not static. It varies based on your current shield level. Your max shield regen is at about 33%, as your shields drop below 33% the passive regen actually gets less. Tactical Shield Manipulation moves your bleed through margin by 5% per skill level. Bleed through is where a small percentage of the damage to your shields actually skips shields and applies to armour. While this sounds like a bad thing, it actually helps passive shield tanking by keeping your shield regen at a higher level meaning overall you can take more damage over time. This means Tactical Shield Manipulation actually hurts your passive shield tanking the better you have it trained. I can't name a single other skill in EVE where training it makes something worse. Most people have to train this skill to 4 in order to use Tech 2 Invulns, the odd wallet warrior keeps it at 1 and only ever uses faction invulns which cost a lot more obviously, but means they get better passive tank. By making this a requirement of V, you have to put yourself in the worst possible position for passive shield tanking, and you will not be able to extract it because it is a requirement for something else, and you can't extract requirements. So no you do not have skill extractors, and it's high time CCP solved this skill being a negative to train.
Fletcher Ryan Asteroid Bluez The Amish Mafia 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:55:35 - [86] - Quote is the rorqual ship maintenance array still tied to only industrial ships?
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 1277	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:56:35 - [87] - Quote Borat Guereen wrote: Zira Happy Ape wrote: nobody will have time to form up and jump several gates in such a short time)... You are right for the large alliances that waste space by not really using it and living in it. For those living in it, 5mn to 7mn is plenty enough to scramble a defense force. I can see these getting use in pandemic horde for sure. They're defense fleets blot out the damned sun. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Anne Aymore Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 20:59:55 - [88] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. 10 rorqs multiboxed = 3B+ isk / hour.... Will Michi's and MX-1005 work on these new drones?
Chalithra Lathar Rhongomiant Legion Industries The Explicit Alliance 42	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:04:39 - [89] - Quote Anne Aymore wrote: 10 rorqs multiboxed = 3B+ isk / hour.... Will Michi's and MX-1005 work on these new drones? Pretty much this Anyone who multiboxes a mining fleet will be dumb not to drop exhumers entirely even if they're planning using the porpoise Industrial core wont be necessary with rorquals. You can just mine while aligned and put scouts 3 jumps out.
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 1277	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:04:51 - [90] - Quote Anne Aymore wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. 10 rorqs multiboxed = 3B+ isk / hour.... Will Michi's and MX-1005 work on these new drones? Not for long since the more people that do this the faster the mineral prices will crash. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Noga Taranogas Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 2	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:07:34 - [91] - Quote industrial core makes rorqual a sitting duck -add 250km cyno inhib side effect so nothing can jump in or out within it. PANIC is a massive warp disrupt zone with shield boosting for only friendlies or everything caught in the aoe? Can mining ships still attack when panic is active? Should the PANIC double as a cyno beacon (would immediately disable industrial core cyno inhib) allowing fleet members to jump/bridge to it? but the active cyno
Sanctus Maleficus Lambent Enterprises 13	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:16:27 - [92] - Quote Fletcher Ryan wrote: is the rorqual ship maintenance array still tied to only industrial ships? That is what I would like to know as well. While in panic, can miners eject from their barges and get into a combat ship in the Rorq's SMA? lol
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1718	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:19:02 - [93] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. Yes, but Rorqs are kinda expensive. Estimate a 3b pricetag for a fully fitted one including the new drones. Putting 20 of those on the field at once is pretty hefty, even for a seasoned multiboxer. There's a return on investment calculation to be made here. Sieging 20 Rorqs with the risk that an enemy fleets gets wind of it and hotdrops the entire fleet is a serious consideration (and something that is very likely to happen at least a few times in the first couple of weeks :D) My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 623	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:20:10 - [94] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. How many multiboxers do you think have 20 or 50 accounts skilled to sit in a Rorqual? How many have the drone skills ready? How many have all the other skills involved ready? Someone has posted that it will take 18 days to sit in the new Porpoise...That's all you'll do as well, you won't have skills to do anything else with it. Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want." Welcome to EVE.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1718	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:26:12 - [95] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. How many multiboxers do you think have 20 or 50 accounts skilled to sit in a Rorqual? How many have the drone skills ready? How many have all the other skills involved ready? Someone has posted that it will take 18 days to sit in the new Porpoise...That's all you'll do as well, you won't have skills to do anything else with it. There are people with way too much money and time in this game. WIth injectors you can sit in a Rorqual on day 1, so that's not the issue. There are very much people out there who will inject 20 Rorq accounts. It's not a matter of if. Multiboxing on a scale like this (10 accounts or more) has always been a ****** thing in EVE. People like that strip entire high-sec systems on a daily basis, and null is no stranger to it either. With the power the Rorq is getting now in combination with super secure backwater null systems this has the potential to seriously screw up the market. The question is, of course, is this intentional? With the Alpha's incoming it would certainly lower the barrier of entry for everyone if all items in space become 10 to 20% cheaper across the board. But as it stands I'm worried about what this is going to do to the economy. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Chalithra Lathar Rhongomiant Legion Industries The Explicit Alliance 42	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:26:52 - [96] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. How many multiboxers do you think have 20 or 50 accounts skilled to sit in a Rorqual? How many have the drone skills ready? How many have all the other skills involved ready? Someone has posted that it will take 18 days to sit in the new Porpoise...That's all you'll do as well, you won't have skills to do anything else with it. Plenty I know have been training/building in anticipation. Never underestimate the ingenuity of the industrialist.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 305	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:29:17 - [97] - Quote 20 rorqs with 2000 dps each... anything that drops is it is going to hurt hard
Ripard Teg Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy 1323	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:39:18 - [98] - Quote Maybe I missed it, but can Rorqs carry mining frigs in their SMBs? Is this change included in November? If not, it should be. It'd also be nice if Rorqs could carry noobships and shuttles in their SMBs too (for the obvious reasons), but that'd just be a nice bonus. aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1719	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:41:48 - [99] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: 20 rorqs with 2000 dps each... anything that drops is it is going to hurt hard With these kinds of targets you enter into the realm of capital and even super drops. Super carriers and Titans supported by FAX Machines really aren't going to hurt against 40k DPS. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
DCLi Ext Swift Redemption DARKNESS. 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:45:44 - [100] - Quote I think the problem that still has to be addressed is the OP of interceptor. Speed tank to drones and interdiction nullification. To get the same bonuses you now need to commit the Rorqual to a fixed position for 5 minutes intervals over hours at a time. Other ships you can align out, but this negated by the keeping mining ships in range and having to siege. This basically painting a big target on it. Risk versus reward. You cannot defend a warp in from an interceptor. There has been suggestions about countering (i.e. anti interdiciton nullified field, propulsion jam field disable all prop mods within 100 km etc). Some of these would create interesting combat uses for rorquals. I believe the best interim solution is to make consistent with carrier stream. Porpoise = Myrm Orca = Carrier Rorqual = Super Carrier (has lots of special modules as well) Give the rorqual the +5 warp strength that a super carrier has. A single interceptor cannot tackle a super carrier unless faction fit. Will need multiple interceptors to hold it there. Instead of single speed tank interceptor immune to drones (faster) while the DPS fleet sits at range. The industrial core modules need some AOE effect to be locked for 5minutes, given that it could be running for hours. Burns out or offline propulsion mods on interdiction nullified ships (this means interceptor have to choose between running props and out speed drones or be attacked by drones). There is potential for game meta using this instead of I win interceptor for big kills. This can change the risk reward potential to make using in the belts. The other thing that was not clear can industrial core run within a pos shield for compression? Hope this provokes thought.

Frauleinwunder PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:46:34 - [101] - Quote The biggest question i have is can the mine Mexocit, and will they be able to hold non-indy ships.
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 623	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:47:24 - [102] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Drago Shouna wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I'd really suggest CCP runs the numbers on a scenario where someone multiboxes 10 Rorquals 10? are you kidding me? I've never seen a proper miner with less then 20 accounts. Sometimes even 50. How many multiboxers do you think have 20 or 50 accounts skilled to sit in a Rorqual? How many have the drone skills ready? How many have all the other skills involved ready? Someone has posted that it will take 18 days to sit in the new Porpoise...That's all you'll do as well, you won't have skills to do anything else with it. There are people with way too much money and time in this game. WIth injectors you can sit in a Rorqual on day 1, so that's not the issue. There are very much people out there who will inject 20 Rorq accounts. It's not a matter of if. Multiboxing on a scale like this (10 accounts or more) has always been a **** thing in EVE. People like that strip entire high-sec systems on a daily basis, and null is no stranger to it either. With the power the Rorq is getting now in combination with super secure backwater null systems this has the potential to seriously screw up the market. The question is, of course, is this intentional? With the Alpha's incoming it would certainly lower the barrier of entry for everyone if all items in space become 10 to 20% cheaper across the board. But as it stands I'm worried about what this is going to do to the economy. Good point mate. Solecist Project*...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse* ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want." Welcome to EVE.
Frauleinwunder PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:47:57 - [103] - Quote DCLi Ext wrote: I think the problem that still has to be addressed is the OP of interceptor. Speed tank to drones and interdiction nullification. To get the same bonuses you now need to commit the Rorqual to a fixed position for 5 minutes intervals over hours at a time. Other ships you can align out, but this negated by the keeping mining ships in range and having to siege. This basically painting a big target on it. Risk versus reward. You cannot defend a warp in from an interceptor. There has been suggestions about countering (i.e. anti interdiciton nullified field, propulsion jam field disable all prop mods within 100 km etc). Some of these would create interesting combat uses for rorquals. I believe the best interim solution is to make consistent with carrier stream. Porpoise = Myrm Orca = Carrier Rorqual = Super Carrier (has lots of special modules as well) Give the rorqual the +5 warp strength that a super carrier has. A single interceptor cannot tackle a super carrier unless faction fit. Will need multiple interceptors to hold it there. Instead of single speed tank interceptor immune to drones (faster) while the DPS fleet sits at range. The industrial core modules need some AOE effect to be locked for 5minutes, given that it could be running for hours. Burns out or offline propulsion mods on interdiction nullified ships (this means interceptor have to choose between running props and out speed drones or be attacked by drones). There is potential for game meta using this instead of I win interceptor for big kills. This can change the risk reward potential to make using in the belts. The other thing that was not clear can industrial core run within a pos shield for compression? Hope this provokes thought. I like the idea of having some warp core strength.
PopeUrban El Expedicion Flames of Exile 119	Posted - 2016.10.04 21:50:54 - [104] - Quote Am Staff wrote: you should not be allowed to cyno while under the P.AN.I.C Function as this will just aid in the cyno been put up and a hostile cap fleet being able to jump in and defend the Rorq that is being attacked and there is nothing you can do about it. So basically in 2 words "It's Broken" Am Staff It's not broken, it's the only way that anyone would risk it on grid in the space its designed for. And it has to be on grid to do its job after these changes. Your only other alternative is asking combat pilots to literally just sit around and babysit a mining op, which is boring, and nobody is going to bother doing, thus nobody is going to bother fielding the rorq. If, however, you can panic invuln a whole mining fleet and light a cyno, it means your miners, and JUST your miners can operate a mining fleet with a reasonable expectation of surviving a hotdrop as long as there's backup reasonably close by. That means they can be ratting, doing a plex, murdering non-blues that happen to be nearby, or whatever they want until they're needed so they don't have to just sit there and suffer all of the boredom of mining without any of the payoffs. Without the ability to cyno, you're basically just handing the rorq to the attackers, who are already in position, have already jumped their ships in, and already have gate/station/system locked down to prevent your defenders from actually forming up to defend. Being able to cyno in a defense fleet is actually a good thing. It means people may be willing to risk an expensive ship in order to get big yields, and creates content by presenting a juicy target to be attacked and defended, which in turn creates content for everyone else.
Eternity Mistseeker Renegades of Eve Aureus Alae 28	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:09:20 - [105] - Quote Of course people are going to multibox these, why would they bother with an exhumer? As with exhumers they'll just eat the losses. Rorquals (and orcas) insure a lot better then exhumers...
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3113	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:16:33 - [106] - Quote CCP please bring back spudzilla. The Rorqual needs a true nemesis.
Joten Koldani Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:17:47 - [107] - Quote But the real question is: Can it mine gas?
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3113	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:20:52 - [108] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Ncc 1709 wrote: 20 rorqs with 2000 dps each... anything that drops is it is going to hurt hard With these kinds of targets you enter into the realm of capital and even super drops. Super carriers and Titans supported by FAX Machines really aren't going to hurt against 40k DPS. Well, assuming the system isn't cyno jammed. Otherwise you're gating it in.
Keebler Wizard Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 33	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:21:27 - [109] - Quote Changes look pretty solid. +Should allow cynos during PANIC. Its about time the miners fought back. +Should allow ALL ships to be stored in rorq maint bay. Doesn't seem overpowered, and would again allow for more active defense and gameplay.
Chalithra Lathar Rhongomiant Legion Industries The Explicit Alliance 43	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:22:44 - [110] - Quote DCLi Ext wrote: I think the problem that still has to be addressed is the OP of interceptor. Speed tank to drones and interdiction nullification. To get the same bonuses you now need to commit the Rorqual to a fixed position for 5 minutes intervals over hours at a time. Other ships you can align out, but this negated by the keeping mining ships in range and having to siege. This basically painting a big target on it. Risk versus reward. You cannot defend a warp in from an interceptor. There has been suggestions about countering (i.e. anti interdiciton nullified field, propulsion jam field disable all prop mods within 100 km etc). Some of these would create interesting combat uses for rorquals. I believe the best interim solution is to make consistent with carrier stream. Porpoise = Myrm Orca = Carrier Rorqual = Super Carrier (has lots of special modules as well) Give the rorqual the +5 warp strength that a super carrier has. A single interceptor cannot tackle a super carrier unless faction fit. Will need multiple interceptors to hold it there. Instead of single speed tank interceptor immune to drones (faster) while the DPS fleet sits at range. The industrial core modules need some AOE effect to be locked for 5minutes, given that it could be running for hours. Burns out or offline propulsion mods on interdiction nullified ships (this means interceptor have to choose between running props and out speed drones or be attacked by drones). There is potential for game meta using this instead of I win interceptor for big kills. This can change the risk reward potential to make using in the belts. The other thing that was not clear can industrial core run within a pos shield for compression? Hope this provokes thought. Fit a capital neut

TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1721	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:35:05 - [111] - Quote Rowells wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: Ncc 1709 wrote: 20 rorqs with 2000 dps each... anything that drops is it is going to hurt hard With these kinds of targets you enter into the realm of capital and even super drops. Super carriers and Titans supported by FAX Machines really aren't going to hurt against 40k DPS. Well, assuming the system isn't cyno jammed. Otherwise you're gating it in. Rorq mining in a cyno jammed system... I'm sure special doctrines will pop up that can take these things out, but as far as my experience goes I'd say a fleet of 20 Rorqs is impossible to kill under those circumstances. An average subcap fleet is going to melt to the combined fire power of 20 Rorqs, let alone reinforcements. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Soleil Fournier Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 150	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:40:08 - [112] - Quote No CYNOS on ships hit by the panic button please. Reasoning: 0 counter-play.
Soleil Fournier Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 150	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:48:52 - [113] - Quote Here's an idea to add counterplay to the PANIC button should you guys really insist on it: Once the panic button is hit, ships cannot light a cyno for X amount of time (2-2.5 minutes?), allowing the attackers time to deploy a mobile cyno inhibitor (assuming they brought one). That gives counterplay and allows the mining fleet the ability to cyno in friendlies after the time expires if a inhibitor wasn't deployed in time.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1721	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:55:26 - [114] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: Here's an idea to add counterplay to the PANIC button should you guys really insist on it: Once the panic button is hit, ships cannot light a cyno for X amount of time (2-2.5 minutes?), allowing the attackers time to deploy a mobile cyno inhibitor (assuming they brought one). That gives counterplay and allows the mining fleet the ability to cyno in friendlies after the time expires if a inhibitor wasn't deployed in time. For now I agree with the devs, let's just see how this plays out first before imposing all kinds of restrictions. But it does need to be closely monitored for the first few weeks and quickly jumped on if need be. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Soleil Fournier Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 150	Posted - 2016.10.04 22:57:18 - [115] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: For now I agree with the devs, let's just see how this plays out first before imposing all kinds of restrictions. But it does need to be closely monitored for the first few weeks and quickly jumped on if need be. Players weren't able to light a cyno inside a POS shield, and I don't think they can do it while tethered either (without losing the tether and becoming vulnerable). Why should they be able to do it while invulnerable with the panic module?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3628	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:21:03 - [116] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: Players weren't able to light a cyno inside a POS shield, and I don't think they can do it while tethered either (without losing the tether and becoming vulnerable). Why should they be able to do it while invulnerable with the panic module? Because otherwise the defence fleet can't arrive in reasonable time. And all the Panic button does is delay you dying horribly. At which point no-one uses Rorqs. So if you want to be able to kill them then they need to be able to cyno things in. You can always bring a cyno inhibitor and drop it as soon as you land on grid.....
Soleil Fournier Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 150	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:28:22 - [117] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Because otherwise the defence fleet can't arrive in reasonable time.. They can light the cyno before the panic button is pressed and not get the effect, which (potentially) sacrifices the one cyno ship to save the fleet. Or if they are already hit by the panic button and are invulnerable, they can light the cyno and lose that invulnerability, which is consistent with how cyno rules work across the game. I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to cyno a fleet in. I'm saying the cyno ship shouldn't be able to do it while enjoying invulnerability. Is there a reason to break the rules in this case? And make cyno ships invulnerable? I don't see it because the rest of the fleet is still invulnerable, it's only the one ship that becomes vulnerable.
Dreamer Targaryen KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:43:05 - [118] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Jump drive fuel consumption: 2000 Oxygen Since the Rorqual currently uses Oxygen Isotopes, is it safe to assume, that it will stay that way or will it actually switch to Oxygen (from Planetary Interaction)?
Swoop McFly Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 49	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:47:55 - [119] - Quote So it mines as much as 8 Hulks, is the perfect mining booster, a jump freighter, a carrier and a FAX combined, with double the jumprange, 90% fatigue reduction and a 7 minute invulnerability mode. Is it just me or does this sound maybe a little bit too good? It can do pretty much everything. The only thing missing is an exploration bonus.
Shalmon Aliatus Bluestar Enterprises The Craftsmen 33	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:49:26 - [120] - Quote Did you consider letting the Rorqual use every Isotope for jumping ? Kinda sucks that the proud queen of mining is tied too having ships bringing Oxygen Isotopes. Why did ORE choose this jump drive instead of inventing a new one capable of using all Isotopes ? Or did they hit legacy code when they did the research

CowRocket Void Angelus.Mortis Fidelas Constans 29	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:52:08 - [121] - Quote Swoop McFly wrote: So it mines as much as 8 Hulks, is the perfect mining booster, a jump freighter, a carrier and a FAX combined, with double the jumprange, 90% fatigue reduction and a 7 minute invulnerability mode. Is it just me or does this sound maybe a little bit too good? It can do pretty much everything. The only thing missing is an exploration bonus. it has to be epic or the risk =/= reward bleeding shadow darkness > did i just saw a red procurer? :P
Zappity Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 3028	Posted - 2016.10.04 23:53:13 - [122] - Quote Swoop McFly wrote: So it mines as much as 8 Hulks, is the perfect mining booster, a jump freighter, a carrier and a FAX combined, with double the jumprange, 90% fatigue reduction and a 7 minute invulnerability mode. Is it just me or does this sound maybe a little bit too good? It can do pretty much everything. The only thing missing is an exploration bonus. And you are stuck in place with no propulsion, warp or jump capability for 5 minutes at a time. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 238	Posted - 2016.10.05 00:03:24 - [123] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Fleet Hangar: 40,000m3(+10,000) Shiny "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen." (Ein Single) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind." (Einer, dem es egal ist)
Swoop McFly Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 49	Posted - 2016.10.05 00:04:02 - [124] - Quote Zappity wrote: And you are stuck in place with no propulsion, warp or jump capability for 5 minutes at a time. So is a FAX. And a FAX doesn't do 2000 dps, doesn't have 10LY jumprange with only 10% of the fatigue and certainly not a 7 minute invul button. You don't even have to use the industrial core and it's still an insanely strong ship. (mines as much as 1.5 Hulks,better boosts than an orca, 10LY jumprange with 90% fatigue reduction, insanely large ore hold and cargo hold+fleet hangar, etc...)
beatlebutt Hedion University Amarr Empire 22	Posted - 2016.10.05 00:43:21 - [125] - Quote I wonder if people are aware of how slow the rorqual is to warp from a standing stop. With max skills and the core OFF what will be the maximum bonus range? I ask this because the only safe way to have a rorqual in a belt is if it is aligned (75% speed) back to the pos or station or citadel. That is the only way you will make it out in time. but for that to be viable you need a pretty large bonus range. Once kill squads develop to catch deployed rorquals, people will see what a disaster deploying would be, massive bonus or not. Mining just isn't that lucrative. Unless the panic button kept the enemy immobile but allowed friendlies to warp out, including the rorqual. LOL like that would ever happen. I think having a Rorqual in belt should be risk enough. I don't think being deployed should hold one in place. I would favor reducing the industrial core's bonus and make it so the rorqual isn't held in place for 5 minutes. I know it will never happen, but one can wish. Ore make it so the rorqual can cyno out even if the core is deployed, if he presses the panic button. All effects would then cease so it can't be used in capital fights for that reason. well it still would, but whatever. Never happen anyways. CCP is dead set on killing the rorqual except as a hauler. I do like restoring the jump range of the rorqual. That is the only awesome part of this mess. the only good thing about ruining rorquals is if there is less mining going on the ore prices will rise. ATM isk per hour it's the worse way in the game to make isk.
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 2391	Posted - 2016.10.05 01:20:45 - [126] - Quote beatlebutt wrote: Ore make it so the rorqual can cyno out even if the core is deployed, if he presses the panic button. All effects would then cease so it can't be used in capital fights for that reason. well it still would, but whatever. Never happen anyways. CCP is dead set on killing the rorqual except as a hauler. Yeah, you can tell by the purchasing spike in Rorquals and Rorqual BPOs that they've definitely succeeded in killing it dead with this announcement. They're probably just in it for the jump range. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Alex Andromedon Minion Revolution Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 02:05:05 - [127] - Quote Are current rorqual pilots gonna get ammo for the boosts or are our modules gonna be useless until we get the ammo?
Zanar Skwigelf Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra 48	Posted - 2016.10.05 02:14:47 - [128] - Quote beatlebutt wrote: I wonder if people are aware of how slow the rorqual is to warp from a standing stop. With max skills and the core OFF what will be the maximum bonus range? I ask this because the only safe way to have a rorqual in a belt is if it is aligned (75% speed) back to the pos or station or citadel. That is the only way you will make it out in time. but for that to be viable you need a pretty large bonus range. Capital Higgs Anchor. Without running the core it can mine more than an exhumer right now, with no need to dock/warp to compression array. throw a higgs rig on it, mine aligned, and enjoy the light show. Also, joining the group asking about mining mercoxit. I don't mind putting deep core miners in the highs, but just curious.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 156	Posted - 2016.10.05 02:19:36 - [129] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. Lighting a Cyno should break the invulnerability. Ships that already have a cyno up do not gain invulnerability. - Is it intended for the industrial ships to have the ability to refit to EWAR and Remote Reps and apply them while invulnerable? This sounds more than a little silly. I know your design goal is that the fleet should be capable of continued mining operations under PANIC, but in practice I think it might be better to set max targets locked to 0. This also applies to in-PANIC rorquals repairing other Rorquals that have coasted out of siege with their own panic. - If I am reading the notes correctly, the Rorqual will still receive 20% of remote capacitor transfers while sieged? Or does that count as "Repairing the Capacitor"? - PANIC Skill requirements definitely need a look at. Thematically they make sense with TSM5. But as others have stated that skill needs reworking in general. Consider replacing with Shield Management and Operation 5. - Have you considered revisiting skill requirements to get into the ship? Mining/Astrogeology sound more in-line than Advanced Mass Production - The sieged yield feels a little high, but we will see how it turns out in practice. I was expecting roughly half that, to put it in the ballpark of ratting carrier income. Of course, that will also depend on how it affects mineral prices in the long run. -T2 core heavy water consumption increase seems unnecessary. It will already be under heavy strain from more active cores and the command burst charges using it. Other than that, it looks pretty good - in terms of mining. Now lets take a look at putting one on the field in a (super)capital engagement. You have 1/7th of a Shield FAX with an Emergency hull energizer that lats upward of 2,000% of the duration. A little more, since it can fit 6 remote reps to the 5 of a Minokawa. Hard to say if they would be used over another T2 Triage FAX. As another use case, you have a ship that can provide command ship level shield bursts with said energizer and pushing 4 million EHP. How do you expect a Vulture to compete with that? Furthermore, why are shield bursts getting such a sturdy 15% platform while armor is confined to 10% bonused capitals (without PANIC) or relatively flimsy command ships? If the Rorqual is in panic, so are the industrial ships around it. Therefore, the remote reps of the Rorqual are not necessary. If the incoming defense fleet needs the reps, their arrival can be timed appropriately. Removing target locks would also mitigate things such as ecm module and drone fit nereus. There is likewise no need for the Rorqual to continue cycling shield command bursts in PANIC. Additionally, if Cyno breaks PANIC, the Rorqual can then choose to break out early and apply repairs at the cost of being held in place by its own cyno. The cyno should then prevent another panic activation for its duration, even if the rorqual manages to refit the burned out module for a spare. Mechanically it should prevent the effect from being applied to the cyno ship, rather than stop the module from activating, so the rorqual can refresh invulnerability on the barges even when immune to the effect itself.
HarlyQ harlyq syrokos investment station Goonswarm Federation 125	Posted - 2016.10.05 02:49:35 - [130] - Quote Zifrian wrote: All these changes really aren't any different than what you said a few months ago. Why the long wait to get a dev blog out? Anyway, I wasn't really impressed then and not now either. The jump changes and orca buffs are nice but, maybe I'm missing something but the Rorq is still pretty boring to fly and doesn't support a dedicated pilot to use. Most people will still use Alts due to the cost and literal boring gameplay. While the drone bonus is nice, it still just sitting there doing little (Yes, I get that mining isn't exciting already). As far as the core, if you are set on five minutes of immobility, then at least reduce the timer to 3-4min on a tech 2 variant. I doubt anyone is going to use it much because it's an easy kill. You should be able to cyno under the effect of panic. Hot drop fleets are common, and defending against one should be common also. If you mine seven systems away from friendly fleets, they'll never make it to you to defend in time but a hostile fleet could jump on you immediately. Overall, I guess I was hoping for more but this is about what I expected, changes to existing items and bonuses but not much else. Not interested in mining anymore honestly and this doesn't nothing for me. Why does mining need to be exciting if you want that go pvp. These changes are good for the game. I understand how C02 can't protect their own members mining but thats why you get stuck using the orca or porpoise. People willing to risk the rorqual get to benefits of the rorqual. The future is looking goooooood. :D

Lugh Crow-Slave 3233	Posted - 2016.10.05 03:03:08 - [131] - Quote so how big is the PANIC mod? how easy will it be for me to jet my burnt out one and refit a new one? BLOPS Hauler
Lugh Crow-Slave 3233	Posted - 2016.10.05 03:04:14 - [132] - Quote HarlyQ wrote: Zifrian wrote: All these changes really aren't any different than what you said a few months ago. Why the long wait to get a dev blog out? Anyway, I wasn't really impressed then and not now either. The jump changes and orca buffs are nice but, maybe I'm missing something but the Rorq is still pretty boring to fly and doesn't support a dedicated pilot to use. Most people will still use Alts due to the cost and literal boring gameplay. While the drone bonus is nice, it still just sitting there doing little (Yes, I get that mining isn't exciting already). As far as the core, if you are set on five minutes of immobility, then at least reduce the timer to 3-4min on a tech 2 variant. I doubt anyone is going to use it much because it's an easy kill. You should be able to cyno under the effect of panic. Hot drop fleets are common, and defending against one should be common also. If you mine seven systems away from friendly fleets, they'll never make it to you to defend in time but a hostile fleet could jump on you immediately. Overall, I guess I was hoping for more but this is about what I expected, changes to existing items and bonuses but not much else. Not interested in mining anymore honestly and this doesn't nothing for me. Why does mining need to be exciting if you want that go pvp. These changes are good for the game. I understand how C02 can't protect their own members mining but thats why you get stuck using the orca or porpoise. People willing to risk the rorqual get to benefits of the rorqual. The future is looking goooooood. :D they can still use a rorq they just may not want to risk the core. if you want better boost than an orca with even less risk than an orca use a rorq with an E-cyno ready BLOPS Hauler
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 156	Posted - 2016.10.05 03:16:54 - [133] - Quote Swoop McFly wrote: So it mines as much as 8 Hulks, is the perfect mining booster, a jump freighter, a carrier and a FAX combined, with double the jumprange, 90% fatigue reduction and a 7 minute invulnerability mode. Is it just me or does this sound maybe a little bit too good? It can do pretty much everything. The only thing missing is an exploration bonus. I'm not sure what hulk you are flying, but mine gets 3848m3 of ore every 60 and change seconds. Lets call the change drone travel time in optimal conditions. That puts it at 4.78 of the current hulk, or "as much as half" of your estimate. Since the yield bonus of skills/implants is going away, without doing the new-hulk math I'm gonna guess and peg it at 5x hulk. In reality it will be less. You need to adjust position to minimize drone flight time as you pop rocks, which you cannot do sieged. Unsieging to move means lower yield during the adjustment period. It's still a terrible jump freighter. Fully expanded would be 175k m3. Just over half a jump freighter without the ability to go to high sec for the cargo and cyno off the Jita 4-4 undock. Furthermore, using it as such means it's not deployable for the other roles due to using(T2) cargo rigs. Without the rigs, you barely break 100km3. I suppose it's better for moving two packaged battleships than a carrier for assembled. It is not a carrier. When fitted with 4 damage amps, It has the dps of the turrets only on a Nidhoggur. Fighters also have missiles for another 1000 dps and significant alpha. Your average mining rorqual will not have 4 drone damage amps. That's not to say people won't try ratting in one, that's pretty much guaranteed. It does not have the remote rep power of a fax. The bonuses are to range. The duration reduction is on par with a FAX, but it reps for the base amount per cycle. A T2 Triage FAX reps for 650% of base.
benz2 DND Industries FUBAR. 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 03:19:44 - [134] - Quote 2 things. What about not being able to light a cyno at all in the vicinity (100+km?) of an active P.A.N.I.C. Module? Either that or - Why when it is active, no damage? i think being able to actually defend themselves while the module is active would give miners a better chance. i see large fleets just waiting to kill miners when the effect wears off, and i think being having a chance to push the defenders away themselves would be better. I've been in situations where no-one would come help the mining fleet, and recently lost 5 ships and 4 pods because i had no assistance. or is it supposed to be a trade-off between maybe losing your ships and beating the intruders or surviving? then what about a severely reduced damage, instead of none at all?
E6o5 Tyler Durden Demolitions 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 04:05:20 - [135] - Quote Questions regarding the PANIC mode - are the mining fleet drones protected as well? Quote: All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0 -> what about doomsdays Quote: Mining remains unaffected so ships can continue to mine as normal while under the protection of the P.A.N.I.C. module. -> can the mining fleet engage the enemy (with drones or modules)?
Chal0ner Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 179	Posted - 2016.10.05 04:20:06 - [136] - Quote Haven't read it all so maybe it's in there somewhere. Will the PANIC thingy protect unagressed ships only? I.e. will you need to start it before the first ship is attacked or can you light it at any time during an attack?
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 156	Posted - 2016.10.05 04:31:49 - [137] - Quote benz2 wrote: What about not being able to light a cyno at all in the vicinity (100+km?) of an active P.A.N.I.C. Module? Why would you want to remove your own ability to call for help? More importantly, why do you want someone else on grid to remove it for you. benz2 wrote: Either that or - Why when it is active, no damage? i think being able to actually defend themselves while the module is active would give miners a better chance. i see large fleets just waiting to kill miners when the effect wears off, and i think being having a chance to push the defenders away themselves would be better. I've been in situations where no-one would come help the mining fleet, and recently lost 5 ships and 4 pods because i had no assistance. or is it supposed to be a trade-off between maybe losing your ships and beating the intruders or surviving? then what about a severely reduced damage, instead of none at all? The general idea is that nullsec yield is higher, because your operations are interruptible. How do you expect offenders to hold the grid for 10 minutes against thousands of incoming dps before reinforcements arrive and the fight actually starts? You get more, because you risk more. If you're in a fleet with you and your alts, with no help to be had, that is obviously not the time to field a sieged rorqual(s). Certainly not within jump range of hostile capitals. You will want to ship down, the same way everyone else, everywhere else in eve, doing any other activity does.
Captain Semper Ministry of War Amarr Empire 115	Posted - 2016.10.05 04:49:51 - [138] - Quote Very nice change! But... If Rorq is much better than hulk we get another "vertical ladder". And as i remember you - CCP - want to move away from the concept of "vertical ladder" and entered tiericide (still dont know how to write this). For now i have 3 hulks and Rorq. After this change i FORCED to learn 3 more Rorq for better mining. Its not a best design - mining fleets w/o mining ships :/ What i suggest? Give Rorq mining bonus which depends on the number of mining ships (frigs and barg) within a radius X For example: Rorq max mining per minute 18k m^3. Degrade it to 3k m^3 and give bonus like: Each mining ships (not other mining command or Rorq) within 200km increase mining yeld by 100% up to 500%. This bonus share between all Rorq within 500km. So you wont be breake your own concept of "tiericide", mining fleets will be optimal with 1 Rorq per 5 mining ships (2 Rorq will get 500% bonus if 10 mining ships in range and etc). Mb it technicaly hard - dunno - but i think its better than just tell everyone: "Go and learn Rorq for better mining and make Rorq fleets". What do you think?
Sasha Nemtsov Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 171	Posted - 2016.10.05 05:06:37 - [139] - Quote Aliana Heartborne wrote: The problem with casual/social fleets like CASMA is that the skills are low for most people as they are new players, so a lot of the job falls to a few people, not just in terms of boosting but also helping the new people not leave in a rage because they get murdered at every corner. In my case i don't have the time to or energy to be active much, so for me personally ill just drop down to alpha clone most likely and do nothing but help people with information in terms of chat which really takes out a bit of the fun The largest thing CCP fails to realise is that it is a social/casual fleets doesnt have any tools to help lessen the load of boosters and organizers, like we cant even see how much stuff how much a single person mines reliably as the fleet history log is a joke, and if you DC these horrible logs are lost as well because no autosaving like every other log. Now CCP please improve the new player experience ;s Hi Aliana, thanks for an interesting perspective. I note that you 'don't have the time...to be active much', which suggests that you belong to a group which I call 'casual but committed'. Despite assertions to the contrary in various corp descriptions, the EVE player base doesn't deal well with this type of player. Your suggestions for tools for boosters seem sound to me. I hope CCP listens. You feel you must 'drop down to Alpha' and provide a chat service? That's some of the most time-intensive stuff right there! Unless you mean to pop in for a few minutes each day. Also, I don't see how it can mitigate the fun if, by your own admission, the fun merely consists of sitting in space in Tarta and Tekaima while you are away at work, or whatever. But I may not be in possession of the complete picture. Help me out here! I get that the proposed changes won't work for you, Aliana. But surely, if you're spending all this time helping new players, you can inspire at least some of them to train up boosting skills? Perhaps the new Porpoise will help there? And while you're at it, gank-avoidance skills, too.
Regan Rotineque The Scope Gallente Federation 464	Posted - 2016.10.05 05:12:18 - [140] - Quote the cyno issue is going to be controversial if you allow it the. the rorq may be used as a pvp fleet ship since oppsosing fleets cannot kill the cyno. if you disallow the cyno you cannot get defense fleets in. Since this new panic module is defensive in nature whatabout giving it a cyno blocker similar to the current cyno blocker module? itkeeps both sides on a level playground while the panic module is running. once the panic runs out the cyno blocking effect disapates.

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3633	Posted - 2016.10.05 05:20:26 - [141] - Quote Regan Rotineque wrote: the cyno issue is going to be controversial if you allow it the. the rorq may be used as a pvp fleet ship since oppsosing fleets cannot kill the cyno. if you disallow the cyno you cannot get defense fleets in. Since this new panic module is defensive in nature whatabout giving it a cyno blocker similar to the current cyno blocker module? itkeeps both sides on a level playground while the panic module is running. once the panic runs out the cyno blocking effect disapates. Then it gets used as a PVP fleet cyno blocker with a 7 minute duration and the ability to repair it for free at your nearest citadel. Why are you so worried about it being used as a PvP ship though? The PANIC doesn't last the full duration of the cyno, meaning the Rorq will be locked vulnerable on the field for several minutes. so either the enemy controlled the field super fast with their hot drop meaning you wouldn't have killed the rorq even if it was vulnerable, or the fight is still ongoing and you can now kill the Rorq. If they want to use a 3 billion isk cyno ship let them.
Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 107	Posted - 2016.10.05 05:50:17 - [142] - Quote Been around since 03, man has time flew. I am going to eat my words, great changes guys it really is. I am really suprised by it. You wont catch me in core mode, but man did you put the carrot out. Very impressed and great job. Been at industry for 12 years and one of the best changes I have seen. I stand corrected.
Katri Ambraelle The Draconis Combine Cohortes Triarii 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:21:58 - [143] - Quote I see a lot of people on here crying about how the new Rorq will be multi-boxed to hell and mines too much. My prediction is that overall mining goes down. Let me point out again that a fully fit Rorq will cost over 3 bil. It roughly mines 4.4 Mil/min and is parked while doing so. Without the core it mines less than a hulk. Basically, you can make twice the isk/hr as a carrier but you are extremely likely to lose the ship. It isn't if you will lose it, but when you will lose it. Watching local won't matter because if a 15+ gang comes in your ship is done. Panic module? I fail to see how that helps much. Last time I checked people don't sit around in null with a fleet waiting to go help industrial ships. The only people that will gain from the new changes are mega corps and wormhole players. How many small null players want to park 3 bil in the belt and hope it doesn't get welped? The Zarvox esq fleets will have a field day with this change and you can bet this will be the kill board padding trash fleet dream. Can you rat with a Dread, sure, but nobody does because it would be dumb to siege up at anoms and with the siege module off a dread damage is laughable. The same goes for mining in a Rorq with the siege module off, laughable. In my opinion the mining boost changes wreck small corp mining and the risk of turning the core online will only be acceptable to mega corps and wormhole miners. Russian/Chinese isk farming corps and wormholers will love this new change and everyone else probably not so much. Casual miners will switch to ratting and pvp as they will make more isk/hr when they don't have a 3 bil ship boosting them in the belt which will not be often. I am personally quite disappointed with the proposed changes.
Lickem Lolly Achura Solutions 10	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:30:39 - [144] - Quote Mining != PVP If we wanted to do PVP, we would go do PVP... Nobody with a brain will siege 1 rorqual in nullsec, unless they are using it as bait. What you will get is blobs of 20-30 rorquals and massive market problems. Congratulations. You've given a massive financial boost to the largest blobbing nullsec alliances. Everyone else will have to use Orcas. Hope you're happy.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1514	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:33:52 - [145] - Quote Rowells wrote: Hold up guys...you hear that? It's the sound of a thousand Russian renters stripping entire regions clean in a day. Someone has never heard of mining anoms before...
Punky260 Deutsche Lichtbringer AG Fidelas Constans 2	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:50:14 - [146] - Quote I like the Rorqual changes so far. It will be a powerful ship, but with a high risk if you want to profit to the max - exactly how I like EVE to be played. What annoys me the most right now are the skill requirements on the Industrial Core. I don't really get neither from a logical, nor a game-mechanical point of view why I would need to skill Mass Production and Advanced Mass Production for that module. The required skill has nothing to do with the module itself or what it does/affects. So I would really like to see a change there and make it some skill from the Resource Processing skill-tree instead. Either Resourse Processing itself and maybe Reprocessing Efficiency and others. It's fine for me to add skills up to the skill-time that is needed right now (roughly 20days) with those skills, but it would make much more sense and be more "in line" of the progression as it is right now. For the PANIC module. I kinda dislike the point that the skill-level is used to determine the time the effect lasts. I know that is the most easy to implement, but it makes it bad to have the skill high in some situations and that is something that should not be a game mechanic. Having a higher skill should always be better, or irrelevant. But it should never be a bad thing! A simple idea to change this would be to make the skill reduce the consumption of the panic module - and then add a little amount of heavy water or strontium or whatever as a consumable to the panic module. Maybe nanites would work as well. And then this amount would be thing which changes the time of the effect. You could make it similar to a "reinforced"-system on a POS or rather more like a ancillary repair module - both ways would work and add a more individual and exciting gameplay to the overall PANIC mechanic. You, as the rorqual pilot, would have to decide how long you need your invul-time and you could choose on the situation itself instead of just having to relay on your prophetic skills and have the right level of skill ^^
Allya Erquilenne Max and Sons LowSechnaya Sholupen 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:53:32 - [147] - Quote Good afternoon. I would like to make one suggestion. I think it would be easier to coordinate industrial operations in deep space if Rorqal portal was as titanium, but able to carry only industrial ships. This would greatly simplify the transfer of its fleet for the development of different systems in the zeros. As a former miner, I was faced with the problem of the zeros when it was necessary to immediately carry more than 30 shovels of my corporation to another for the production system. I understand that my idea may be absurd, but it is the place to be. If my idea you still interested, I would like to take part in the discussion. Thank you in advance :)
Captain Semper Ministry of War Amarr Empire 115	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:57:31 - [148] - Quote Katri Ambraelle wrote: I see a lot of people on here crying about how the new Rorq will be multi-boxed to hell and mines too much. My prediction is that overall mining goes down. Let me point out again that a fully fit Rorq will cost over 3 bil. It roughly mines 4.4 Mil/min and is parked while doing so. Without the core it mines less than a hulk. Basically, you can make twice the isk/hr as a carrier but you are extremely likely to lose the ship. It isn't if you will lose it, but when you will lose it. Watching local won't matter because if a 15+ gang comes in your ship is done. Panic module? I fail to see how that helps much. Last time I checked people don't sit around in null with a fleet waiting to go help industrial ships. The only people that will gain from the new changes are mega corps and wormhole players. How many small null players want to park 3 bil in the belt and hope it doesn't get welped? The Zarvox esq fleets will have a field day with this change and you can bet this will be the kill board padding trash fleet dream. Can you rat with a Dread, sure, but nobody does because it would be dumb to siege up at anoms and with the siege module off a dread damage is laughable. The same goes for mining in a Rorq with the siege module off, laughable. In my opinion the mining boost changes wreck small corp mining and the risk of turning the core online will only be acceptable to mega corps and wormhole miners. Russian/Chinese isk farming corps and wormholers will love this new change and everyone else probably not so much. Casual miners will switch to ratting and pvp as they will make more isk/hr when they don't have a 3 bil ship boosting them in the belt which will not be often. I am personally quite disappointed with the proposed changes. Sorry but you are TOTALY wrong. I were mining with 3 hulks and a Rorq in ore site for 1 year. ONE YEAR. And "gang" was visit me only ONCE. For 1 year i get ganfed only ONE time. And they even kill nothing. 15 crussize ships will do 0 damage to new Rorq. Its sure that new Rorq useful only in large alliance with intel, home def and claim. Its not for a "solo" multibox guys. And this is awesome.
Captain Semper Ministry of War Amarr Empire 115	Posted - 2016.10.05 06:58:24 - [149] - Quote Double
Berengar Barnes Men of Business Ltd. Kraftwerk. 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 07:00:35 - [150] - Quote it would be very convenient to open a cyno while PANIC is running. But i do not see why it is necessary: Every mining-fleet has at least one scout +1 or +2 jumps out. You can jump back to your mining-system and open a cyno.. or am i missing something important here?

Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1514	Posted - 2016.10.05 07:09:12 - [151] - Quote Swoop McFly wrote: So it mines as much as 8 Hulks, is the perfect mining booster, a jump freighter, a carrier and a FAX combined, with double the jumprange, 90% fatigue reduction and a 7 minute invulnerability mode. Is it just me or does this sound maybe a little bit too good? It can do pretty much everything. The only thing missing is an exploration bonus. No. First, your math sucks. Hulk yield is 3500m3/minute with a 3% implant (22mil), and 3800~ with mining drones. It's 5 or less hulks in yield. Second, Of course it's the perfect mining booster, that's part of the whole point. Third, no, not a jump freighter, unless you fancy a tiny cargo bay. Fourth, no, not a carrier. Has to be sieged to get over 1k dps from drones, can't carry non combat ships in it, doesn't have the burst dps of a carrier Fifth, similar to a fax, but not as tanky, or as good at repping.
Grookshank Jump Drive Appreciation Society 125	Posted - 2016.10.05 08:01:42 - [152] - Quote This seems problematic on some points: PANIC should give a combat timer, to stop immediate refitting PANIC should block all combat actions: Cyno under PANIC makes it an unkillable cyno ship Ewar under PANIC should be a no Repping under PANIC should be a no Make it a good miner, mining booster with good defenses: yes. Make it a 10ly, almost no fatigue, immune fax: no.
Assia Eko Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 08:11:55 - [153] - Quote Will it trigger an escalation when warping to a C5/6 combat anomaly ?
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 156	Posted - 2016.10.05 08:36:52 - [154] - Quote Katri Ambraelle wrote: Let me point out again that a fully fit Rorq will cost over 3 bil. It roughly mines 4.4 Mil/min and is parked while doing so. Without the core it mines less than a hulk. Basically, you can make twice the isk/hr as a carrier but you are extremely likely to lose the ship. It isn't if you will lose it, but when you will lose it. Let me point out again that "over 3 bil" is a fully fit platinum insured Rorqual. WHEN you lose it, it will take a whole two to three hours of mining to pay itself off/replace after said insurance payout of 2,215,595,008 ISK.
Soleil Fournier Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture 150	Posted - 2016.10.05 08:51:59 - [155] - Quote Rorq is only 3 billion, that's cheap. Players out in the far reaches of nullsec will have whole fleets of these suckers. The supply of minerals will be obscene, leading to an inevitable crash of mineral prices and a whole lot of supercaps being built.
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 425	Posted - 2016.10.05 09:08:20 - [156] - Quote Why not allow cloaking while the industrial core is active? All the mining barges would warp off, and the rorq would cloak. The rorq would still be unable to warp for a while, which would mean the hostile fleet would still be able to find it before it warped off if they knew they were looking for a rorq. And the possibility the hauler was already warping to the rorq at zero because the rorq was almost full when local spiked. Whoops! Under that mechanic, parking close to the belt would mean the hostile fleet wouldn't have very much space to sweep to decloak the rorq. Parking far away from the belt would increase travel time for the drones, and mean leaving them in space as somewhere between a strong hint and a dead giveaway of where the rorq was. If the rorq recalled its drones before cloaking and cloaked before they got to the hangar (or at least one was on a return trip), well... the formation of drones would point to a rock at one end and the cloaked rorq at the other. Edit: Or there's the choice of not using the rorq's mining drone bonus at all. Parking closer would mean the rorq would be able to recall all its drones before the reds showed up in belt if the captain was paying attention, but they wouldn't have to do a particularly complicated search pattern to find it. A signature :o
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 156	Posted - 2016.10.05 09:18:00 - [157] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: a whole lot of supercaps being built. Making them more accessible and expendable in general may not be a terrible thing for the game. The issue is more that the people who already have large stockpiles of them are the ones in position to take advantage of this change to build more. This is not a good thing for new entities trying to enter the arena in the short term. In the long term, we may see more than one massive fight every few years (when someone screws up) as the losses will be more recoverable. Shallanna Yassavi wrote: Why not allow cloaking while the industrial core is active? Because what is realistically 4 minutes or less is insufficient to sweep a grid for a cloaked ship. Assuming you found the right grid to start with. Also because I don't know where you get the idea of the Rorqual warping off. You would decloak and immediately jump to a cyno in tether range of a citadel.
Gustav Mannfred Summer of Mumuit 144	Posted - 2016.10.05 09:18:03 - [158] - Quote Generally, these changes are nice, but there are some problems in my opinion: 1. With that amount of yield, a few guys multiboxing rorqs can easily clean belts in no time, 18000m3 per minute is more than 10 times more than an exumer(hulk has about 1600m3 per minute). Is there any reason to bring some mining berges? 2. With 10ly jumprange and its insane drone dps bonus this ship becomes the #1 choise for hotdroping and pvp. It is also like the old carriers, with its 15 effective heavy drones it has the same amount as carriers were able to launch before citadel. This also makes it again possibile to run havens and sanctums afk and get about 40 mil per tick or so. 3. With its bonuses to RR, this ship is just like a FAX with a lot more DPS. The Industrial core boosts remote reps AND DPS. FAX triage module set drone dps to 0 when activated. solutions: 1 and 2: Give the Rorqual a fighter bay and fighters, it gets 4 launch tubes, 3 for light fighters, one for heavy fighters, one for support fighters and 3 for the harvest drones. Remove the dps bonus from the industrial core and replace the drone damage bonus to a 10% bonus to fighter damage and hitpoints per level. With that, the Rorq should be able to deal about 40% of the damage a supercarrier can do, but with much less application against small targets and if you want to rat in it, you need to be on keyboard. Also this solves the problem of afk beltcleaning as you need to manually activate the mining lasers of the drones and also manually unload cargo of every single flight. (one flight of harvest drones has 9 drones, just as a light fighter squadrom). This makes it hard to farm afk or multibox a lot of ships. With the ability to launch fighters, the rorqual also should be able to fit fighter support units. And its jumprange should stay as it is now. 3. remove 2 hi slots and add them to low slots, which makes it less effective as a RR ship and the industrial core should set fighter missile dps to 0 and drastically reduce applications of their primary weapons. So they are still effective against npc's, but the ship will then not be able to benefit from RR bonuses and beeing able to do a lot of dps. what do you think CCP? otherwhise this ship just kills the market as T1 ships become insanely cheap and those mining in less effective ships will most likely stop that. i'm REALY miss the old stuff.-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183
March rabbit Mosquito Squadron The-Culture 1922	Posted - 2016.10.05 09:30:03 - [159] - Quote Aldran Gentlharp wrote: basicaly i like the changes of the rorqual and the stats of the panic module exept one thing. Preventing all affected ships from warp makes this panic module and the rorqual rather useless. It is to provide time for defence fleet to formup and arrive. Not to let industrials flee. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Thunder Fenix Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 14	Posted - 2016.10.05 10:07:38 - [160] - Quote Will be nice to see rorquals on field again! Just can i suggest to increase even more ore hold and fleet hangars? Why even bigger ore hold? well considering incoming m3 of ore during fleet ops it will probably be a clickfest for compression, have bigger ore hold would mitigate this (make instead auto-stack and auto-compression cycling every few seconds in ore hold as added feature would be the best choice here, would completely avoid repeatitive actions) Why bigger fleet hangar? more ore mining = more compressed ore to be hauled out. Only efficient way to do so is have other toon hauling it and only way to haul stuff out from rorqual is place it in fleet hangar so can be taken out by other fleet members, again here drag & drop fest for both rorqual pilot and hauler. Deep Transport with max skills can haul almost 70k m3 so increasing fleet hangar to match it will halve repetitive ops. All of course cutting out space from normal cargo.

Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 158	Posted - 2016.10.05 10:10:40 - [161] - Quote Gustav Mannfred wrote: 18000m3 per minute is more than 10 times more than an exumer(hulk has about 1600m3 per minute).. Your math is VERY wrong. My hulk mines significantly more than that per laser. In reality, it will be a little more than 4 hulks. If that. Gustav Mannfred wrote: Is there any reason to bring some mining berges? Yes. To mine out the mercoxit. Or because you don't feel comfortable putting 15+ Billion isk on grid at the moment. Gustav Mannfred wrote: 2. With 10ly jumprange and its insane drone dps bonus this ship becomes the #1 choise for hotdroping and pvp. It is also like the old carriers, with its 15 effective heavy drones it has the same amount as carriers were able to launch before citadel. This also makes it again possibile to run havens and sanctums afk and get about 40 mil per tick or so. No, for the same reason you don't rat in a dreadnaught. You finish the site in 10 minutes then spend 5 waiting for the siege cycle to end so you can move to the next one. By the time you warp and land you're making Ishtar level ticks. Likewise if you're going to drop in and siege with a glass cannon fit, why would you not drop a suicide dreadnaught that does 5x the dps of the Rorq for the same cost? Gustav Mannfred wrote: 3. With its bonuses to RR, this ship is just like a FAX with a lot more DPS. The Industrial core boosts remote reps AND DPS. FAX triage module set drone dps to 0 when activated. A Rorqual with T2 Capital remote booster repairs 1150 HP per cycle A Minokawa with same repairs for 7906 HP per cycle Gustav Mannfred wrote: solutions: Along with being largely unnecessary, your solutions do hilarious things like give the Rorqual more cargo capacity than a faction fit cargo expanded jump freighter (while using t2 expanders). If you want to "afk belt clear" go right ahead. Enjoy your 50km drone trips with the excavator drone's 138m/s after skill bonuses. 18000 m3 per cycle, ~785 second cycles for a round trip. That will be around 1400 m3 per minute. It will net you less income than a procurer with Porpoise boosts. As for the impact to the t1 market, T2 is so cheap and effective that T1 honestly should come down in price. Ratting carriers push 200 mil an hour. There are still plenty of people ratting in all sorts of subcapital ships. Just because a mining capital ship will pull what a capital should, does not mean smaller scale miners will cease their activities.
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 425	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:21:17 - [162] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: Soleil Fournier wrote: a whole lot of supercaps being built. Making them more accessible and expendable in general may not be a terrible thing for the game. The issue is more that the people who already have large stockpiles of them are the ones in position to take advantage of this change to build more. This is not a good thing for new entities trying to enter the arena in the short term. In the long term, we may see more than one massive fight every few years (when someone screws up) as the losses will be more recoverable. And less special. If you've ever played SWTOR, there were a LOT of side quests involving Sith and dark Jedi (or Jedi/rival Sith if you're an imp). Force users were supposed to be special in the Star Wars universe, but copypasting a bunch of them makes them... not. Or: Yes, you might get these huge fleet fights more often, but creating an eclipse with a bunch of titans won't be epic or special if it happens too often. The whole point of those things was to be rare and epic special. Putting the yield of mining ships where they are now took that away. Quote: Shallanna Yassavi wrote: Why not allow cloaking while the industrial core is active? Because what is realistically 4 minutes or less is insufficient to sweep a grid for a cloaked ship. Assuming you found the right grid to start with. Also because I don't know where you get the idea of the Rorqual warping off. You would decloak and immediately jump to a cyno in tether range of a citadel. So take jump drive away from it? Making it warp around like a slow subcap might not be a bad thing. Having it fit in a jump freighter would mean still being able to buy it in slightly hostile space without it being a deathtrap. Even with that limitation, it can warp in 10-11 seconds from a dead stop with a microwarpdrive fit. A signature :o

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 14495	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:25:20 - [163] - Quote Thanks for the feedback so far everyone. A couple quick answers to questions we see coming up multiple times: We're not planning on changing the restrictions on what ships are allowed into the Rorq SMB at this time. The concern with removing the restrictions is that it would become too powerful combined with the increased jump range. The mining foreman ships won't have any ability to mine gas or mercoxit at this time. You'll want to use other ships for mining those substances. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Crave Ma'Lice Ma'Lice M.'n'T. Inc 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:38:35 - [164] - Quote Lickem Lolly wrote: Mining != PVP If we wanted to do PVP, we would go do PVP... Nobody with a brain will siege 1 rorqual in nullsec, unless they are using it as bait. What you will get is blobs of 20-30 rorquals and massive market problems. Congratulations. You've given a massive financial boost to the largest blobbing nullsec alliances. Everyone else will have to use Orcas. Hope you're happy. doubt so, for reliable amount of harvested ore you have to park the Rorq within the asteroid as the excav drones will be slow as fu... so every m they have to travel will deplete the isk/h significantly
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:40:17 - [165] - Quote PANIC module wrote: All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0 What about neuts and ewar? Can I have a wing of Scorpions sitting there invulnerable for the most of the fight and jamming the crap out of enemies?
Queitis DBCI C0LD Fusion 1	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:51:44 - [166] - Quote @fozzie what are your plans to fix the nullsec Heavy water issue? will you be reducing the amount of ozone in dark glitter and increasing heavy water in it ? If you swapped the HW and Ozone figures in Dark glitter around, that would resolve a lot of the imbalance issues without doing much to the market
Axes blade Shadow State Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:52:31 - [167] - Quote I believe they should be able to light a cyno then in P.A.N.I.C mode. However most fleet take at least 15min to get ready so I donGÇÖt think It will help the pilot much anyway. Also does one Rorqual going into P.A.N.I.C protect a 2nd Rorqual in the same fleet?
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 305	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:52:42 - [168] - Quote @CCP Fozzie Any plans to fix the Heavy water Imbalance?
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 305	Posted - 2016.10.05 11:53:28 - [169] - Quote Axes blade wrote: I believe they should be able to light a cyno then in P.A.N.I.C mode. However most fleet take at least 15min to get ready so I donGÇÖt think It will help the pilot much anyway. Also does one Rorqual going into P.A.N.I.C protect a 2nd Rorqual in the same fleet? panic mode dont affect other rorquals but concidering a reasonable fit rorq will tank 10 dreads... i dont see the issue
Sakul Aubaris Holy Cookie 12	Posted - 2016.10.05 12:35:49 - [170] - Quote Am I the only one Thinking, that CCP overshoot a little with the Roqual ? The Orca seems allright for me but the Roquall is a bit... to much? I see some winers wine, but with these changes the Roqual might be able to be a new Slowcat. You have a remote rep range bonus 8 hislots (you use 5 large shieldboosttranfers and not capital ones because without triage they are better and with capchain or capbooster you run stable), a capitalship tank and five sentries and 20 backupsets.. Honestly i don't care about that mining yield, because i don't mine. There more the better, because more minerals -> cheaper combat ships. But the combat potential of the new roquall is... at least interesting, at worst op.

Zerzzes Markarian McCloud and Markarian Trade and Logistics Corp. 5	Posted - 2016.10.05 12:59:17 - [171] - Quote I think the changes are better than what I feared. In general I like to see that the Rorqual gets into the field now. It's also good that the Rorqual (and the Orca) can do some significant mining themself. But given the long drone moving times, the yield will be probably much smaller. However, I don't see many people using the Indy core anymore, because the risk just gets too large (except when you have a large supercap fleet to protect you, an no larger hostile supercap fleet nearby). So not beeing able to compress hurts quite a bit, because you will get full very fast, if one Rorqual supports several barges. I'm not sure that the concerns of 20 Rorqual fleets come true, except maybe in very remote regions. Because a 20 Rorual fleet would be a dream of any supercap fleet. The jump range changes are great.
Tiberizzle Amok. Goonswarm Federation 141	Posted - 2016.10.05 13:16:37 - [172] - Quote Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk.
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 1280	Posted - 2016.10.05 13:51:45 - [173] - Quote Shalmon Aliatus wrote: Did you consider letting the Rorqual use every Isotope for jumping ? Kinda sucks that the proud queen of mining is tied too having ships bringing Oxygen Isotopes. Why did ORE choose this jump drive instead of inventing a new one capable of using all Isotopes ? Or did they hit legacy code when they did the research My guess would be because (AFAIK) that's the type of isotopes produced by the ICE in the region where ORE is located. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Zareph Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 3	Posted - 2016.10.05 13:56:38 - [174] - Quote The cyno while in PANIC mode is a perfect option speaking as a 10 year miner. We never put a rorqual in a belt in 0.0 mining operations because it made no sense. While I get the need to change the mining link (and other) mechanics a PANIC button is great for 0.0 mining in an alliance. I'm concerned about the number of ships, as sometimes you can easily get 30 people in exhumer/mining barges or more, as long as I can protect all 30 (or more) with a panic button, light a cyno and wait for reinforcements that makes staying in a belt worthwhile in my alliance. Yeah, it can be shot and a 50 to 200 person gang coming along can make it interesting but you should have intel for that and GTFO well before. The new Exhumer level drones need some mechanic changes, or be able to hold a ton of ore to compensate for them being slow. Parking a rorqual on a rock is difficult due to their lack of manuverability/speed and spending 10m warping in/out to get in position and the inevitable ping pong through a belt of rocks. Either have the drone spit out compressed ore, or carry the highest m3 in the game exhumer or barge. The return / go out trip is sloooow and if I have to waste charges/heavy water waiting that's a little nuts. Will the PANIC module protect these most likely really expensive drones too? Just the mining ones, not combat.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 14:19:08 - [175] - Quote Quote: P.A.N.I.C. Module: -50% velocity Wasn't this supposed to be -100% or is there something going on here?
Tialano Utrigas Running with Dogs Stella Nova 100	Posted - 2016.10.05 14:35:37 - [176] - Quote My opinion is that a cyno shouldnt be able to be lit while the PANIC mode is active (be it the rorq or the miner). It WILL end up being used as a cyno ship in large fleet engagements which isnt it's intended use. This does NOT mean that you cant cyno in back up. It just means that you need to wait for the PANIC mode to cycle first, then light. You can still use the industrial core to supply reps and get the self rep benefits. If there's enough on grid to alpha through your rorq then there are other issues tbh. I think a slightly favourable outcome might be that a cyno disables and inhibits the PANIC mode on which ever ship lights. That still allows a proc to refit a cyno in PANIC mode but be vul when it lights.
Axes blade Shadow State Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 14:48:47 - [177] - Quote Tialano Utrigas wrote: My opinion is that a cyno shouldnt be able to be lit while the PANIC mode is active (be it the rorq or the miner). It WILL end up being used as a cyno ship in large fleet engagements which isnt it's intended use. This does NOT mean that you cant cyno in back up. It just means that you need to wait for the PANIC mode to cycle first, then light. You can still use the industrial core to supply reps and get the self rep benefits. If there's enough on grid to alpha through your rorq then there are other issues tbh. I think a slightly favourable outcome might be that a cyno disables and inhibits the PANIC mode on which ever ship lights. That still allows a proc to refit a cyno in PANIC mode but be vul when it lights. I am concerned how you play the game if you think a 2.5 bil ship is going to be used just to light a fleet cyno. The cyno is a must to bring to support ships in time.
Querns GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2514	Posted - 2016.10.05 14:48:50 - [178] - Quote Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. Tiberizzle, as usual, with the Real Dope on eve game mechanics. Listen to this man. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Galinius Valgani Albertross Mining Corp. Off The Reservation. 9	Posted - 2016.10.05 14:52:01 - [179] - Quote Worst case solution is to allow Cynoing for only one combatant. And forbidding it leads to boring gameplay so I tend to allow it. Is there any way to make it good for defend mining ops and not screw op fleet ops. Perhaps give it a Cyno spoolup penalty of 5 Minutes? Will be in the timeframe of being invulnerable but 5 Minutes is a long time for the enemy to disengage or prepare fighting?
MuraSaki Siki Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative 67	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:04:20 - [180] - Quote how to prevent rorqual go through C5/6 to highsec if it's mass is less than Freighters

FearlessLittleToaster GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 137	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:15:27 - [181] - Quote I have to say I'm cautiously enthusiastic about these changes, which I did not expect. Instead of making the Rorqual a hilarious pinata that you have to fix in a belt this is likely to be more case of "Pinata hits you until candy comes out" for gangs not expecting to take one on. As well the yield looks like it will be meaningfully scaled to the price of the hull. Again, bravo. So, broad feedback aside, here are some specifics: - Please make the big mining drones faster. Otherwise their real and theoretical yields will be absurdly far apart. And parking caps next to a rock is stupidly tedious; if this thing is supposed to be less of a mining beast than it's stats read like just nerf the stats rather than getting there through a non-intuitive mechanic on a secondary system. - I'm guessing they won't but I'd like to confirm: Non-damage offensive modules will not work while the PANIC is active correct? By this I mean Srcams/Neuts/Etc. Hilarious abuse potential otherwise. - Bringing back mining signatures that require probing (in addition to mining anomalies, no need to remove those) would make for much more interesting hunting. People would feel safer and therefore be more sloppy. - Please keep the drone bay at 6000m. Even if 5/6 of it ends up being full of mining drones the rest of that space is key to the ship being viable against small gangs. One of the biggest reason my Rorq never leaves a POS is that, while I can combat fit the thing and have it tank like a pro, it has so little drone space that a capable five man roam can render it harmless in a couple minutes. Then it's pinata o'clock and that's never fun. - the PANIC button is great for discouraging cap drops, which is really nice. - Jump range increase is amazing, thank you. - I like the fact that the mining potential on this thing is not linked to fitting; it can roll full combat fit and still pull in some serious ore. That being said, a drone mining augmentation module would provide more interesting gameplay choices if you wanted to add one. Remember the poor Vexor and its red-headed stepchild of a mining drone bonus! - Will the drones drop ore into the ore bay or cargo? I ask because that's the kind of bug that gets overlooked sometimes and it should be the ore bay... - Will it be possible to refit a new PANIC button off another Rorqual or a depot and use it immediately after you burn out the first? I would suggest some kind of cooldown or another constraint on this, otherwise I can just park two Rorqs next to each other, type iddqd in local, and stop giving a **** about anything... - A thought on the panic button and the overall combat capacity of these things. They are pretty close to old standard drone carriers in terms of their damage output, and the PANIC button plus the FAX tank and strong remote reps would make them very difficult to stop if enough of them got together. I think there is a real danger of a "Rorquing Ball" capfleet becoming the new dominant meta. I think the best way to fix this would be to stop a ship with a weapons timer from activating the button. That would give the attackers a minute to kill one which was participating in combat.
Myrriam Elusive Hamsters TERRA REGNUM 1	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:26:23 - [182] - Quote Somebody already tried to figure amount of tank which will have 20 Rorqs in remrep setup? And I personally know ppl who will have 20 rorqs deployed right after this changes goes live.
Artcanin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 7	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:26:47 - [183] - Quote Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. This needs to be addressed.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:26:53 - [184] - Quote Tiberizzle wrote: #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. Assuming it works like normal drones, there is a "mine repeatedly" option.
Lady Ayeipsia Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 1208	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:35:43 - [185] - Quote For the PANIC... How will the speed decrease and increase be handled? In other words if a fleet is waiting for it's target to lose invulnerability, if they time it correctly will the fleet be able to hit a ship at a reduced velocity as it speeds back to max or will speed be at max when the invulnerability drops?
Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 108	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:42:42 - [186] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: Rorq is only 3 billion, that's cheap, insurance mitigates a bunch of that. Players out in the far reaches of nullsec will have whole fleets of these suckers. The supply of minerals will be obscene, leading to an inevitable crash of mineral prices and a whole lot of supercaps being built. Think they've overdone the yields on these. Wrong wrong and wrong. Drama drama drama. It will be ganked over and over till people realize two things: A: It is a kick ass **** kill B: Keep it out of siege mode Believe me, there are going to be some nice exciting fights. After the first person that loses 15 in a belt to a well coordinated fleet rage posts, people will get the point. These changes are awsome. Great job CCP, I have not been a fan of your changes hardly ever, but some great risk vs reward here.
Querns GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2514	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:44:29 - [187] - Quote Rowells wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. Assuming it works like normal drones, there is a "mine repeatedly" option. This is meant to illustrate that there is travel time between each cycle of the mining drone, even if it automatically returns to mine a new cycle. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 108	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:48:11 - [188] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: Gustav Mannfred wrote: 18000m3 per minute is more than 10 times more than an exumer(hulk has about 1600m3 per minute).. Your math is VERY wrong. My hulk mines significantly more than that per laser. In reality, it will be a little more than 4 hulks. If that. Gustav Mannfred wrote: Is there any reason to bring some mining berges? Yes. To mine out the mercoxit. Or because you don't feel comfortable putting 15+ Billion isk on grid at the moment. Gustav Mannfred wrote: 2. With 10ly jumprange and its insane drone dps bonus this ship becomes the #1 choise for hotdroping and pvp. It is also like the old carriers, with its 15 effective heavy drones it has the same amount as carriers were able to launch before citadel. This also makes it again possibile to run havens and sanctums afk and get about 40 mil per tick or so. No, for the same reason you don't rat in a dreadnaught. You finish the site in 10 minutes then spend 5 waiting for the siege cycle to end so you can move to the next one. By the time you warp and land you're making Ishtar level ticks. Likewise if you're going to drop in and siege with a glass cannon fit, why would you not drop a suicide dreadnaught that does 5x the dps of the Rorq for the same cost? [quote=Gustav Mannfred]3. With its bonuses to RR, this ship is just like a FAX with a lot more DPS. The Industrial core boosts remote reps AND DPS. FAX triage module set drone dps to 0 when activated. A Rorqual with T2 Capital remote booster repairs 1150 HP per cycle A Minokawa with same repairs for 7906 HP per cycle Your on point here. I will most likely use a orca + skiff setup. You never put out too much shiny or be prepared for a large drop of dreads. I do like the rorqual changes a lot, but no way in hell you will catch me putting one in a belt, definately back to being the poor man JF though =) Great changes ccp
Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 108	Posted - 2016.10.05 15:51:44 - [189] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Thanks for the feedback so far everyone. A couple quick answers to questions we see coming up multiple times: We're not planning on changing the restrictions on what ships are allowed into the Rorq SMB at this time. The concern with removing the restrictions is that it would become too powerful combined with the increased jump range. The mining foreman ships won't have any ability to mine gas or mercoxit at this time. You'll want to use other ships for mining those substances. Fozzie these are all great changes, they really are. I have heard a lot of how strong defensively they will be. But as we all know, players are crafty and they will be sunk like any other ship, albeit a lot more fun to take down now. I mine for my living and pretty much have been in industry since 03. My bank account is moderate size, but I can not wait to get in on some fleets where someone decided to put 15 on the field. Be one hell of a battle. Great changes man they really are. Thanks for increasing that jump range, I always used my rorqual as a poor mans JF and it is good for corps just getting into null. Just great changes all around. Lot of new content for both the pvp crowed and the care bears. Lots of fun in the future.
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 16:08:22 - [190] - Quote FearlessLittleToaster wrote: - Please make the big mining drones faster. Otherwise their real and theoretical yields will be absurdly far apart. And parking caps next to a rock is stupidly tedious; if this thing is supposed to be less of a mining beast than it's stats read like just nerf the stats rather than getting there through a non-intuitive mechanic on a secondary system. ... - I like the fact that the mining potential on this thing is not linked to fitting; it can roll full combat fit and still pull in some serious ore. I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose. You will want to fir those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP! Now we only need to make sure its combat capabilities are balanced. Rorquing ball may be a thing. And definitely all offensive modules (including neuts and EWAR) should not be functioning while in PANIC.

Damjan Fox Fox Industries and Exploration 298	Posted - 2016.10.05 16:13:37 - [191] - Quote Just a thought... If i park an industrial ship with a fleet hangar (full of PANIC modules) next to my Rorqual, could i just swap the burned PANIC module for a new one? If the Panic module doesn't give me a weapons timer, which prevents refitting, could i just swap modules as long as i have new ones in my industrial? Proposal: >>> New Inventory / Item Hangar <<<
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 16:57:58 - [192] - Quote Querns wrote: Rowells wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. Assuming it works like normal drones, there is a "mine repeatedly" option. This is meant to illustrate that there is travel time between each cycle of the mining drone, even if it automatically returns to mine a new cycle. Ah ok
Gevlin Fink Operations The Volition Cult 288	Posted - 2016.10.05 16:58:36 - [193] - Quote in the PANIC Mode I am concerned about the use of Capital repers being used when Panic Mode is on, Its repair ability repair other combat ships while in Industrial and Panic mode, making it an unkillable Force Aux target for upto 7.5 mins Could this repairing be only limited to those sharing the same Panic effect as the Rorqual, since it only will be working on ships producing no FPS, Even giving the inability to use remote reps while in panic mode might work. What about the Panic mode effecting Electronic warfare - for 7.5 mins you have indestructable industrials that can tackle and jam for upto 7.5 mins, being immune even to doomdays Mining fleet = best Tackle -> should not be the case. To keep the Panic in line with it's intentions of being a Sit and wait for help tool Prevent Rorqual providing Remote reps, --> it has a passive regen x10 ability plus a 99.99% immunity. I would take a capital feel to take out a Covetor. remote reps beyond drones would be overkill. Prevent the use of Electronic fair modules Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 17:04:21 - [194] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Now we only need to make sure its combat capabilities are balanced. Rorquing ball may be a thing. And definitely all offensive modules (including neuts and EWAR) should not be functioning while in PANIC. I'd suggest simply stop cycling of all modules. And disconnect all drones. Otherwise, it will be rather difficult to keep track on all those exploits we can possibly come with.
Frauleinwunder PH0ENIX COMPANY Phoenix Company Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 17:07:08 - [195] - Quote Also another question as to the yields stated before, does that include the effecs of Drone damage amps?
FearlessLittleToaster GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 137	Posted - 2016.10.05 17:30:32 - [196] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose. You will want to fit those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP! Now we only need to make sure its combat capabilities are balanced. Rorquing ball may be a thing. And definitely all offensive modules (including neuts and EWAR) should not be functioning while in PANIC. The problem with that is how hard it hits anyone trying to mine anywhere other than an upgraded nullsec anom. The anoms have a few huge rocks that miners can park next to, which would mean fitting an MWD to relocate every few cycles. A belt or one of the randomly spawned mining sites, on the other hand, features tons of little rocks spread out over a very large area. That isn't to say the amount of ore available in belts is small, quite the contrary, but using the current numbers for these drones a mining barge would probably perform better. There wouldn't be much manual piloting could do to fix this, the asteroids are spread tens to hundreds of KM apart and most wouldn't last a single core cycle. Warping in and out would take minutes for each rock. Same with drone speed augmenters, even fit for max drone speed travel would take more time than mining for all but the closest asteroids. So if the design goal is to soft-restrict Rorq mining to upgraded systems where mining anoms spawn then the mining drone speeds make sense. If not then it needs changed. I can think of a couple use cases where this restriction would cripple emergent gameplay: - It would force anyone using a Rorq to mine in a couple utterly predictable locations, instead of giving the choice between highest yield in a the obvious location of an anom or lower output hiding in one of thirty belts (Output/time would probably be around a T1 mining barge with drone speed as low as it is). - It would prevent an organized corp from dropping Rorqs on a system to blitz-mine the industrial index up as a defensive tactic, which would otherwise be a really cool application for the upgraded hull. Without the upgrade spawned anoms a fleet of Procurers would be better, a rather sad state for the end-all of mining hulls. - Since anyone who wants boosts while belt mining (say for Mercoxit, which will still need barges) will likely need a Rorq in the belt anyhow. This would be frustrating for the Rorq pilot to say the least, they would get all the risk but none of the benefit of flying the hull. Also just consider how much of a hit to output this would really be. Lets assume that these drones have a 60 second mining cycle and I fit my Rorqual so their speed is boosted to 200m/s. I fit an MWD and so nanofibers too, and 1000m from my mining target. Though it might seem like my drones are going to be making a 10 second round trip, meaning that they will lose 1/7 of their total time mining to travel, the reality is a lot worse. When drones mine a rock they orbit it, and some rocks can be several KM long. If a drone finishes it's cycle on the far side of a larger asteroid it would add massive delay to each run, and not even parking on the rock at zero would prevent that. Then we get into the travel time issue on the hull, namely that with slow drones and the core shut down to relocate a Rorq will be probably mine less than an Exhumer. So if the design forces constant relocation there will be a massive hit to output for even the best flown ships; even the most efficient piloting won't make drones harvest more while the Rorq is in transit. I would rather have fast drones and lower base output than outstanding paper output which cannot be achieved.
Monee Sasen Miners with Teeth 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 17:41:17 - [197] - Quote Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? Is the answer that we will be penalised because the only solution will be not to operate the industrial core which effectively makes the compression null n void which was the main trait of a Rorqual. or Are you just making players move into larger corps/alliances to try and benefit from having a defenders there by eliminating the small people. All in all i think the nessesary use of the Panic button and being stuck ( because it will happen and you will need it ) will just deter the single solo players like me from the game.
Querns GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2515	Posted - 2016.10.05 17:53:27 - [198] - Quote Monee Sasen wrote: Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? Is the answer that we will be penalised because the only solution will be not to operate the industrial core which effectively makes the compression null n void which was the main trait of a Rorqual. or Are you just making players move into larger corps/alliances to try and benefit from having a defenders there by eliminating the small people. All in all i think the nessesary use of the Panic button and being stuck ( because it will happen and you will need it ) will just deter the single solo players like me from the game. Do they not have Astrahus or pos-mounted Compression Arrays where you live? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Monee Sasen Miners with Teeth 0	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:06:20 - [199] - Quote Querns wrote: Monee Sasen wrote: Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? Is the answer that we will be penalised because the only solution will be not to operate the industrial core which effectively makes the compression null n void which was the main trait of a Rorqual. or Are you just making players move into larger corps/alliances to try and benefit from having a defenders there by eliminating the small people. All in all i think the nessesary use of the Panic button and being stuck ( because it will happen and you will need it ) will just deter the single solo players like me from the game. Do they not have Astrahus or pos-mounted Compression Arrays where you live? ok i use the compression mode as a bad example - activating the industrial core then to get full bonus
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:13:46 - [200] - Quote FearlessLittleToaster wrote: I would rather have fast drones and lower base output than outstanding paper output which cannot be achieved. Me, on contrast, prefer Rorqual to be a wunderwaffe on paper and every miner's pipe dream. But if said miners get into those vessels, I dont want them to crash the market. It is very good if Rorq requires expert manual piloting. Give them miners something to do, and solve the multiboxing problem. Sounds great.

Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 355	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:19:29 - [201] - Quote Monee Sasen wrote: Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? ... Are you just making players move into larger corps/alliances to try and benefit from having a defenders there by eliminating the small people. You can: - insure it and pray to Bob; - recruit more ppl; - use barges. A small corporation cannot drop titans left and right like PL either. So what? HTFU.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:21:49 - [202] - Quote Gevlin wrote: in the PANIC Mode I am concerned about the use of Capital repers being used when Panic Mode is on, Its repair ability repair other combat ships while in Industrial and Panic mode, making it an unkillable Force Aux target for upto 7.5 mins Could this repairing be only limited to those sharing the same Panic effect as the Rorqual, since it only will be working on ships producing no FPS, Even giving the inability to use remote reps while in panic mode might work. What about the Panic mode effecting Electronic warfare - for 7.5 mins you have indestructable industrials that can tackle and jam for upto 7.5 mins, being immune even to doomdays Mining fleet = best Tackle -> should not be the case. To keep the Panic in line with it's intentions of being a Sit and wait for help tool Prevent Rorqual providing Remote reps, --> it has a passive regen x10 ability plus a 99.99% immunity. I would take a capital feel to take out a Covetor. remote reps beyond drones would be overkill. Prevent the use of Electronic fair modules I think the purpose of remote reps in the panic would be to assist your defenders.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:23:46 - [203] - Quote Can we get some more details on the excavator/ore/ice drones?
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 1286	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:37:08 - [204] - Quote Myrriam wrote: Somebody already tried to figure amount of tank which will have 20 Rorqs in remrep setup? And I personally know ppl who will have 20 rorqs deployed right after this changes goes live. Roughly between a ** load and a ** ton. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 1286	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:39:00 - [205] - Quote Rowells wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. Assuming it works like normal drones, there is a "mine repeatedly" option. That doesn't change the mine one cycle and return behavior. Mining drones have always worked that way. They return to the parent ship to drop off their ore and then go back to the rock after each cycle Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 630	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:42:50 - [206] - Quote Querns wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with ** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. Tiberizzle, as usual, with the Real Dope on eve game mechanics. Listen to this man. Why on earth would any miner be 40k away from the rocks and trying to use drones? Take a shuttle, bookmark a rock then warp to it..what's the problem? Solecist Project*...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse* ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want." Welcome to EVE.
FearlessLittleToaster GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 138	Posted - 2016.10.05 18:59:57 - [207] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Me, on contrast, prefer Rorqual to be a wunderwaffe on paper and every miner's pipe dream. But if said miners get into those vessels, I dont want them to crash the market. It is very good if Rorq requires expert manual piloting. Give them miners something to do, and solve the multiboxing problem. Sounds great. I would be more receptive to this argument if it required expert manual piloting. Unfortunately neither making 50 bookmarks before mining nor turning on an MWD, clicking an asteroid, and hitting approach are all that engaging. If a mechanic was created to make mining engaging and heavily reward skill I would be 100% behind it. This, on the other hand, would just be tedious.
Querns GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2515	Posted - 2016.10.05 19:06:34 - [208] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: Querns wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. Tiberizzle, as usual, with the Real Dope on eve game mechanics. Listen to this man. Why on earth would any miner be 40k away from the rocks and trying to use drones? Take a shuttle, bookmark a rock then warp to it..what's the problem? The rorqual has to siege. This locks it in place for 5 minutes. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Dutow Sa Jupiter Fleet 3	Posted - 2016.10.05 19:31:49 - [209] - Quote Quote: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range Just keep calm and don't panic for a moment: let's focus on these changes for the industry core. With a single capital ASB, a Rorqual is easily capable of tanking 15-20k++ dps. Can repair 340 shield hp / sec per large remote shield rep. Assuming 80% resistances, that's 1.7k dps. With 8 high slots, it's not that hard to fit 4 reps or even more => 6.8k dps tanked for fleetmates. These numbers are without fleet boosts, and the Rorqual receives bonuses for shield boosting too. And there's still slots left for drone modules. Add ECM immunity as a nice extra. So if this Rorqual is defending a citadel, where it's easy to supply it with infinite amount of charges for it's ASB... Now let's remember that panic button too! "tethering (if already tethered do not apply)". So it's not just that I can perma-panic a rorqual using another's fitting service, I can even keep said rorqual tethered if I want to? Nice extra, might be useful sometimes. It's a simple tradeoff: keeping one rorqual in panic means we lose around some dps, but we get an invulnerable ewar + command boost platform. Good thing that panic won't affect other Rorquals: that would hurt our dps. Also, now any of our corpmates should be able to fly invulnerable ewar indy ships to annoy the enermy (and keep their logis jammed and scrambled). By corpmates, of course I mean 10 multiboxed alpha clones in T1 indy ships. Multiboxing is easy when you don't have to watch most of your alts! Just orbit & scram & jam the logis, and forget about them until you devour their other ships with your drones and any other combat ships (kept alive by remote reps of two or more rorquals)
David Mandrake Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 25	Posted - 2016.10.05 19:33:06 - [210] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: I have no idea what you're talking about. But you have skill extractors. To explain for the people who don't understand shield tanking. Shield regen is not static. It varies based on your current shield level. Your max shield regen is at about 33%, as your shields drop below 33% the passive regen actually gets less. Tactical Shield Manipulation moves your bleed through margin by 5% per skill level. Bleed through is where a small percentage of the damage to your shields actually skips shields and applies to armour. While this sounds like a bad thing, it actually helps passive shield tanking by keeping your shield regen at a higher level meaning overall you can take more damage over time. This means Tactical Shield Manipulation actually hurts your passive shield tanking the better you have it trained. I can't name a single other skill in EVE where training it makes something worse. Most people have to train this skill to 4 in order to use Tech 2 Invulns, the odd wallet warrior keeps it at 1 and only ever uses faction invulns which cost a lot more obviously, but means they get better passive tank. By making this a requirement of V, you have to put yourself in the worst possible position for passive shield tanking, and you will not be able to extract it because it is a requirement for something else, and you can't extract requirements. So no you do not have skill extractors, and it's high time CCP solved this skill being a negative to train. To put it out there, having tested this awhile back, you're looking at a negligible regen bonus from TSM IV vs V. it is a slight hurt to train it - but on a Chimera fit for full resists on the weapons I was using, it wound up being a 1k or so HP difference on the killmail iirc. I'll try to see if I can find my results - and if not, I'll see about recreating it - but although it is a net negative to train, the negative effect likely won't play a role aside from a few edge cases.

Denngarr B'tarn Cripple Creek Serrice Council. 5	Posted - 2016.10.05 20:48:38 - [211] - Quote I'm actually stunned that the 'Extractor' drones are looking as good as they are. I'm all for more drones in the mining belts personally as currently they just aren't worth much (or in case of ice, useless). With the PANIC button, based on what I could read, we can at least align to a warp out, so it's far less likely to be a massacre or potentially crawl to the edge of bubbles. A cyno would definitely be nice to fire off to warp in a rescue fleet. The only thing I can see that it troubling is the amount of Heavy Water the T2 Industrial core requires. Since I don't use T2 siege/triage, it may be a comparable difference, but that additional 500 pre-bonus is just painful as hell. I hate having to burn heavy water anyhow, but this could really make it prohibitive to run with a T2 core. I would personally only recommend 1250 at most since we're only seeing a 20% increase in boosting from T2 vs T1. That being said, I'll be finishing off Industrial Reconfiguration V just so I can give it the max on boosting.
David Mandrake Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 25	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:19:25 - [212] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: PANIC module wrote: All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0 What about neuts and ewar? Can I have a wing of Scorpions sitting there invulnerable for the most of the fight and jamming the crap out of enemies? Because Scorpions are not industrial ships, and as people seem to be missing a lot, industrial ships are the only ships that are covered by the PANIC module. Otherwise it would not only be pretty prone to abuse, but abuse far greater than just having a few battleships on field with your miners to jam things. Monee Sasen wrote: Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? Is the answer that we will be penalised because the only solution will be not to operate the industrial core which effectively makes the compression null n void which was the main trait of a Rorqual. or Are you just making players move into larger corps/alliances to try and benefit from having a defenders there by eliminating the small people. All in all i think the nessesary use of the Panic button and being stuck ( because it will happen and you will need it ) will just deter the single solo players like me from the game. Because larger groups have more resources, so they're able to field bigger toys. If you try to set up the Rorqual so that a tiny group can use it in near complete safety from the larger groups, then you'd basically have to make it unkillable - I mean, using your argument, CCP isn't doing much to help me if my Rorqual is dropped by a few dozen Titans and supers. But it's not expected to. If you're attacked by a group large enough to completely destroy your defense, then they're going to kill your big toys if you make them vulnerable. Thus act accordingly. This is Eve. If you can't defend it or get people to defend it for you, you don't deserve to have it. Dutow Sa wrote: Stuff I had a big reply written out to your post, but the forums won't let me post it. But I think you need to look at the Rorqual as not a big mining barge, but as a capital, and compare it to those. I also think you need to check your numbers - the Rorqual can't rep nearly as much as you claim (the bonus is on it's local reps, not remote) - and even if it could, a Fax will outstrip it's repping power with a single repper. For a combat situation, aside from fun fleets, I don't see why you would choose a Rorqual over a cheaper ship that's more effective at it's job - and yes, other caps are cheaper than Rorquals. The single most expensive ship I've ever owned is a Rorqual, and I've owned every kind of capital. You could, potentially, use it as an Entosis ship similar to what people are doing with Faxes - but it's still expensive to do this with it. Basically it's an expensive, jack of all trades ship and although it does have it's niche and will do great doing what it's designed to do - mining support and logistics (not the fleet logistics type, the "I need 100,000m3 of fuel moved to this tower in the middle of nowhere" logistics). But it won't do that great at anything else, and I don't think you'll see any serious fleet concepts with it. Though I'm sure people will do Battle Rorqs, just like they do already, and they'll still die in a fire.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 139	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:22:12 - [213] - Quote Will the PANIC button be restricted with a weapons timer? I won't argue whether or not it should, but is it intended gameplay to get engaged by a gang, slaughter some with 2000 drone DPS, and once I get into armor PANIC and rep myself back up while invulnerable? Also, does the max yield include Capital Drone Mining Augmentors or is it just with max skills? I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Echo Mande 83	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:37:43 - [214] - Quote Querns wrote: Do they not have Astrahus or pos-mounted Compression Arrays where you live? The main bonus of onboard compression is not so much to bypass citadels or compression arrays, as it is to allow a command ship to stay on-station longer and to not have to have a chain of haulers to haul all that ore at a 1:1 volume to a citadel or POS array. With the nifty tractor bonuses this will also include other mining ships' ore. Less haulers == more miners or PVP cover. Call on-board compression another quite powerful way of helping fleetmates mine more effectively. Those reasons are the same reasons I would really really like the orca to be able to compress. Wallet remarks everywhere
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 454	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:52:05 - [215] - Quote this is a refreshing post. you guys have it going the right way on the mining side. the porpouse is a cool lil ship! orca changes rule! 5 hammer heads? not, 1 gecko. and the rorqual..holy ****! i dont understand the cargo scanner bonus tho. its only used in low or null, you arent worried about scanning folks cargo. by the time you lock anyone they have warped. feelt windows tells you how much each person mined. maybe someone can tell me how this can be used? anyway, 18.4k per minute under siege is 92k per siege or a full ore hold in 10 minutes. EPIC! jump in a wh, siege in a belt and 10 minutes later, come home and build a battleship.. =) (or so)... 5 rorquals in a belt sieging will be 10k dps. assign to a drone bunny and smoke everything that comes in belt. i take back all but 3 of the bad things i said about you fozzy... ;-)
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 454	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:56:03 - [216] - Quote Denngarr B'tarn wrote: I'm actually stunned that the 'Extractor' drones are looking as good as they are. I'm all for more drones in the mining belts personally as currently they just aren't worth much (or in case of ice, useless). With the PANIC button, based on what I could read, we can at least align to a warp out, so it's far less likely to be a massacre or potentially crawl to the edge of bubbles. A cyno would definitely be nice to fire off to warp in a rescue fleet. The only thing I can see that it troubling is the amount of Heavy Water the T2 Industrial core requires. Since I don't use T2 siege/triage, it may be a comparable difference, but that additional 500 pre-bonus is just painful as hell. I hate having to burn heavy water anyhow, but this could really make it prohibitive to run with a T2 core. I would personally only recommend 1250 at most since we're only seeing a 20% increase in boosting from T2 vs T1. That being said, I'll be finishing off Industrial Reconfiguration V just so I can give it the max on boosting. 20% per ship for the same 500 HW cost. 10 mining ships would generate 200% yield. thats another 2 miners for 500 HW.
exiik Shardani Imperial Spacedrill and Logistics 82	Posted - 2016.10.05 21:58:22 - [217] - Quote amazing changes on rorqual. that is kind of love what rorq need :-) <3 sry for my English :-(
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3118	Posted - 2016.10.05 22:02:04 - [218] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: i dont understand the cargo scanner bonus tho. its only used in low or null, you arent worried about scanning folks cargo. by the time you lock anyone they have warped. feelt windows tells you how much each person mined. maybe someone can tell me how this can be used? Presumably you could scan a cargo can and see if it's full or not, then tractor it in.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 162	Posted - 2016.10.05 22:09:19 - [219] - Quote Monee Sasen wrote: Why is there always an assumption that that panic button is there to allow time for defenders to come and help. What if you operate in a small corp in null and there is no-one to help? Because you have mining barges around you that can warp off until you panic to reship for combat to break tackle and free the Rorqual, even if no one else is online. The panic button can also be hit as you start taking armor damage. It will regenerate the Rorqual's shield to full and reset the fight, though you will most likely remain under severe capacitor pressure. You are also in no way required to fit a panic button, opting instead for a different high slot such as a smartbomb or neutralizer which may be more fitting to your situation. Monee Sasen wrote: Is the answer that we will be penalised because the only solution will be not to operate the industrial core This touches on a post I made in the previous dev blog thread. I believe the Rorqual and core should not have a significant increase in the mining burst strength over other boosters. Players should not feel punished using the weaker booster options with their barges. The choice on whether to field/siege or not should be purely based on the personal yield of the Rorqual itself. The current proposal looks like this for a 3 MLU Hulk benefiting from T2 cycle link +implant: T1 Battlecruiser : 2997 m3/min Porpoise : 3169 m3/min Orca : 3262 m3/min Rorqual : 3467m3/min Not too bad so far. Unsieged Rorq is only a 298 m3/min increase over a porpoise for a 9.4% gain. T1 Core : 4312 m3/min T2 Core : 4533 m3/min And here is where we miss the mark. A T2 sieged rorqual adds 1364 m3/min to the hulk, for a 43% yield increase over a Porpoise. 30% more than an unsieged Rorqual is FAR too much of a jump. This also puts the theoretical max yield of the rorq itself, without factoring travel time, at 4 boosted hulks. Combined with travel times, that carrot is looking less and less juicy. Especially considering unsieging to relocate may affect burst uptime on the barges in the fleet. I originally expected a sieged effective yield of two hulks. But the more I think about it, the more I think it will fall below that mark.
Decaneos Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 145	Posted - 2016.10.06 00:54:01 - [220] - Quote I think people are not reading things very well. If you are in panic mode the only thing you can do is MINE!!!! you cant tackle, you cant use EW and you cannot attack.

Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 164	Posted - 2016.10.06 01:11:09 - [221] - Quote Decaneos wrote: I think people are not reading things very well. If you are in panic mode the only thing you can do is MINE!!!! you cant tackle, you cant use EW and you cannot attack. No. The only thing you CANNOT do is damage or leave the grid. Quote: +99.99% Shield Resists -90% Shield recharge duration (increases passive shield regen rate) All turret, missile, drone and smartbomb damage set to 0 Prevents warp, cloak, jump, dock, tethering (if already tethered do not apply) As presented, you can repair other ships. You can apply ecm, damps , webs, points, remote sebos, capacitor warfare, provide shield bursts, use ECM drones, logistic drones, neuting drones, and so on and so forth all while invulnerable to damage (but still vulnerable to being neuted out yourself, and affected ships that are not a sieged rorq are vulnerable to ewar). As it stands, to engage a mining fleet, you will need neuts. Lots and lots and lots of Neuts.
Mariko Musashi Hareka Kaishin. 1	Posted - 2016.10.06 03:46:10 - [222] - Quote Movement Effects: -100% Rorqual velocity +900% Rorqual mass Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering Can we get the -100% Rorqual velocity removed on the industrial and remove the changing of the ship it is not needed anymore in the game as compression is now instant and the bpos/bpcs for compression were removed so this is outdated and not needed. Using the invul field already basically keeps you stuck on grid so need to keep the rorqual immobile using the industrial core. Or at the very least reduce the cycle time of the industrial core to 1 minute as compression is instant now and the longer time for indy core cycle time is obsolete.
Zanthar Eos Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion 3	Posted - 2016.10.06 04:15:01 - [223] - Quote I really like these changes. Can't wait to get out in the belts with this.
Dutow Sa Jupiter Fleet 3	Posted - 2016.10.06 04:55:34 - [224] - Quote David Mandrake wrote: I had a big reply written out to your post, but the forums won't let me post it. But I think you need to look at the Rorqual as not a big mining barge, but as a capital, and compare it to those. I also think you need to check your numbers - the Rorqual can't rep nearly as much as you claim (the bonus is on it's local reps, not remote) - and even if it could, a Fax will outstrip it's repping power with a single repper. For a combat situation, aside from fun fleets, I don't see why you would choose a Rorqual over a cheaper ship that's more effective at it's job - and yes, other caps are cheaper than Rorquals. The single most expensive ship I've ever owned is a Rorqual, and I've owned every kind of capital. You could, potentially, use it as an Entosis ship similar to what people are doing with Faxes - but it's still expensive to do this with it. Basically it's an expensive, jack of all trades ship and although it does have it's niche and will do great doing what it's designed to do - mining support and logistics (not the fleet logistics type, the "I need 100,000m3 of fuel moved to this tower in the middle of nowhere" logistics). But it won't do that great at anything else, and I don't think you'll see any serious fleet concepts with it. Though I'm sure people will do Battle Rorqs, just like they do already, and they'll still die in a fire. I'm pretty sure about my numbers: By a quick check in pyfa, a current Rorqual with around 80% resists and a single CASB has above 6k / sec local reps. If I multiply that by 3.5... Okay, I ignored the reload time here, but the fact is, it's easy to reach insane tank on a rorqual in controlled situations (e.g. where you are able to supply it with an insane amount of cap charges). Even if I missed something and these bonuses are additive with something else, it's still insane. For the remote reps: -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use. I'm pretty sure that's a bonus there. I was also speaking about a very specific situation: indy corp defending its base somewhere. I'm also sure that the same facts make dual/multi boxed mining rorquals really hard to kill (yes, they can't remote rep each other while the core is active, but they can rep the defense fleet) - assuming that mining with excavator drones will be worth it.
Commander Who Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time Solyaris Chtonium 7	Posted - 2016.10.06 05:15:54 - [225] - Quote Zappity wrote: I wish the Rorqual super drones were fighters. The fighter interface is soooo much better than the drone interface and is much more fun to use. I think something like this would be good, at the moment if you park the rorqual in a Enormous Field and target one of the large Spodumain Rocks (>60000 = 960,000m-¦) will take ~ 1hr @ 18,400m-¦/min mining rate to eat it + Travel. If the drones works the same as other mining drones (right click mine) then you have not changed anything it will still be afk mining just a little bit risker. Set your Shield alarm to 98% and watch TV, will only become interesting if: NPC Rats come to the belt Someone actually comes into the system and actually wants deal with killing a full tank with the Don't Touch Me module and the OP as hell damage drones on them; or your ore hold is full and you need to compress
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.06 05:55:53 - [226] - Quote the cargo scan is nice if we were still in 2007 before we could abandon cans and they turn colors. change the name to "its done" and that nullifies a complete bonus on a ship. now we have a definitive time to pull cans and we dont have to try to target a can with a capital ship. how about dropping the cargo scan option for a drone control and optimal range bonus? the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em. typical situation...drop sentries, set to defend xxx miner only to find out they are out of range. not a good thing. the cargo bonus is 200% range. carriers got a 200% drone/fighter control range bonus before the fighter changes. how about changing the cargo scan bonus to 200% drone control range and say 100% optimal/fall off? or 200% control range as a role bonus and 100% optimal tied to the industrial core siege mode. maybe 150% for t2. much more useful this way. or a 200% control range role bonus and 20% per level optimal/fall off per level.
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.06 06:32:07 - [227] - Quote Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range we only get a bonus to cap for rr? local reps pull a ton of power and now they will be -60 duration. i can see our cap going away quickly and not having any to jump when the core turns off. is this a typo or are we going to go cap dry?
Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1545	Posted - 2016.10.06 08:56:35 - [228] - Quote PANIC module should block entosis/break active locks/disallow it somehow. Whatever it takes, it can't be allowed to go live without a tweak there. A 100% immune entosis ship is a bad thing.
Punky260 Deutsche Lichtbringer AG Fidelas Constans 2	Posted - 2016.10.06 09:42:23 - [229] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range we only get a bonus to cap for rr? local reps pull a ton of power and now they will be -60 duration. i can see our cap going away quickly and not having any to jump when the core turns off. is this a typo or are we going to go cap dry? I guess you have to decide if you commit to the fight and try to safe buddies - or if you rather decide to stay juicy and jump out once you can. This is not a bad mechanic :)
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 164	Posted - 2016.10.06 09:54:02 - [230] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em. The Rorqual fails at this pillar, but not due to control range (which is part of your high slot and rig fitting choices). You are not going to recall your mining turtles to launch combat drones. The barges will instead use their combat drones to clear the rats off the Rorqual, in some cases before the excavators can even be pulled in. In a PvP scenario you are going to abandon the mining drones to launch combat. Rats won't be worth losing the yield to clear faster. If there are no barges on grid, people might even ignore the rats completely. Another thing that may become a big concern with respect to rats, is if they regularly primary the excavators. They are currently listed with 600 shield hp and 0% resists. You are not going to keep them up even if you prelock. We do not yet know the price point of the drones either. Players in small ships will be able to pick away at the drones and run before the Rorqual can respond. Not much of a fleet defender if it can't keep its own mining drones alive, is it? A better choice may be to make the excavator a single, more sturdy drone. The Rorqual could then mine with it while still fielding 4 combat drones. The intent for PANIC is to be able to continue mining, but it will not apply to drones that we know of. Players will kill off the excavators stopping mining activity under panic anyway. To be honest, some people will be more interested in jetting the ore they already have to shrink the lossmail value and hope the attackers leave it behind, rather than want to continue mining. This is part of why I would like to see max targets locked and drone bandwidth set to 0 under panic, to prevent abuse edge cases. ECM Burst would still be usable, for better or worse. You want to retain ability to cycle modules, as dropping out of PANIC with hardners off would be really bad. Making cynos break the invulnerability would also give the pilot control for when the defense fleet needs reps and added dps, with its own costs to doing so. Then we have the problem of dealing with two existing drone bugs in the game. The first makes your drones the top priority target for all rats on grid. It requires a session change to fix. This will periodically cost you excavator drones and mining time until you realize the problem and fix it. The second is a bug that occurs when recalling your drones. They are back in your bay, but your drone interface gets stuck showing them as still in space and "returning". The drones do not show in your drone window as inside the bay, so you can't relaunch the same flight. Launching a different flight does not update the interface. You can no longer tell when your drones are being targeted, which ones are out, or even if they're alive or not unless you can tell yours apart in the drone ball on grid. Recalling the next flight usually bugs out that one as well. I see this bug literally every single day. Sometimes every 20 minutes despite session changes and relaunching the client. I am not looking forward to having to deal with this in a Rorqual in a pvp scenario. "Let me just eject from my ship for 10 seconds and board it again to fix my UI real quick" In fact, when it happened earlier today, it would not update my shields or armor either despite the citadel tether repairing my ship to full.

Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 305	Posted - 2016.10.06 11:43:48 - [231] - Quote @vlad... try repairing your client... that bug never happens to me. so it sounds more like client side than server side
HarlyQ harlyq syrokos investment station Goonswarm Federation 126	Posted - 2016.10.06 11:55:41 - [232] - Quote Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with **** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. This just all this. Also the cyno should be allowed during panic.
Henry Plantgenet Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 117	Posted - 2016.10.06 13:00:15 - [233] - Quote Will these changes prevent the rorqual from being used instead of force auxiliaries because of the increased jump range?
David Mandrake Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 25	Posted - 2016.10.06 14:57:53 - [234] - Quote Dutow Sa wrote: I'm pretty sure about my numbers: By a quick check in pyfa, a current Rorqual with around 80% resists and a single CASB has above 6k / sec local reps. If I multiply that by 3.5... Okay, I ignored the reload time here, but the fact is, it's easy to reach insane tank on a rorqual in controlled situations (e.g. where you are able to supply it with an insane amount of cap charges). Even if I missed something and these bonuses are additive with something else, it's still insane. For the remote reps: -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use. I'm pretty sure that's a bonus there. I was also speaking about a very specific situation: indy corp defending its base somewhere. I'm also sure that the same facts make dual/multi boxed mining rorquals really hard to kill (yes, they can't remote rep each other while the core is active, but they can rep the defense fleet) - assuming that mining with excavator drones will be worth it. I did miss the duration bonus so my apologies on that. You still don't have a lot of remote repping power with the Rorqual compared to a Fax, and I don't think it's enough to really hold up to much. Enough to buy time? Sure. Enough to stop a serious attempt at attacking something without being reinforced by a proper fleet? Not happening. As far as the local tank goes, you can reach a quite high EHP and local rep. You are susceptible to neuting pressure, however, and you do need to keep your active tank running in order to reach these high EHP gains and don't have much room for cap injection. Either way it's all still trying to buy time for help to arrive, because with that sort of a fit you're not going to be killing much although you might survive for awhile. If an indy corp wants to defend it's base with a Rorqual that's fine, but it's not an asset that I, personally, would use for that unless it was a last stand in a wormhole and I wanted to go out fighting and had literally nothing left to fight with. There's a lot better ships to fly to do that with, though.
Cade Windstalker 570	Posted - 2016.10.06 15:48:58 - [235] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: Mole Guy wrote: the fleet will be spread out, we will need to defend our miners. not only rep their shield, but kill the rats on em. The Rorqual fails at this pillar, but not due to control range (which is part of your high slot and rig fitting choices). You are not going to recall your mining turtles to launch combat drones. The barges will instead use their combat drones to clear the rats off the Rorqual, in some cases before the excavators can even be pulled in. In a PvP scenario you are going to abandon the mining drones to launch combat. Rats won't be worth losing the yield to clear faster. If there are no barges on grid, people might even ignore the rats completely. Another thing that may become a big concern with respect to rats, is if they regularly primary the excavators. They are currently listed with 600 shield hp and 0% resists. You are not going to keep them up even if you prelock. We do not yet know the price point of the drones either. Players in small ships will be able to pick away at the drones and run before the Rorqual can respond. Not much of a fleet defender if it can't keep its own mining drones alive, is it? A better choice may be to make the excavator a single, more sturdy drone. The Rorqual could then mine with it while still fielding 4 combat drones. I don't think this is a failure, it's just a choice of trade offs the player has to make. There's nothing anywhere in that blog saying that the ships should be amazing at all three all the time or that defense has to take the form of whacking things for each ship. The Rorqual has the option to be an amazing miner or combat ship, but in some cases it certainly makes more sense to just slap a target painter on it and assist combat drones from the other ships to it. Vald Tegor wrote: The intent for PANIC is to be able to continue mining, but it will not apply to drones that we know of. Players will kill off the excavators stopping mining activity under panic anyway. To be honest, some people will be more interested in jetting the ore they already have to shrink the lossmail value and hope the attackers leave it behind, rather than want to continue mining. This is part of why I would like to see max targets locked and drone bandwidth set to 0 under panic, to prevent abuse edge cases. ECM Burst would still be usable, for better or worse. You want to retain ability to cycle modules, as dropping out of PANIC with hardners off would be really bad. Making cynos break the invulnerability would also give the pilot control for when the defense fleet needs reps and added dps, with its own costs to doing so. I don't really see this as a problem. Some kind of wide area invulnerability is always going to have abuse cases, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing in this instance unless those uses become truly dominant and overpowering rather than niche cases that create amusing stories. I would also point out that setting drone bandwidth to 0 would auto-abandon all deployed drones, which is far from ideal for something like this. Vald Tegor wrote: Then we have the problem of dealing with two existing drone bugs in the game. The first makes your drones the top priority target for all rats on grid. It requires a session change to fix. This will periodically cost you excavator drones and mining time until you realize the problem and fix it. The second is a bug that occurs when recalling your drones. They are back in your bay, but your drone interface gets stuck showing them as still in space and "returning". The drones do not show in your drone window as inside the bay, so you can't relaunch the same flight. Launching a different flight does not update the interface. You can no longer tell when your drones are being targeted, which ones are out, or even if they're alive or not unless you can tell yours apart in the drone ball on grid. Recalling the next flight usually bugs out that one as well. I see this bug literally every single day. Sometimes every 20 minutes despite session changes and relaunching the client. I am not looking forward to having to deal with this in a Rorqual in a pvp scenario. "Let me just eject from my ship for 10 seconds and board it again to fix my UI real quick" In fact, when it happened earlier today, it would not update my shields or armor either despite the citadel tether repairing my ship to full. Both of these bugs are quite rare overall, the first especially gets blamed far more often than it actually occurs, and neither is common enough that CCP should just refrain from doing anything with drones until they're fixed. Regarding the second bug, if you're seeing it that often you may want to check through your client settings and open a ticket with CCP to provide them logs and other information. I've personally been running around primarily in an Ishtar for the last couple of months and I've never seen this bug in hundreds or thousands of drone deploys, swaps, and recalls. If you're seeing it that frequently that would suggest there is an issue with how your client is setup or communicating with the server. In other words, you're an edge case and that sucks, but it doesn't have much bearing on everyone else.
Raven Ship Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.06 17:15:38 - [236] - Quote Force rorquals to stay in belt is bad already, but to give that insane boost to mining of those with industry core active, that is worst possible thing to do, better simply remove mining boost at all. Can't imagine the sick brain behind such idea, but it is what will benefit only few biggest alliances, and put in mayor disadvantage EVERYONE else. Just look at megacyte price, hour after that dev blow, it drop 20%? on price. This is why CCP lose playerbase all the time, as CCP listen to those cry babys gathered around failscade alliances, who are in minority, but cry loudest and everywhere.
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 1295	Posted - 2016.10.06 17:51:57 - [237] - Quote Raven Ship wrote: Force rorquals to stay in belt is bad already, but to give that insane boost to mining of those with industry core active, that is worst possible thing to do, better simply remove mining boost at all. Can't imagine the sick brain behind such idea, but it is what will benefit only few biggest alliances, and put in mayor disadvantage EVERYONE else. Just look at megacyte price, hour after that dev blow, it drop 20%? on price. This is why CCP lose playerbase all the time, as CCP listen to those cry babys gathered around failscade alliances, who are in minority, but cry loudest and everywhere. Most of the mineral prices are dropping because people are speculating that supplies will rise, prices will fall, and they're dumping their stockpiles (which, ironically, is causing supplies to rise and prices to fall). People really are their own worst enemy. The market always finds a new normal though. You just have to ride out the storm. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 146	Posted - 2016.10.06 18:40:53 - [238] - Quote CCP, i'd consider making the rorqual 300mil mass so it can go through mid class wormholes, this will increase activity in wh space for miners and pvpers.
Basil Vulpine Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass 74	Posted - 2016.10.06 19:07:53 - [239] - Quote Some suggestions to throw in to the pot here if CCP is able to be creative with their code Rorqual, PANIC and Cynos. Problem: A mining Rorq under attack being able to light a cyno is good, a PvP rorq being able to light a cyno and be invulnerable is bad. Suggestion: If a Rorqual has a jump reactivation timer (or any fatigue if you want to be cruel) then it can't activate the PANIC module. Now for the Rorqual to be an invulnerable bridgehead through which you can bring your other caps in you need to either defend it after jumping in to the initial cyno or slowboat it in with your spearhead. Though you could still bring it in to system in advance and log it off I guess. PANIC button and TSM 5 Problem: TSM 5 as a pre-req is contentious Solution: Make Mining Upgrades 5 a pre-req. As best as I can read from the comments a lot of people are up in arms about a relatively minor but provable disadvantage from training TSM to 5 instead of leaving it at 4. Since the scale of the problem is relatively minor these people are either devout min/maxers or strictly following what they've been told. While TSM is an obvious choice of pre-req for something that makes a huge change to a shield stat in theory it could be any skill. I suggest Mining Upgrades to 5. Lore wise PANIC is unique and is some weird edge case effect that can be caused by mining augmentation feeding back in to shields. Game balance wise this takes a skill that many miners stopped training at 4 because "you'll never need mining upgrades to 5" and makes them train that to 5 instead. On a skill map that is going to be worse for most people than Int/Mem would be. As an added bonus it's going to encourage people to speed in to a Rorqual and forget their shield skills. Everybody gets to benefit, not just the miners!
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 164	Posted - 2016.10.06 19:28:55 - [240] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: @vlad... try repairing your client... that bug never happens to me. so it sounds more like client side than server side When my alt blitzed L4 missions in a Rattlesnake during the war, I saw it all of twice over the course of months. But blitzing involves constant gate jumps, station docking and ship swaps. Living out of a citadel, staying in-system most of the time, I see it all the time. It's not just me either. I heard dozens of people complain about it on comms over the past month.

Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.06 20:55:22 - [241] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: I don't think this is a failure, it's just a choice of trade offs the player has to make. There's nothing anywhere in that blog saying that the ships should be amazing at all three all the time or that defense has to take the form of whacking things for each ship. The Rorqual has the option to be an amazing miner or combat ship, but in some cases it certainly makes more sense to just slap a target painter on it and assist combat drones from the other ships to it. There definitely need to be some fitting and fleet composition choices. But the design intent for this ship is to enable you to ignore minor intruders and keep mining, even under PANIC. A handful of interceptors being able to all but completely neuter the mining capability of the Rorqual by bouncing in and out sounds like a failure to me. A single drone you can pre-lock, with some buffer to it, sounds more fitting. Even if it takes 100mbit bandwidth. You can't even pull the excavators when hostiles land on grid. It may take 20 or more seconds to recall them off a rock you are sitting at 0 with. These things move at the speed of a slowboating mining barge. Cade Windstalker wrote: I don't really see this as a problem. Some kind of wide area invulnerability is always going to have abuse cases, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing in this instance unless those uses become truly dominant and overpowering rather than niche cases that create amusing stories. There are at least two obvious dominant cases. The first is invincible cyno. It's not at all uncommon to jump a carrier through a cyno and immediately have it light a secondary. Why would you use anything other than the invincible Rorqual for that? More importantly, we have Shield Command Bursts in a capital engagement. Capitals, including titans, are receiving a 2% per level bonus to Command Bursts in this update. Only Command Ships receive the 3% per level bonused links. There is no reason to ever use a shield command ship for that extra edge in tank when an invincible Rorqual provides the same bonus. Meanwhile, armor fleets are left with trying to keep a command ship alive or using 2% links from a capital. The shield burst bonus should drop to 2% per level as with all capitals, and should not be usable in PANIC. (i know, that doesn't require target locks) Beyond that, engaging a mining group with several Rorquals and a number of barges presents a lot of issues. Only one Rorqual needs to panic to enable the barges/industrials to apply invincible electronic and capacitor warfare, or remote reps. ECM drones and modules would have too easy a time breaking tackle to free the remaining rorquals, particularly with options like refitting or outright swapping to a "battle indy" stored in the Rorqual. It is at the very least counter intuitive for the attackers to have to worry about neuting out the invulnerable barges and haulers and killing their ewar drones. More importantly, the Rorquals who manage to get off grid are capital ship pilots liberated to rejoin the fight in a more appropriate ship. Killing off the stuck Rorqual who paniced won't be all that easy. As for bandwidth abandoning drones, "screw the drones, save the the ships" sounds like PANIC to me. The Rorqual will most likely abandon the excavators anyway. The only people who will care about some small and medium drones floating in space are the ones who hold the grid at the end of the fight. Having them auto aggress targets and chase into orbit to land 0 damage hits is also counter intuitive, for both the attackers and defenders.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2712	Posted - 2016.10.06 21:58:40 - [242] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. We are currently leaning towards allowing cyno lighting and watching closely to see if this causes problems. If needed, we can change the effect to prevent cyno lighting and prevent ships with an active cyno from receiving the P.A.N.I.C. effect. Just say no to invulnerable cynos. If you want to light a cyno for reinforcements, it should be done on the Rorquals, not on a invulnerable Procurer. So, since Rorquals cannot receive the PANIC effect, they should be able to light the cynosural field to bring in the reinforcements. Ships with an active cynosural field should not receive the PANIC effect. Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field. I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.06 22:42:36 - [243] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field. I don't see a problem with being able to light the cyno under panic, as long as doing so breaks the invulnerability. FT Diomedes wrote: I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual. Your procurer would have to be in their fleet to benefit. You would need to bring in your own Rorqual, and at that point you may as well have that be your invulnerable secondary cyno. Hilarious things you can do, however, include putting a spy with neutralizers in their fleet. Help cap out their rorqual while benefiting from their own invulnerability. Or take squad command and kick exhumers from fleet right before you drop. Another concern arises when you factor in the jump range increase. You now have welfare triage that can drop at black ops ranges, although cyno jammers can mitigate that. Engagements with invincible reps and ewar on both sides just sound really dumb.
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 6442	Posted - 2016.10.06 23:00:02 - [244] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose. You will want to fit those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP! Good luck with that, as the drone bonus only applies when the core is active, and you are stuck in one spot.
Flashmala Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 44	Posted - 2016.10.06 23:39:37 - [245] - Quote What's the ETA for Sisi? Age does not diminish the extreme disappointment of having a scoop of ice cream fall from the cone.
Mariko Musashi Hareka Kaishin. 5	Posted - 2016.10.07 03:32:06 - [246] - Quote Flashmala wrote: What's the ETA for Sisi? This^^
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 1295	Posted - 2016.10.07 03:40:53 - [247] - Quote Mariko Musashi Hareka wrote: Flashmala wrote: What's the ETA for Sisi? This^^ That ^^ Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Marox Calendale Human League Eleven Signs Network 86	Posted - 2016.10.07 08:25:41 - [248] - Quote Will the Panic Field relay to the ship or to the Pilot? Will I be able to leave a Panic Barge and warp off with my pod? If not, this field will not work very well in Wormhole Space, because my Cavalry are mostly sitting in other Barges next to me, ready to warp back and change to pvp fitted clones and ships. How do the excavator drones work? do they still have to fly back to the rorqual to drop the ore or will they drop jetcans like other pilots will do? What is the highest range of (Capital) Tractor Beams on the rorqual? I didn-¦t see any special (role) bonuses, like I think it now has.
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 177	Posted - 2016.10.07 10:22:55 - [249] - Quote Consumables, invulnerability, consunmed boosters that make mining temporarily better. All very bad ideas. You need to learn how to make the game more productive for people working together from a purely mechanical standpoint. In PVP, people working together can crush a single person, with more efficiency, as there's less risk to anyone on the attacking side being blown up, and the effects of their modules are multiplicative, when someone can bring webs and target painters and someone else can bring a scram and whatever you want. One of the problems is that people are lazy and crying for an easier time. if ore is mined faster on the basis of ship bonuses, all that will happen is prices will drop and people will need to mine more of it, further pushing low level corps or solo miners behind. There's already corp asset ships, they're called covetors and hulks. Ironically enough, these things are corp level because they're inefficient, like the Solo PVPer, but in a GANG, such as C/H+hauler, they're hugely more efficient. You want corps or even loose gangs to be more relevant? HALVE the ore holds of all mining frigs, barges, and exhumers. You want to PUSH that LONG align/warp time of mining ships to encourage the use of haulers. No matter what ships you put in, you're still on a 1 for 1 basis with regard to those ships. In real life, the reason people create companies is because there's a food/hunger incentive to slave yourself to a corporation for fractions of profits. There's no such incentive in eve since the whole immortal/not starving bit. Because of no needs, people can demand a higher price from corps or go it solo, thinking its better to be alone than give some of your profit to a corp. On the 1 for 1 basis, 1 player is an entire mining operation unto themselves. Their ship is digger, conveyor belt, sorter, refiner (yes, the ore is refined from dirty to pristine), and hauler all on their own. That's what 1 for 1 means, when real mines require a larger number of people to perform the same tasks. Not to get too I-Robot here, but we've assumed total automation, which makes it harder to be successful as a mining corp. If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp? Back to PvP and the multiplicative way people improve the outcome by banding together. Ship buffs do that but are quite a tacky way. I prefer to see a purely mechanical way of that being done (e.g. no ship buffs, but the modules and collaboration of each individual player mechanically improve resource gathering). As it stands there's also still one glaring issue which is that people have a bad attitude. Corp based mining can already be quite lucrative but people think that there's no benefit except to go solo. Changing the game before people figure the game out won't help the low enders. High enders don't need more power, because they know all the tricks. The way I see it, these changes are like turning softball into T-ball because the players can't figure out a business model that works. Nothing wrong with a sizable group of people unhappy with content letting their sub lapse for a week to demonstrate this. I think it is in everyone's interest to send a message, rather than let enough straws build up to break the camel for good.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3121	Posted - 2016.10.07 15:22:42 - [250] - Quote You know what would be really cool? If a capital tractor beam worked on asteroids. With asteroids being scoopable.

Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 359	Posted - 2016.10.07 15:47:23 - [251] - Quote Tau Cabalander wrote: Skia Aumer wrote: I think I got it. Excavator drones are slow on purpose. You will want to fit those navigation comps, 3x nonofibers and a capital-sized MWD in order to get a good mining yield. Furthermore, maneuvering between roids will take a lot of attention span, and this makes multiboxing really difficult. Bravo! Good job, CCP! Good luck with that, as the drone bonus only applies when the core is active, and you are stuck in one spot. I know, and I'm absolutely fascinated about that. I will definitely try this as soon as I can, and I didnt mine for years. TBH, the best mining experience I had was during those hulkogeddons some kids might not remember. Yeah, I like it spicy.
The Economist Logically Consistent 40	Posted - 2016.10.07 16:01:27 - [252] - Quote While you're looking at the rorqual and related modules: Any chance of allowing capital tractor beams to work on all wrecks regardless of ownership (at least in 0.0)? The loot whorqual has been sub-optimal for too long!
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 359	Posted - 2016.10.07 16:07:31 - [253] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: (skipping wall of text) If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp? Because you want to hang out with ppl? To learn some tips and tricks and just to chit-chat. Furthermore, you've acknowledged that mining in a fleet provides some benefits - and it really does. Anyway. I can kinda understand your point, but where is the constructive part of your criticism? What do you suggest?
Athril Ostus Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 0	Posted - 2016.10.07 16:22:34 - [254] - Quote Going to be buried at this point.... The Rorqual ship maintenance needs review. It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce. Especially since you can suit case a carrier/dread and drag any fit ships you want. It needs balanced to not challenge the role of jump freighters but at current the limitation on the ship maintenance bay seems needlessly restrictive in contrast to a carrier/dread. Also just a note, Ii think leadership V should be a requirement for mining director 1. The only point of mining director 1 is to use the links. The links themselves require Leadership V.
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 359	Posted - 2016.10.07 17:12:06 - [255] - Quote Athril Ostus wrote: The Rorqual ship maintenance bay needs review. It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce. You will see what is odd when daddy PL starts using them as ghost riders. BTW, can I fit a bunch of heavy scramblers and tackle those titans while being invulnerable under the PANIC mode?
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.07 17:39:47 - [256] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We are interested in hearing what the community thinks about cyno restrictions for ships affected by the P.A.N.I.C. module. We are currently leaning towards allowing cyno lighting and watching closely to see if this causes problems. If needed, we can change the effect to prevent cyno lighting and prevent ships with an active cyno from receiving the P.A.N.I.C. effect. Just say no to invulnerable cynos. If you want to light a cyno for reinforcements, it should be done on the Rorquals, not on a invulnerable Procurer. So, since Rorquals cannot receive the PANIC effect, they should be able to light the cynosural field to bring in the reinforcements. Ships with an active cynosural field should not receive the PANIC effect. Nor should ships receiving the effect be able to light the field. I laugh, however, at the idea of logging off a Procurer with a cyno in a hostile belt, logging in, lighting my cyno and receiving the hostile PANIC effect so I cannot be killed and can keep bringing in more stuff to kill their Rorqual. the rorqual does receive invul mode. they just cant receive it from someone else. they have to jump in and lite it themselves or lite it from the belt. their rorqual and the mining fleet is protected. other rorquals in the belt are not.
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.07 17:44:43 - [257] - Quote scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies. we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships. we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up. its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO. what do we do with the spare ship??? and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that. or "its a designed feature/draw back".. and 5 light years is beautiful.
Skia Aumer Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 359	Posted - 2016.10.07 18:10:27 - [258] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. Are you sure a Rorqual is supposed to be good at ninja mining? I thought that's what the mining frigates are for.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.07 18:50:28 - [259] - Quote Athril Ostus wrote: It seems odd to have a capital industrial ship that cannot transport the ships/items it is helping to produce. It does that just fine. Throw cargo expanders in the lows and you have 105,706m3 of cargo space without even using cargo rigs and a 40km3 fleet hangar. That is already better than a suitcase for ships you produce, which are not yet assembled. You also get double the jump range and -90% fatigue. Carrier ship bays are for relocating combat fit craft.
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 177	Posted - 2016.10.07 20:07:57 - [260] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: 13kr1d1 wrote: (skipping wall of text) If I can get a mining barge and go solo, why do I need your corp? Because you want to hang out with ppl? To learn some tips and tricks and just to chit-chat. Furthermore, you've acknowledged that mining in a fleet provides some benefits - and it really does. EDIT: Let me bring in my vision on the fleet mining and why it is not that popular. You are comparing mining fleets to PVP fleets. Yet, there is a big difference. The in-game purpose of PVP fleet is either to destroy/capture or to defend some target. In fact, most of the time you just destroy and defend. If you capture, you've got a real trouble. The drama behind the distribution of money moons, for example, is beyond hilarious. Even if an enemy jumps out of his ships (it happens once is a while, to safe his pod or smth) - the comms just explode! People start yelling if we should finish the ship to make the killboard green, or we should take it - and if we do, who will take it: either FC, or a hero tackler, or the poorest newbie in the gang. But at least we have killmails, and those killboards give somewhat estimate of people participation and this can be used as a tool to distribute those captured targets. Now imagine a mining fleet, the whole purpose of which is to acquire goods. If someone takes responsibility to lead this fleet, he has to settle so many issues with the little wealth they generate. Look, that dude is slacking - let's reduce his share! Hey, another dude joined halfway through, he doesnt deserve the full reward! That little newbie in a venture is no match for my mighty Hulk! Your Orca doesnt really count, I could bring mine too! Ore hauling is too easy, those folks should've better brought barges... And so on. With that much pressure, an FC of mining fleet does not have even the basic tools! He cannot even monitor how much ore does each of the fleetmates mine. It's not logged anywhere. Well let's escalate further, and look at the corporations as means of generating profit - through mining, refining, production, trade, anything. Are there any tools for accounting? Maybe there are a few, but comparing to the sheer diversity of EVE economy, they are absolutely lackluster. But fixing it requires a huge efforts. I hope we see them, someday. But for now, they're fixing the Rorqual. And they're doing it great. Then tell the masses who want to get rich solo through mining and think corps will cost them money. To point one, PvP and Mining should share a similar property; having more people on grid increases effectiveness mechanically, or thanks to combining the efforts of modules fitted to the ships, rather than continuing to lean super hard on that "give more ships and more buffs" crutch that they've been on since T2 cruisers. Point two, I'll give you my second tier idea. Not my first, that's mine alone. Second tier idea says you get the ore's market values at current time in a big spreadsheet. Then you pay the person that mined such ore that value. Now, youre only paying them the market price, say there's a 15-16 veld spread and you give them 15.5. Because they can sit there and mine continously, they aren't having to set up hauling (and pay for it), or buy a hauler (although this is a one-off unless ganked), and spend TIMEAKAMONEY to haul their own stuff or set those contracts up. If there's a problem ACCOOUNTING for people's value, there's not enough buckets on the line. There's a wealth of information regarding how real mining works, and CCP and players ignore how those companies work and what the requirements are. Take anom ore sites as an example where CCP decided to reduce content by making it "easy" to find them. No more do you need a probe scanner, and the "aggravation" of getting your alt out or hiring someone else. Key point at the end there, hiring someone else. Could you imagine if this game was dynamic enough to allow for "exploration services"? A corporation who's only goal is to discover things in Eve for other players to make use of, and therefore be able to profit from being that kind of individual? But no, CCP pruned this because people complained, just as they're complaining now, about things which they were annoyed to need alts for. People whine because they need alts to run their mining fleets. But they're spending lots of money IRL to be able to multibox those fleets, and in doing so they're doing the literal work 15 other people could be doing with them. They're cutting themselves out of player generated content, then crying, then CCP is making new ships and superbuffing the Rorq. Im sure CCP made it so you don't need probes because people hated the "minigame requirement" of using probes and scanners to find ore, especially since that meant getting their alt out or having another ship in system to do the probing. In actuality PEOPLE are the problem with the game. People who want to be able to SOLO THE UNIVERSE, and are either willing to spend lots of money on multiboxes or just use alts+their own main to probe things down so they can profit from it, and, not willing to share that profit, do not want to involve other players or collaborate, and thus call probing a "time wasting mindless chore thats not fun" until CCP changes it. People's attitudes are the problem. I heard there was an awesome game where it is against the EULA to have alts, or to dual box, etc. That game sounds amazing, because it enforces the need for people to rely on others rather than making alt armies to produce their own ships, mine their own ore, etc. If things keep going this path, I wonder how many subs it'll start stealing from Eve. CCP seems to be designing this game to encourage people to get around cooperative gameplay. Pirate mains going full carebear using alts for market comes to mind. Nothing wrong with a sizable group of people unhappy with content letting their sub lapse for a week to demonstrate this. I think it is in everyone's interest to send a message, rather than let enough straws build up to break the camel for good.

13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 177	Posted - 2016.10.07 20:10:10 - [261] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies. we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships. we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up. its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO. what do we do with the spare ship??? and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that. or "its a designed feature/draw back".. and 5 light years is beautiful. Invulnerability is completely antithetical to the spirit of eve. Its also pretty dumb from a gamePLAY aspect. Where's my rorqual frigate that I can go plow FW in and press PANIC to get 5 minute invulnerability if I do something stupid? Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Ashranesh Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2016.10.07 20:31:30 - [262] - Quote Industrial Core I: Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 1 Duration: 5 minutes Consumption: 1000 units of Heavy Water Enables Ore and Ice Compression no body think this is to long, 5 min in 0.0 ?, you can put that at 2 or 3 min to give chance to put this big ass in safe place or a skill to reduce that cycle time at 2 or 3 min or Industrial Core II: Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5 Duration: 5 minutes Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water Enables Ore and Ice Compression redure the cicle time at the Industrial Core II at 2 or 3 min. 5 MIN is very long sorry for my english
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.07 20:59:23 - [263] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: Take anom ore sites as an example where CCP decided to reduce content by making it "easy" to find them. No more do you need a probe scanner, and the "aggravation" of getting your alt out or hiring someone else. Probing the site down was never a real problem, for the miner. It was the miner's "invulnerability" from roaming gangs that lacked a prober themselves. People who mine their own resources to make their own ships are not really a problem. They take pride in building things themselves and that's fine. They are generally highly inefficient. To make up the cost of the blueprints alone you need to be supplying a market of other players with goods. Mass producers are often purchasing at least a portion of the materials from others. While the Rorqual will ideally spit out large amounts of ore into the economy, it is also its own mineral sink. These things will be blowing up, that's the whole idea. People will also build more for use and stockpiling than one per corporation as it is currently. This would ideally put pressure on the high ends it produces, as well as the Veld and Scordite markets in Empire. We'll see if it actually pans out that way, after the market settles from speculation spikes. It's also why it is important that these changes do not make it TOO safe to deploy. There's also a number of ways to facilitate player interaction within a corporation. You are looking at it from a very narrow view of a "mining company". Eve corporations are more akin to Sci-Fi space mega-corps, delivering a wide range of end products to a market, with their own military to defend their holdings from rampant piracy and rival corporations.
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 87	Posted - 2016.10.07 23:24:14 - [264] - Quote HarlyQ wrote: Tiberizzle wrote: Everyone seems to be getting really excited about the theoretical yield of the rorqual but they're completely forgetting how bad drone mining mechanics are. #1. There isn't even a hot key to make the mine, you have to use the context menu. #2. The drone goes out, mines exactly 1 cycle and then returns with its mining amount. The excavator drones exist on tranquility right now and they MWD at 100m/s. That's like a 10+ minute round trip to some of the ore site asteroids even with drone navigation comps and skills. The base speed needs to be an order of magnitude higher, or these things will spend over 90% of their time in transit and a sieged rorqual will be considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. The other option is that the Rorqual, a capital ship with ** for agility and warp speed that must additionally exit siege, rewarps for basically every individual asteroid it mines, and spends 90%+ of its time in warp... and is considerably worse than a barely trained barge in reality. Even if the drones are much quicker than the preliminary stats imply they will be, that theoretical yield will translate into a real yield of 25-50%, if that, and they'll be barely worth using as an upgrade over a Hulk. With a theoretical yield of 18400m^3/minute and the speed as they exist on tranquility currently, for an asteroid 40,000m away (i.e. roughly the range something like half of the rocks in a colossal are from the warpin), it will take the drone 800 seconds (13.3 minutes) to travel for every 60 seconds of mining, meaning its real yield is 6.976% of the theoretical 18400 or 1283m^3 per minute. With drone navigation 5 and the MWD bonus from siege it will be 162.5m/s or 492s (8.2 minutes) of travel for 60 seconds of mining, or 10.8% efficiency / 1999m^3 per minute. That's like 20m isk/hr on spod, lol. Put another way, a rookie ship with Miner II's jetcan mining (187m^3/min) would give an unsieged Rorqual (8.5% efficiency at 40km with 125m/s speed, of 3000m^3/min =257m^3/min) a good contest for most of an ore site after you factor in travel time if the base speed on tranquility is currently representative of final stats. This just all this. Also the cyno should be allowed during panic. Yes, all the above is completely accurate - but I believe we're all missing the point... The Rorqual is NOT** supposed to be a mining ship and replace a proper Barge! It's: a Booster; a Compressor; a Hauler; a ship-carrier; a Defender; and it can also mine some. There should be only between 1-3 Rorquals per belt (dependent on Boosting range) - and a whole slew of barges - because the above is indeed correct. I rather suspect that's why the drone speeds are as they are. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.08 04:15:01 - [265] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: Mole Guy wrote: scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies. we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships. we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up. its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO. what do we do with the spare ship??? and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that. or "its a designed feature/draw back".. and 5 light years is beautiful. Invulnerability is completely antithetical to the spirit of eve. Its also pretty dumb from a gamePLAY aspect. Where's my rorqual frigate that I can go plow FW in and press PANIC to get 5 minute invulnerability if I do something stupid? im not asking for invulerability. thats being given. im talking about when people in the fleet come up to mine. i have their skiff in the SMB. for them to use their skiff, they have to leave their ship floating in space. neither a dread (combat ship) nor carrier, orca nor bowhead have restrictions like this. i can stick a shuttle in a dread or a bs. maybe a DST to get fuel when i run out from jumping around. maybe limit dread to combat only and carriers to drone boats only. doesnt make sense. im just saying you should be able to store the ship you fly to mine in the rorqual. make it limited to frigates and indy ships. that way they can fly a cloaky to the dig site, jump in a skiff and have their cloaky stored. hard to abuse that.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.08 05:09:34 - [266] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: im just saying you should be able to store the ship you fly to mine in the rorqual. make it limited to frigates and indy ships. that way they can fly a cloaky to the dig site, jump in a skiff and have their cloaky stored. hard to abuse that. Use a cloaky venture or blockade runner instead. Or make use of the clone bay. Death clone over, mine, if hostiles show up store the barges and jump out. Who cares about the empty pods. With the extra low and jump range its already treading close to a jump freighter. Don't want it stepping on its toes.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 165	Posted - 2016.10.08 06:04:38 - [267] - Quote Marcus Tedric wrote: I believe we're all missing the point... The Rorqual is NOT supposed to be a mining ship and replace a proper Barge! It's: a Booster; a Compressor; a Hauler; a ship-carrier; a Defender; and it can also mine some. There should be only between 1-3 Rorquals per belt (dependent on Boosting range) - and a whole slew of barges - because the above is indeed correct. I rather suspect that's why the drone speeds are as they are. Tiberizzle is very correct and the importance of it cannot be overstated. However, my view on this is completely opposite to yours. It's the Orca that is the Industrial Command Ship. It should be the sole source of top end mining bursts, just as combat command ship bursts are the top end there. The Porpoise should, and for the most part does, fall in line with Command Destroyers. The Rorqual is a capital. Capitals only get 2% combat bursts, right up to Titans. So should the Rorqual with no burst bonus from the core. At best, have the core push it up to be equal to the Orca. A Hulk with links mining Spod currently makes comparable income to an Ishtar. The Rorqual should be fielded as a capital mining ship and pull income in the ballpark of a ratting carrier. All of its other roles are just utility fillers. I should want to deploy and siege my own Rorqual on the merit of its personal yield, no matter what else is already on field. Not another version of today's log in and look for alternative productive activities for my Rorq pilot, because someone else is already boosting.
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.08 15:49:11 - [268] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: Marcus Tedric wrote: I believe we're all missing the point... The Rorqual is NOT supposed to be a mining ship and replace a proper Barge! It's: a Booster; a Compressor; a Hauler; a ship-carrier; a Defender; and it can also mine some. There should be only between 1-3 Rorquals per belt (dependent on Boosting range) - and a whole slew of barges - because the above is indeed correct. I rather suspect that's why the drone speeds are as they are. Tiberizzle is very correct and the importance of it cannot be overstated. However, my view on this is completely opposite to yours. It's the Orca that is the Industrial Command Ship. It should be the sole source of top end mining bursts, just as combat command ship bursts are the top end there. The Porpoise should, and for the most part does, fall in line with Command Destroyers. The Rorqual is a capital. Capitals only get 2% combat bursts, right up to Titans. So should the Rorqual with no burst bonus from the core. At best, have the core push it up to be equal to the Orca. A Hulk with links mining Spod currently makes comparable income to an Ishtar. The Rorqual should be fielded as a capital mining ship and pull income in the ballpark of a ratting carrier. All of its other roles are just utility fillers. I should want to deploy and siege my own Rorqual on the merit of its personal yield, no matter what else is already on field. Not another version of today's log in and look for alternative productive activities for my Rorq pilot, because someone else is already boosting. sorry, but the orca is almost as expensive as a carrier and should make money comparable since they are both low tier capitals. the rorqual is twice what a carrier is and should make more. its sole purpose is to make isk. carrier is for combat and but be used to make isk. the rorqual is more but can be used to clear sanctums (ive done it. put a carrier in one and a rorqual in the other back before fighter changes). 1kdps rorqual wasnt anything to sneaze on. but a sieged rorqual can double that. just watch local and intel channels. however, in its native habitat, it should way out do a carrier. thing about a ratting carrier, santums despawn and respawn at set intervals. mining sites to not. you can say itll crank out 1.7B if mining dark glitter continuously for an hour, but i think it would be gone before that and the rorqual has to siege to do it. in a good site, you should be able to cut a bunch of rock, then move and siege again. no need to sit and let the drones fly 40k as it was mentioned earlier. i just feel they are different, the 2 cant be compared isk wise. ones is a burst one can be constant. when it can mine gas and whatnot, ill be happy. we need gas compression. buy gas cylinders as an ingredient. compress into cylinders. store cylinders. when used, it goes back from full cylinder to empty. reuse em. maybe give a life span like on real gas cylinders.
faciliam The Scope Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2016.10.08 19:03:45 - [269] - Quote Getting rid of system wide boosting is a bad idea ...its the backbone of eve industry . Because having a Rorqual on grid is even worse . There will be rorqual killing gangs, losses will be great people will park them up ...everyone knows this. Stop bashing miners with dumb changes ..like ore holds and removing a laser of the hulk and give the lone miner some new ships so he can compete if he is not getting boosted. Your trying to kill the game fozzie...sure you don't work for roberts?
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM 6205	Posted - 2016.10.08 20:34:51 - [270] - Quote faciliam wrote: Getting rid of system wide boosting is a bad idea ...its the backbone of eve industry . Because having a Rorqual on grid is even worse . There will be rorqual killing gangs, losses will be great people will park them up ...everyone knows this. Stop bashing miners with dumb changes ..like ore holds and removing a laser of the hulk and give the lone miner some new ships so he can compete if he is not getting boosted. Your trying to kill the game fozzie...sure you don't work for roberts? Uh, if you have a ship that can compete with a boosted ship, why would you use boosted ships? (aside from that, I know people positively salivating over the combat potential of Rorqs) Woo! CSM XI! Fuzzwork Enterprises Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 168	Posted - 2016.10.08 23:24:44 - [271] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: sorry, but the orca is almost as expensive as a carrier and should make money comparable since they are both low tier capitals. the rorqual is twice what a carrier is and should make more. its sole purpose is to make isk. carrier is for combat and but be used to make isk. the rorqual is more but can be used to clear sanctums (ive done it. put a carrier in one and a rorqual in the other back before fighter changes). 1kdps rorqual wasnt anything to sneaze on. but a sieged rorqual can double that. just watch local and intel channels. however, in its native habitat, it should way out do a carrier. thing about a ratting carrier, santums despawn and respawn at set intervals. mining sites to not. you can say itll crank out 1.7B if mining dark glitter continuously for an hour, but i think it would be gone before that and the rorqual has to siege to do it. in a good site, you should be able to cut a bunch of rock, then move and siege again. no need to sit and let the drones fly 40k as it was mentioned earlier. i just feel they are different, the 2 cant be compared isk wise. ones is a burst one can be constant. when it can mine gas and whatnot, ill be happy. we need gas compression. buy gas cylinders as an ingredient. compress into cylinders. store cylinders. when used, it goes back from full cylinder to empty. reuse em. maybe give a life span like on real gas cylinders. Actually, the Orca is half the build cost of a Carrier and double a Command Ship. If mineral prices come down, it will actually get closer to the command ship, which relies on T2 components for most of its cost. The Carrier is also significantly more expensive to fit than an Orca, which uses subcapital modules. In fact, by the time you fit the Carrier and the Rorqual, their cost is relatively close. The Rorqual also insures much better. Not that price point should be indicative of income potential. Where the Orca's personal yield should fit in the scheme of things is better reserved for its own thread, but it should certainly be in line as a mining ship of it's own. Just as combat command ships do non trivial amounts of damage. I was referring more to the broad class of ship and a general ballpark of income. I was also referring to comparing the Rorqual and Carrier in sustained scenarios. Mining Spod, which there is ample supply of for average income, vs a carrier chaining havens. I have limited experience ice mining so can't really speak to the burst potential there. But you need to mine out everything in the ice belt if you actually want it to respawn(afer the timer). Spending a bit of time cherry picking when it's up, assuming you get there first, without considering scouting and setup time, can hardly be considered any kind of income baseline. Ice is probably better looked at in terms of the total m3 to roll the belt, and how the ship performs compared to the other ice mining options in clear speed. Otherwise, It's the same idea as taking the highest potential drop from a 10/10 and saying "well i can run one in 10 minutes, so I can earn 10 billion an hour". One thing that would certainly be a sad state of affairs, is if the Rorqual ended up with higher effective (not theoretical) income potential chaining combat anomalies that it did mining. This is a big part of the reason I would like to see faster drones that mined less ludicrous amounts of ore per cycle. As for gas and mercoxit, I really don't mind there being a niche mining activity that is better done with more appropriate ships. Where it poses an issue is having to bring a boosting ship that can't mine gas, to help mine gas. The Porpoise sounds like a more appropriate ship for that to me, though. It would be nice to see it able to fit two bonused gas harvesters along with links. Otherwise, with a small number of miners, you're better off with a 5 harverster 1 link Ferox. Such niche specializations is also another reason to have less significant discrepancies between the effective strength of mining bursts among the ship classes.
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 148	Posted - 2016.10.09 00:19:41 - [272] - Quote Might be a good time to rid of the industrial core and make the bonuses passive cause I still can't get my head around why the rorqual needs to lock itself in place to do anything, especially to mine. Dreads and FAXs provide big enough bonuses to warrant the immobility but the rorqual doesn't even come close to being such a force multiplier, even in terms of mining, after this patch. If PANIC mode was the only reason a Rorqual had to stay immobile for 10-15 mins then I can understand that in the grand scheme of things. Basically, the rorqual will be a sort of guardian/protector for mining vessels in hostile space but to require that the Rorqual to still stay locked down to perform it's activities at reasonable speeds is ridiculous.
Geronimo McVain EVE University Ivy League 217	Posted - 2016.10.09 07:05:11 - [273] - Quote faciliam wrote: Getting rid of system wide boosting is a bad idea ...its the backbone of eve industry . Because having a Rorqual on grid is even worse . There will be rorqual killing gangs, losses will be great people will park them up ...everyone knows this. Stop bashing miners with dumb changes ..like ore holds and removing a laser of the hulk and give the lone miner some new ships so he can compete if he is not getting boosted. Your trying to kill the game fozzie...sure you don't work for roberts? Well, align the Roq to a savety and let a small ship with lots of webs circle it. Whenever something comes up insta warp out. There ar options, you just have to find them. What the Roq need is a module to push combat drones like the Panic module. This will give others then Sov miners a chance against gangs when using Skiffs. Just boosting the combat qualities of the Roq is useless in a fleet.
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 178	Posted - 2016.10.09 08:01:05 - [274] - Quote Steve Ronuken wrote: faciliam wrote: Getting rid of system wide boosting is a bad idea ...its the backbone of eve industry . Because having a Rorqual on grid is even worse . There will be rorqual killing gangs, losses will be great people will park them up ...everyone knows this. Stop bashing miners with dumb changes ..like ore holds and removing a laser of the hulk and give the lone miner some new ships so he can compete if he is not getting boosted. Your trying to kill the game fozzie...sure you don't work for roberts? Uh, if you have a ship that can compete with a boosted ship, why would you use boosted ships? (aside from that, I know people positively salivating over the combat potential of Rorqs) for double the bonus obviously. And you're CSM?...... Industry ships shouldn't have combat potential even approaching a true military ship design. That's just dumb on it's face. How about you hire some mercs to protect you, or mine in safer space? No, that's too difficult, lets whine until CCP gives us OP industrial ships. Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 178	Posted - 2016.10.09 08:04:16 - [275] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: 13kr1d1 wrote: Take anom ore sites as an example where CCP decided to reduce content by making it "easy" to find them. No more do you need a probe scanner, and the "aggravation" of getting your alt out or hiring someone else. Probing the site down was never a real problem, for the miner. It was the miner's "invulnerability" from roaming gangs that lacked a prober themselves. People who mine their own resources to make their own ships are not really a problem. They take pride in building things themselves and that's fine. They are generally highly inefficient. To make up the cost of the blueprints alone you need to be supplying a market of other players with goods. Mass producers are often purchasing at least a portion of the materials from others. While the Rorqual will ideally spit out large amounts of ore into the economy, it is also its own mineral sink. These things will be blowing up, that's the whole idea. People will also build more for use and stockpiling than one per corporation as it is currently. This would ideally put pressure on the high ends it produces, as well as the Veld and Scordite markets in Empire. We'll see if it actually pans out that way, after the market settles from speculation spikes. It's also why it is important that these changes do not make it TOO safe to deploy. There's also a number of ways to facilitate player interaction within a corporation. You are looking at it from a very narrow view of a "mining company". Eve corporations are more akin to Sci-Fi space mega-corps, delivering a wide range of end products to a market, with their own military to defend their holdings from rampant piracy and rival corporations. Gee, I think I found the problem, then. A probe ship should be part and parcel to any roam. More people necessary to play, more player generated content. Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 168	Posted - 2016.10.09 08:40:50 - [276] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: Gee, I think I found the problem, then. A probe ship should be part and parcel to any roam. More people necessary to play, more player generated content. Two guys roaming in cruisers should totally have to bring probes Anything they could possibly threaten in a mining operation would warp off grid when they see probes on dscan, before you can even initiate warp to the site. That does not "generate content". You are looking for a problem where there isn't one. There's people who pay for wormhole connection bookmarks already, that connect desirable K-Space systems normally very distant from each other. Large alliances have teams of scouts doing this on a regular basis. Also, you may not be aware of the fact that larger roams that have a fleet commander do in fact bring combat probes. They are constantly used by the FC for warpins when bouncing around a grid.
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 178	Posted - 2016.10.09 09:18:40 - [277] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: 13kr1d1 wrote: Gee, I think I found the problem, then. A probe ship should be part and parcel to any roam. More people necessary to play, more player generated content. Two guys roaming in cruisers should totally have to bring probes Anything they could possibly threaten in a mining operation would warp off grid when they see probes on dscan, before you can even initiate warp to the site. That does not "generate content". You are looking for a problem where there isn't one. There's people who pay for wormhole connection bookmarks already, that connect desirable K-Space systems normally very distant from each other. Large alliances have teams of scouts doing this on a regular basis. Also, you may not be aware of the fact that larger roams that have a fleet commander do in fact bring combat probes. They are constantly used by the FC for warpins when bouncing around a grid. Anything they could possibly threaten in a mining operation would warp off grid when they see probes on dscan, before you can even initiate warp to the site. That does not "generate content". " warp off grid when they see probes on dscan, ." *"probes on dscan, "* Or you know, how they alraedy are aligned to warp off now, and do so the moment they see someone in system that could threaten them, or see them within 5-10AU on Dscan. Your reasoning is fallacious. Probe or ship triggers it? Then it doesn't matter if probes required or not. Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 89	Posted - 2016.10.09 15:08:29 - [278] - Quote Anyone know if drone mining augmenter rigs will affect the new excavator drones?
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 149	Posted - 2016.10.09 18:09:51 - [279] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: 13kr1d1 wrote: Gee, I think I found the problem, then. A probe ship should be part and parcel to any roam. More people necessary to play, more player generated content. Two guys roaming in cruisers should totally have to bring probes Anything they could possibly threaten in a mining operation would warp off grid when they see probes on dscan, before you can even initiate warp to the site. That does not "generate content". You are looking for a problem where there isn't one. There's people who pay for wormhole connection bookmarks already, that connect desirable K-Space systems normally very distant from each other. Large alliances have teams of scouts doing this on a regular basis. Also, you may not be aware of the fact that larger roams that have a fleet commander do in fact bring combat probes. They are constantly used by the FC for warpins when bouncing around a grid. The sense of entitlement that some people have knows no bounds. So because you are roaming, kills should automatically fall on your lap? How about actually working for kills like most people do? Those who take their time to ensure they have the right comp of ships, monitor and track their targets aren't fools.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 168	Posted - 2016.10.09 19:45:09 - [280] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: Or you know, how they alraedy are aligned to warp off now, and do so the moment they see someone in system that could threaten them, or see them within 5-10AU on Dscan. Your reasoning is fallacious. Probe or ship triggers it? Then it doesn't matter if probes required or not. Have you actually tried mining aligned in a hulk before? Your ore hold fills up twice as often as you are allowed to jetcan. You mine sitting next to a freight container. An interceptor can easily jump into the system and warp to the anomaly before the hulk can align, depending on where in the system it is currently spawned. TomyLobo wrote: The sense of entitlement that some people have knows no bounds. So because you are roaming, kills should automatically fall on your lap? How about actually working for kills like most people do? Those who take their time to ensure they have the right comp of ships, monitor and track their targets aren't fools. Hi Tomy, I'm a miner. Nice to meet you. I don't think my operation should be able to completely ignore hostiles in our space, unless they bring a massive fleet that we're going to form for and engage before it gets to me anyway. Miners are not entitled to free security. That is why you have better yield and rare resources in dangerous space - because the activity is interruptible by definition. It's also why the yield increase should mostly come from personal capacity of the ships involved (and therefore at risk) rather than someone fielding a booster.

FT Diomedes The Graduates 2717	Posted - 2016.10.09 20:46:37 - [281] - Quote FT Cold wrote: Anyone know if drone mining augmenter rigs will affect the new excavator drones? They said they were working on the rigs too. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 149	Posted - 2016.10.09 21:12:21 - [282] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: 13kr1d1 wrote: Or you know, how they alraedy are aligned to warp off now, and do so the moment they see someone in system that could threaten them, or see them within 5-10AU on Dscan. Your reasoning is fallacious. Probe or ship triggers it? Then it doesn't matter if probes required or not. Have you actually tried mining aligned in a hulk before? Your ore hold fills up twice as often as you are allowed to jetcan. You mine sitting next to a freight container. An interceptor can easily jump into the system and warp to the anomaly before the hulk can align, depending on where in the system it is currently spawned. TomyLobo wrote: The sense of entitlement that some people have knows no bounds. So because you are roaming, kills should automatically fall on your lap? How about actually working for kills like most people do? Those who take their time to ensure they have the right comp of ships, monitor and track their targets aren't fools. Hi Tomy, I'm a miner. Nice to meet you. I don't think my operation should be able to completely ignore hostiles in our space, unless they bring a massive fleet that we're going to form for and engage before it gets to me anyway. Miners are not entitled to free security. That is why you have better yield and rare resources in dangerous space - because the activity is interruptible by definition. It's also why the yield increase should mostly come from personal capacity of the ships involved (and therefore at risk) rather than someone fielding a booster. I do not advocate that players should be able to earn resources in total peace but there should be precautions that can be taken to keep you relatively safe, so that both aggressor and defender can be alert and engaged in the process, otherwise, it will be a one-way street. Why should I even bother farming crosses/rocks when farming players is a lot easier and far and away more rewarding? Different people will have varying levels of concentration, alertness and skill and it will be up to the aggressor to take advantage of that. It's this that makes the hunt enjoyeable not arbitrary limits imposed by the game to make one side very vulnerable. Exhumers and barges still get destroyed by the doves in nullsec despite local and intel networks so why do we still need arbitrary limits imposed to make content?
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 89	Posted - 2016.10.09 23:02:10 - [283] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: FT Cold wrote: Anyone know if drone mining augmenter rigs will affect the new excavator drones? They said they were working on the rigs too. Thanks, missed it before.
Sitting Bull Lakota SBL Co 172	Posted - 2016.10.09 23:52:12 - [284] - Quote This is going to be great. Panic modules, fleet boosts, up to 18.4k m3/minute. All great. I'm hoping this will be the catalyst that gets my friend back into the game.
SpaceTigerCross Wiarbea Industries Imperium Divine. 4	Posted - 2016.10.10 07:06:10 - [285] - Quote I would like a bigger fuel bay!
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 6448	Posted - 2016.10.10 07:57:58 - [286] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies. we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships. we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up. its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO. what do we do with the spare ship??? and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that. or "its a designed feature/draw back".. and 5 light years is beautiful. Use the Prospect, a cloaky mining frigate?
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.10 10:29:15 - [287] - Quote SpaceTigerCross wrote: I would like a bigger fuel bay! rorqual has plen-T of gas to get around.
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.10 10:30:33 - [288] - Quote Tau Cabalander wrote: Mole Guy wrote: scenario: we jump to a new system to ninja mine. i have a rorqual, my friends are in a skiff. before we jump, i put the skiff's in my SMB and they go in cloakies. we get there, they try to switch ships...but that doesnt work. now, we have ships scattered about while they are in mining ships. we get attacked, i PANIC, they are protected, but their cloakies (which are floating in space) get blown up. its dumb to not be able to put any ship in the SMB IMO. what do we do with the spare ship??? and trolls dont say "thats what you get for using the rorqual" or some bs like that. or "its a designed feature/draw back".. and 5 light years is beautiful. Use the Prospect, a cloaky mining frigate? I'm assuming the ship hangar accepts Expedition Frigates [Prospect & Endurance]? Mining Frigates [Venture] were allowed in Retribution 1.1 that is one work around. should work fine. i forget about those lil things from time to time.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1519	Posted - 2016.10.11 00:38:20 - [289] - Quote -dubs-
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1519	Posted - 2016.10.11 00:42:05 - [290] - Quote SpaceTigerCross wrote: I would like a bigger fuel bay! Between the existing fuel bay, cargo hold, and fleet hangar, I don't think I've ever thought to myself, 'boy, I sure could use a bigger fuel bay' on a rorqual. Either you're boosting locally, and you're full of all the heavy water you need for a while plus emergency isotopes, or you're crammed full of ridiculous amounts of isotopes for long trips. Marcus Tedric wrote: The Rorqual is NOT supposed to be a mining ship and replace a proper Barge! Why not? You're placing arbitrary restrictions based on nothing more than your feelings. The rorqual was intended when created to lead mining opeartions, not cower in a pos as an afk gamepiece all day long. It absolutely should be a mining ship that can replace a barge, though ideally not at the cost of forcing every barge pilots gamestyle to be stomped down into mediocrity. At this point, I'm really optimistic, especially with the increased synergy between rorquals and mining barges.

ShadowFirestar The Walking Deads V. O. I. D. 1	Posted - 2016.10.11 09:08:33 - [291] - Quote One feature id like to see that make life easier for fleet miners is the ability to allow other mining ships to compress their ore in their own ore hold when they are in range of the rorq. When the rorq is sieged of course.
Smuff Gallente Minion Revolution Goonswarm Federation 11	Posted - 2016.10.11 12:12:02 - [292] - Quote when will the changes be on sisi
Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.11 22:44:37 - [293] - Quote CCP Fozzie, quick question that I don't see answered anywhere, what's the cost per drone looking like for the Excavator Mining Drones? I'm seeing a lot of speculation but no hard facts. Thanks!
Jalxan Spoopy Newbies Brave Collective 42	Posted - 2016.10.12 16:13:18 - [294] - Quote This is something I discovered through another feedback thread, which regards the Rorqual and docking in Astrahus stations. I will be posting this in both threads, as both are mutually exclusive, and should be read. I strongly recommend, that the Rorqual be allowed to dock in the Astrahus. In addition, Rorquals, as they are not combat vessels, should be permitted to mine in High Sec space. Because the Rorqual is going through a rework, it is a perfect time to size the Rorqual to the approximate dimension of a Freighter, and since Freighters count as capital ships, and since they can dock in the Astrahus station, the Rorqual should as well. This is especially important, as Astrahus stations are known to be mining/refining stations, and it would severely hamper the Rorqual if it can't dock in a station that is designed to cater to it! Thus, I'd like to see the Rorqual to be Freighter-sized, and capable of docking in the Astrahus, and undocking via its largest docking ports. Beyond that, I believe the new Rorqual is perfect.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 143	Posted - 2016.10.12 16:53:47 - [295] - Quote Jalxan wrote: This is something I discovered through another feedback thread, which regards the Rorqual and docking in Astrahus stations. I will be posting this in both threads, as both are mutually exclusive, and should be read. I strongly recommend, that the Rorqual be allowed to dock in the Astrahus. In addition, Rorquals, as they are not combat vessels, should be permitted to mine in High Sec space. Because the Rorqual is going through a rework, it is a perfect time to size the Rorqual to the approximate dimension of a Freighter, and since Freighters count as capital ships, and since they can dock in the Astrahus station, the Rorqual should as well. This is especially important, as Astrahus stations are known to be mining/refining stations, and it would severely hamper the Rorqual if it can't dock in a station that is designed to cater to it! Thus, I'd like to see the Rorqual to be Freighter-sized, and capable of docking in the Astrahus, and undocking via its largest docking ports. Beyond that, I believe the new Rorqual is perfect. Hell no to hisec rorquals. Good luck ganking it ever with its EHP and reps. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Knight Jay The Scope Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.12 20:21:30 - [296] - Quote THIS IS WAY OP. 7min invulnerably. 2000 dps it has 10 au jump range triage HUGE drone bay becasue of the capital mining drone size so can fit soooo many drone waves. it can keep lock and mine in panic mode. Meaning it can keep lock and entosis in panic mode. so basically this thing is a carrier with dps of a super and a EHE of 7min OOOO and it can mine at the rate of 10 hulks.
Vivianne Athonille Athonille Logistics and Provisions 27	Posted - 2016.10.12 20:41:27 - [297] - Quote Jalxan wrote: This is something I discovered through another feedback thread, which regards the Rorqual and docking in Astrahus stations. I will be posting this in both threads, as both are mutually exclusive, and should be read. I strongly recommend, that the Rorqual be allowed to dock in the Astrahus. In addition, Rorquals, as they are not combat vessels, should be permitted to mine in High Sec space. Because the Rorqual is going through a rework, it is a perfect time to size the Rorqual to the approximate dimension of a Freighter, and since Freighters count as capital ships, and since they can dock in the Astrahus station, the Rorqual should as well. This is especially important, as Astrahus stations are known to be mining/refining stations, and it would severely hamper the Rorqual if it can't dock in a station that is designed to cater to it! Thus, I'd like to see the Rorqual to be Freighter-sized, and capable of docking in the Astrahus, and undocking via its largest docking ports. Beyond that, I believe the new Rorqual is perfect. As much as I like this idea, something needs to be given up if a Rorqual can be in High Sec. Maybe the Industrial Cores and PANIC cannot be activated in High Sec?
Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.12 23:49:01 - [298] - Quote Jalxan wrote: This is something I discovered through another feedback thread, which regards the Rorqual and docking in Astrahus stations. I will be posting this in both threads, as both are mutually exclusive, and should be read. I strongly recommend, that the Rorqual be allowed to dock in the Astrahus. In addition, Rorquals, as they are not combat vessels, should be permitted to mine in High Sec space. Because the Rorqual is going through a rework, it is a perfect time to size the Rorqual to the approximate dimension of a Freighter, and since Freighters count as capital ships, and since they can dock in the Astrahus station, the Rorqual should as well. This is especially important, as Astrahus stations are known to be mining/refining stations, and it would severely hamper the Rorqual if it can't dock in a station that is designed to cater to it! Thus, I'd like to see the Rorqual to be Freighter-sized, and capable of docking in the Astrahus, and undocking via its largest docking ports. Beyond that, I believe the new Rorqual is perfect. Hi Jalxan! Nice running into you again! Gotta disagree with you here though. The Rorqual is a Capital Ship in all the ways that matter while Freighters are the Orca are not. The Rorqual: Requires the Capital Ships skill to fly Has Capital Ship EHP. Fits Capital Class modules including Capital RR. Freighters, in comparison, do none of these things and are basically capitals in name only. CCP could move them off to their own hull class as "Freighters" and no one would notice. The Rorqual also mines enough with these changes to strip a High Sec belt bare in a few hours and there's basically no way to gank it or otherwise stop it, and because of how mining profits work you can keep it in a newbie corp and war-dec proof permanently. It would also make moving and owning these ships significantly less risky, since you just need to jump one onto a gate to High Sec and it can safely traverse to the other side of High Sec at that point. IMO this is just too many negatives or things that would need to change to make letting the Rorqual enter High Sec a good idea. Letting it dock in Medium structures is a somewhat separate issue but one that will be largely solved when/if CCP fixes bumping of Tethered ships and allows Citadel storage to be accessed from space, since at that point you have a rough parity of functionality between the Tether and the POS Shield.
Knight Jay The Scope Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.13 00:29:20 - [299] - Quote how are you people talking about letting this thing in high sec when as it stands its going to destroy null sec. ITS INSANELY OVER POWERED. It can do 2k dps..................... IT OUT DAMAGES carriers!!!! with a bonus to drone hp Can jump 10ly it can do the job of a fax. It has a EHE that lasts for 7MIN!!!!! How many more times does this need to be pointed out. It is literally going to make bringing anything else pointless. why bring carriers when this can do 2k dps from drones. why bring dreads when this can do 2k dps from drones. why bring fax when this can triage your fleet. Hey got to entosis? use roqs!!!! jump em in! **** goes down jump them to each other and PANIC. or wait just use their combined dps to wipe out everything. did i mention lowsec incursions with these? this just can not be allowed to see tq with the proposed stats etc it will ruin the game. PL will be fielding fleets of these beasts. possibly the most unbalanced ship suggestion EVER!!!
Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.13 01:33:34 - [300] - Quote Knight Jay wrote: why bring carriers when this can do 2k dps from drones. Because it needs to siege like a Dread to do that, they're still just drones which means a Carrier's Fighters will eat them alive, and if you're going to have to siege anyway you may as well just bring a Dread. Same or better range, no killable drones, cheaper hull, and comparable or better local tank. Knight Jay wrote: why bring dreads when this can do 2k dps from drones. Because a Dread can do 4k to sub-caps or ~10-12k to caps, and it's cheaper. Knight Jay wrote: why bring fax when this can triage your fleet. Because some quick eyeball math says the FAX is cheaper, reps better, is easier to fit, and tanks better than a Rorqual will even with these changes. The only advantage the Rorqual actually has that I can see is rep range and rep cap use. The rep range is questionably useful and the rep cap use is offset by the ~150-200k PG it's missing over a FAX. Also a Rorqual can only support Shield fleets, so there's that. Knight Jay wrote: Hey got to entosis? use roqs!!!! jump em in! **** goes down jump them to each other and PANIC. or wait just use their combined dps to wipe out everything. PANIC doesn't affect other Rorquals, and the Rorqual still has the 5x Entosis modifier. You could, potentially, Entosis using a Barge that's been PANIC'd, since it would have the normal 5-minute cycle time, but it wouldn't have any sort of ECM immunity and would be pretty easily jammed out unless you used a lot of remote ECCM, and at that point you've just dropped probably 3bil in assets on one node that you probably could have taken more effectively. That's the only potential abuse I see is Entosis and other mining ships combined with PANIC, but that's a pretty expensive trick and it's questionable if it'll work...

Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1549	Posted - 2016.10.13 09:30:47 - [301] - Quote Well the thing would be that people already drop FAX on nodes and going PANIC with a bunch of skiffs or procurers around you means you force the enemy to bring a predictable and weak as all hell set of ships to handle it. Battle barges still do a startling amount of DPS in numbers and the FAX can rep like a monster right up until it has to hit the "no fun allowed" button. It really wouldn't be remotely healthy for that aspect of the game.
Knight Jay The Scope Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.13 10:49:29 - [302] - Quote It's going to be OP mark my words. and people will abuse the hell out of them. They are neither expensive enough or crap enough at their individual roles to balance out the fact they can do all the roles of other caps at once plus have a 7min EHE
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 184	Posted - 2016.10.13 11:31:56 - [303] - Quote Knight Jay wrote: THIS IS WAY OP. 7min invulnerably. 2000 dps it has 10 au jump range triage HUGE drone bay becasue of the capital mining drone size so can fit soooo many drone waves. it can keep lock and mine in panic mode. Meaning it can keep lock and entosis in panic mode. so basically this thing is a carrier with dps of a super and a EHE of 7min OOOO and it can mine at the rate of 10 hulks. Clearly you mean "almost the dps of a super". Because we all know that 2,000 is "almost" 16,000. It is also more than the 3000 dps of a carrier. And we all know filling your low slots with drone amps and using ogres works oh so well in pvp combat. They apply just as well as fighters right? The same way that a Triage Rorqual replaces the FAX. A Minokawa will put a triage fit rorqual to shame with a single repper. Just as the mining yield is 10 hulks. No, it doesn't get the effective yield of 45,000 m3 per minute. It gets a theoretical 18k. If we're lucky, this will be an effective yield of close to 9k, or double a hulk, because drones are not turrets. I say hopefully, because it would be bad if that 18,000 number is based on using an unrealistic fit like two T2 and one T1 drone mining augmentor rigs. In addition to being an extra billion in uninsurable fitting cost, it guts your cpu by nearly 200 and cripples your tank. Removing them, if they were included, gives us a theoretical 13,410. Which leaves us hoping to pull 6k, barely edging out a hulk in practice. We are also yet to see the cost of drones, which I expect to periodically lose to rats, or how they actually enter the market.
Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1549	Posted - 2016.10.13 12:05:43 - [304] - Quote Quick question. If CCP proposed blops with multimillion ehp, 1000 DPS and a 10 LY 90% reduction range (you could drop ratters in VFK from pure blind, lonetrek), would y'all be ok with that? Because that's what this is.
Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.13 13:29:02 - [305] - Quote Morrigan LeSante wrote: Well the thing would be that people already drop FAX on nodes and going PANIC with a bunch of skiffs or procurers around you means you force the enemy to bring a predictable and weak as all hell set of ships to handle it. Battle barges still do a startling amount of DPS in numbers and the FAX can rep like a monster right up until it has to hit the "no fun allowed" button. It really wouldn't be remotely healthy for that aspect of the game. Ed: No entosis for PANIC confirmed in tweetfleet. Woopwoop Nice to hear, I would have been very surprised if that made it into the final version. Knight Jay wrote: It's going to be OP mark my words. and people will abuse the hell out of them. They are neither expensive enough or crap enough at their individual roles to balance out the fact they can do all the roles of other caps at once plus have a 7min EHE I might bother to mark your words if you had some substantive numbers to back them up. So far what we've got is a ship that can fit to rep well, or deal damage well, but not as well as either of the capitals that are specialized for the role and not without entering a siege cycle where it's local tank is worse than either of the ships it will supposedly be used instead of. I'll see about throwing together some math on this subject tonight, but I'd be very surprised if these concerns are at all justified. It seems like you just sort of glanced at the bonuses and CCP's quick blurb and immediately PANIC'd without thinking... Morrigan LeSante wrote: Quick question. If CCP proposed blops with multimillion ehp, 1000 DPS and a 10 LY 90% reduction range (you could drop ratters in VFK from pure blind, lonetrek), would y'all be ok with that? Because that's what this is. It's possible we'll see people hot-dropping with gank Rorquals, but its DPS relies on quite slow drones which even a half-decently fit PvE ship can swat, and it aligns in about a minute, can't cloak while warping, and can be tackled by a single Interceptor more or less indefinitely. If you dropped this thing on even a full-gank fit ratting Carrier the Carrier would go "oh look, lunch!" release tackle fighters, light a cyno, and proceed to chew through the Rorqual's drones while waiting for backup.
Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1549	Posted - 2016.10.13 13:53:27 - [306] - Quote I dunno, it has a 6k drone bay (space for 48 heavy drone flights, 240 heavies total). You'll cyno in at 5-10km off the target and drop facemelting DPS which tracks perfectly, meanwhile having more EHP than said carrier, your choice of neuts, RR etc. It's absurdly powerful. A ratting carrier wont break them in time, not even close. Basically it's a Sin on some very powerful steroids. More expensive, sure, but also more insurable and far more durable. And can jump further with reduced fatigue to boot. The range and fatigue reductions are huge. I was doing some calculations, a rorq can jump from Esesier to VFK (via IItanmanden) and back to the mid for the same fatigue as a another capital going 5 LY. You can literally go from Placid to the middle of Dek in under 2 minutes in these.
Henry Plantgenet Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 120	Posted - 2016.10.13 13:56:15 - [307] - Quote A sin doesn't have to siege for full DPS, it can MJD any time it feels in trouble and cloaked it moves much faster.
Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1549	Posted - 2016.10.13 13:59:02 - [308] - Quote And a rorqual doesnt need to siege for 1k DPS either. If I can get a thanatos to a 10s align, I'll be able to do the same with a rorq. EHP values are pre-buff therefor lower than they will be but you even now can easily get 2.2m EHP (no heat or links), a pair of capital remote reps (poor unsieged but still not ignorable if a few drop), neuts, MWD for align, 800 DPS out of 2.25km/s berzerkers, cloak. Pair of heavy cap boosters leaves it completely stable until charges go away. Enough cap power that one or two can swap a booster for a capital tackle mod. All before you even look at a faction mod (except the MWD, I deadspace that on my caps)
Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.13 14:46:07 - [309] - Quote Morrigan LeSante wrote: I dunno, it has a 6k drone bay (space for 48 heavy drone flights, 240 heavies total). You'll cyno in at 5-10km off the target and drop facemelting DPS which tracks perfectly, meanwhile having more EHP than said carrier, your choice of neuts, RR etc. It's absurdly powerful. A ratting carrier wont break them in time, not even close. Basically it's a Sin on some very powerful steroids. More expensive, sure, but also more insurable and far more durable. And can jump further with reduced fatigue to boot. The range and fatigue reductions are huge. I was doing some calculations, a rorq can jump from Esesier to VFK (via IItanmanden) and back to the mid for the same fatigue as a another capital going 5 LY. You can literally go from Placid to the middle of Dek in under 2 minutes in these. A ratting Carrier with an absolutely paper tank and no active reps has at least 300k EHP. That's a good 5 minutes for a single Rorqual to chew through it, and the Carrier doesn't even have to kill the drones it just has to chase them off to reduce incoming DPS, and capital RR on Drones will do jack and squat. If the Carrier actually has an active tank fit then 1k DPS won't even come close to breaking it, so you're talking about someone dropping multiple Rorquals. That'll fly just about once per group before whoever got dropped will have a group of capitals loitering a few systems over waiting to pop your loot pinata of a hot-drop, and unlock BLOPS you can't warp off and can't cloak up, making these things hilariously easy to catch and kill. Plus while Black Ops ships are relatively expensive they're rarely fitted with expensive modules, making the loss comparable or slightly in the BLOPs ship's favor given the cost of insurance and Capital modules, and Blops can be easily purchases in Jita. A new Rorqual is much harder to buy and probably has to be built buy the group that wants to use it, a process that is logistically annoying at the least, and takes about two weeks, give or take. Basically my personal stance on the concept of the Rorqual hot-drop is "great, sounds hilarious". I don't think this is going to replace or overshadow actual combat captials or Black Ops ships, and I don't think it's going to be nearly as prevalent or problematic as you seem to think.
Morrigan LeSante Black Omega Security Circle-Of-Two 1549	Posted - 2016.10.13 15:26:55 - [310] - Quote Of course they can warp off and cloak, they are not locked in place to DPS Naturally I meant more than one in a drop, honestly - I think there are two things that will delay the prevalence - rorq availability and the skill requirements to use one.

Cade Windstalker 571	Posted - 2016.10.13 19:46:44 - [311] - Quote Morrigan LeSante wrote: Of course they can warp off and cloak, they are not locked in place to DPS Naturally I meant more than one in a drop, honestly - I think there are two things that will delay the prevalence - rorq availability and the skill requirements to use one. Sorry, I mean can't in the sense of "the Rorqual takes around a full minute to align out and it can't warp cloaked" meaning it's easy to catch one, and a prober can nail it before it can cloak if they're good and smart. Besides, you can point and tackle a Rorqual pretty easily. Certainly more easily than a cloaky hotdrop fleet. What that means is that you're basically dropping in anywhere between 2 and 4 times the value of a Black Ops fleet per-hull (Rorquals are up to 3b per hull according to Eve Central) for a small increase in jump range and a decent increase in Tank, but using ships that are vulnerable to capital drops and harder to evac than any cloaky you could conceivably bring. So yeah, again, if people wanna hot drop these things I think that's a fantastic and hilarious idea and I wholeheartedly encourage the practice!
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 185	Posted - 2016.10.13 22:55:08 - [312] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Sorry, I mean can't in the sense of "the Rorqual takes around a full minute to align out and it can't warp cloaked" meaning it's easy to catch one, and a prober can nail it before it can cloak if they're good and smart. Besides, you can point and tackle a Rorqual pretty easily. Certainly more easily than a cloaky hotdrop fleet. Thought it can warp off and cloak, with the disadvantages you listed, it doesn't need to. It can just jump to an exit cyno. It's not relying on a field blops bridge back, which is what forces the rest of the drop to do so after a successful gank. It also has a very short jump cooldown. When counterdropped, it's probably gonna die. It doesn't have the extraction option of a MJD. For drops it can also be fit relatively cheaply with a minimum of capital modules. Even a T2 fit blops will cost you close to a bil after platinum insurance pay. The Rorqual will probably end up the cheaper loss. This is where it gains capacily to jump in and save a blops battleship, especially more than one. It's a favorable trade, even if you lose it in the process. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, just something to consider.
Cade Windstalker 572	Posted - 2016.10.13 23:42:39 - [313] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: Thought it can warp off and cloak, with the disadvantages you listed, it doesn't need to. It can just jump to an exit cyno. It's not relying on a field blops bridge back, which is what forces the rest of the drop to do so after a successful gank. It also has a very short jump cooldown. When counterdropped, it's probably gonna die. It doesn't have the extraction option of a MJD. For drops it can also be fit relatively cheaply with a minimum of capital modules. Even a T2 fit blops will cost you close to a bil after platinum insurance pay. The Rorqual will probably end up the cheaper loss. This is where it gains capacily to jump in and save a blops battleship, especially more than one. It's a favorable trade, even if you lose it in the process. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, just something to consider. It still has to deal with Jump Fatigue, at least to an extent, and I'm mostly talking about the situation of being counter-dropped while it either doesn't have jump cap or is still in fatigue (or is tackled). A BLOPS fleet that is tackled or otherwise interdicted, whether it's made up entirely of BLOPS ships or not, will be basically impossible to track and pin down once off-grid even for an experienced prober unless someone screws up the extraction (not impossible, but unlikely enough that I think we can write it off for the purposes of this discussion). As for the cost of a Rorqual I don't think you'll realistically have time to drop it on a BLOPS drop gone wrong, and you're overestimating the insurance payout. I pulled the current Rorqual Platinum Insurance Cost and Payout off of CREST (wooo Eve APIs!) and it comes to a cost of 664,678,502.4 ISK and a payout of 2,215,595,008 ISK. At the current market price of 3B that's a net loss on the hull of about 1.5B, and even if you're building the things yourselves that's still a loss of a full 1B after job install and material costs plus the cost of capital modules (and the Industrial Core if you want to use it as an emergency reps drop). I'm not saying it won't happen, and like I said I kind of hope it does, but I don't think it's something that's going to become the new meta.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 187	Posted - 2016.10.15 02:38:00 - [314] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the cost of a Rorqual I don't think you'll realistically have time to drop it on a BLOPS drop gone wrong, and you're overestimating the insurance payout. I pulled the current Rorqual Platinum Insurance Cost and Payout off of CREST (wooo Eve APIs!) and it comes to a cost of 664,678,502.4 ISK and a payout of 2,215,595,008 ISK. At the current market price of 3B that's a net loss on the hull of about 1.5B, and even if you're building the things yourselves that's still a loss of a full 1B after job install and material costs plus the cost of capital modules (and the Industrial Core if you want to use it as an emergency reps drop). The payout is roughly equal to build cost, there is just a massive demand for them at the moment. Paying the insurance and fitting it totalling around a bil is not all that difficult. By comparison, a Blops: Platinum71,960,923.00239,869,744.00 is a net payout of 170 mil. The hull itself is over a bil. It's not hard to go over 170 mil fitting the thing. Particularly if you're fitting to bridge the small stuff back and have even the most modest of bling typically fitted to one. A quick look at killboard losses this month and it's not hard to find ones that approach or even surpass two billion.
Kaning Olacar Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore 3	Posted - 2016.10.15 11:13:43 - [315] - Quote Will there be other ways other than the industrial core to increase the yield? IE modules that affect the drones? (before anyone mentions the rigs yes i know they are there....and they are ****....carry on) It would be interesting to see pilots having options other than anchoring themselves in one position
Flashmala Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 48	Posted - 2016.10.15 19:53:16 - [316] - Quote Will the Invulnerability Core Operation skill be available to train before November 8th? Age does not diminish the extreme disappointment of having a scoop of ice cream fall from the cone.
Mole Guy Band of Builders Inc. Silent Infinity 456	Posted - 2016.10.16 19:18:40 - [317] - Quote what about mining boosts and those belts that are 1300km wide? some of the roids are 100km apart which means we will have to boost a miner and they warp to it. on the drone miners, especially the rorqual, we siege and strip a roid, then wait 5 minutes to move to a new roid to siege again. any chance to shrink those fields since we dont have system wide boosts anymore?
Cade Windstalker 583	Posted - 2016.10.17 14:40:44 - [318] - Quote Vald Tegor wrote: The payout is roughly equal to build cost, there is just a massive demand for them at the moment. Paying the insurance and fitting it totalling around a bil is not all that difficult. By comparison, a Blops: Platinum71,960,923.00239,869,744.00 is a net payout of 170 mil. The hull itself is over a bil. It's not hard to go over 170 mil fitting the thing. Particularly if you're fitting to bridge the small stuff back and have even the most modest of bling typically fitted to one. A quick look at killboard losses this month and it's not hard to find ones that approach or even surpass two billion. Payout is actually always slightly below build cost to avoid insurance scams and other potential perverse incentives (like the Rokh Self Destruct plague that got insurance changed in the first place). The build cost is still 2.5b (per Fuzzworks) unless you're building the thing entirely from base minerals, and the loss-mail will count against market price not mineral price because that's what you could have gotten for the thing if you'd sold it. The actual mineral price of a Black Ops is well below 1b, but the cost in time, skills, and research cores pushes the price up so if you're going to compare losses it should be market price to market price, not market price to build price. Anyways, the end result is I don't think we're going to be seeing Rorquals used too much in support of Black Ops operations. Hard to get them into position, questionable if they'll even help you get the shinies off grid, and if you drop one you're basically guaranteed to lose it. Kaning Olacar wrote: Will there be other ways other than the industrial core to increase the yield? IE modules that affect the drones? (before anyone mentions the rigs yes i know they are there....and they are ****....carry on) It would be interesting to see pilots having options other than anchoring themselves in one position I don't believe there are any drone mining yield low slots, and besides if there were they would stack with the core, so to get the full benefit you still need to anchor in place with the core and take that risk to reap the massive rewards.
Cade Windstalker 583	Posted - 2016.10.17 14:42:31 - [319] - Quote Mole Guy wrote: what about mining boosts and those belts that are 1300km wide? some of the roids are 100km apart which means we will have to boost a miner and they warp to it. on the drone miners, especially the rorqual, we siege and strip a roid, then wait 5 minutes to move to a new roid to siege again. any chance to shrink those fields since we dont have system wide boosts anymore? This sounds more like an interesting challenge to be overcome than something that should be removed because of its lack of convenience. Those who are good at planning and coordination reap the rewards of these belts, those who aren't find them frustrating and mine elsewhere. Thus we have yet another thing to differentiate systems are areas of space.
Dina Datrader The Dingo Ate My Spaceship 3	Posted - 2016.10.17 17:18:12 - [320] - Quote RIP Rorqual. I will be using mine purely as an additional JF to haul mining ships and ore once it comes out as that is about the only thing I like about this concept. IMO I think you have considered the larger corps / alliances but forgotten about the smaller groups who don't have the same luxury as my miners do in a larger alliance. If I do use it to boost , I most certainly will not be using the core. I have the luxury of a large alliance to back me up, but still most likely wouldn't arrive in time anyway. The PANIC button only delays the inevitable explosion. I feel sorry for the smaller corps / alliances, it is them that will suffer the most from this change. Don't get me wrong, I totally understand that everything we fly should come with risk to which the rorq at present basically does not and I am all for it as far as it should have risk attached but you should have allowed cloaking with the core running or something IMO, I don't know, but as it is at the moment I feel the rorq is a sitting duck and feel the risk is not worth the reward..

Cade Windstalker 584	Posted - 2016.10.17 19:02:50 - [321] - Quote Dina Datrader wrote: RIP Rorqual. I will be using mine purely as an additional JF to haul mining ships and ore once it comes out as that is about the only thing I like about this concept. IMO I think you have considered the larger corps / alliances but forgotten about the smaller groups who don't have the same luxury as my miners do in a larger alliance. If I do use it to boost , I most certainly will not be using the core. I have the luxury of a large alliance to back me up, but still most likely wouldn't arrive in time anyway. The PANIC button only delays the inevitable explosion. I feel sorry for the smaller corps / alliances, it is them that will suffer the most from this change. Don't get me wrong, I totally understand that everything we fly should come with risk to which the rorq at present basically does not and I am all for it as far as it should have risk attached but you should have allowed cloaking with the core running or something IMO, I don't know, but as it is at the moment I feel the rorq is a sitting duck and feel the risk is not worth the reward.. Having said all that though, we will have to wait and see I guess, once it is released before I make any hard decisions. It kind of sounds like the problem here is your allies and their response time, not the new Rorqual. If there's one thing that the earlier discussion of outside the box Rorqual uses highlighted it's that this thing is only about 1B sitting in the belt after insurance, and it has about 50% of the DPS of a Carrier, 80% of the rep potential of a FAX, and 90% of the local tank with the Core active. If that doesn't buy your mining fleet enough time to get rescued, especially when you throw the PANIC button on there, then your alliance is doing a really poor job of supporting its mining ops or you're mining at the arse end of your Alliance's space from where all the PvP pilots hang out. In either case that isn't a failure of the new design, it's a problem with the risk mitigation of your organization, and no Rorqual buff is going to fix that. Also at the end of the day there should be some question as to whether or not something like this is worthwhile. If it's absolutely and unquestionably worthwhile then something has gone wrong and it's probably overpowered. Where things are right now though I think your group should be able to make use of this in most cases, and if they can't the gap between a sieged Rorqual and an unsieged one or an Orca isn't so vast that you'll need to pack up shop and go home.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2743	Posted - 2016.10.17 21:00:42 - [322] - Quote Good post, Cade. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
capitotutto Saken Government DARKNESS. 0	Posted - 2016.10.17 21:47:25 - [323] - Quote This new rorqual is the worst thing CCP has done since years. I'm really thinking to sell my 4 Hulk toons and close my paid account. I'd like to understand why this patch should be so profitable for just 4 5 biggest alliance and why CCP has to forget the rest of the players!! For me it's just unbelivable. small & medium size allies seems to be not so important for CCP!! Then they cry if they loose online players.... CCP: do you want more active players? start with avoiding camper AFK cloacked ship.. It's a shame not able to play cause a player decide to be logged cloacked and AFK in your system. do not say more isk more risk, cause you really know that If I made 10b a day mining with a rorqual but I loose 2 rorqual, I get a positive balance of 4b but my corp will not like too much the new killboard and I will be kicked off. So people who says' more isk more risk' just ignore ns living. Ok, you want rorqual to be on grid (and against now, means 90% of player will lose 90% of their actaul boost time) but having the rorqual stopped in belt is so stupid. I just imagine how many bomber squad will hit rorqual just when panic button will ends or how many bubble you could find all around you. and then? how to save your rorqual? Do not tell me 'your ally has all times needed to create a defense fleet' cause this idea worth just for big allies who has pvp fleet of 100 200 people. This patch means that all allies without a big pvp fleet, couldn't use Rorqual. I'm so disappointed, this is not acceptable. Strong will become strongest, weak will become weakest
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 151	Posted - 2016.10.17 23:16:05 - [324] - Quote capitotutto Saken wrote: This new rorqual is the worst thing CCP has done since years. I'm really thinking to sell my 4 Hulk toons and close my paid account. I'd like to understand why this patch should be so profitable for just 4 5 biggest alliance and why CCP has to forget the rest of the players!! For me it's just unbelivable. small & medium size allies seems to be not so important for CCP!! Then they cry if they loose online players.... CCP: do you want more active players? start with avoiding camper AFK cloacked ship.. It's a shame not able to play cause a player decide to be logged cloacked and AFK in your system. do not say more isk more risk, cause you really know that If I made 10b a day mining with a rorqual but I loose 2 rorqual, I get a positive balance of 4b but my corp will not like too much the new killboard and I will be kicked off. So people who says' more isk more risk' just ignore ns living. Ok, you want rorqual to be on grid (and against now, means 90% of player will lose 90% of their actaul boost time) but having the rorqual stopped in belt is so stupid. I just imagine how many bomber squad will hit rorqual just when panic button will ends or how many bubble you could find all around you. and then? how to save your rorqual? Do not tell me 'your ally has all times needed to create a defense fleet' cause this idea worth just for big allies who has pvp fleet of 100 200 people. This patch means that all allies without a big pvp fleet, couldn't use Rorqual. I'm so disappointed, this is not acceptable. Strong will become strongest, weak will become weakest 1. No one cares that you have a paid account. Just because you pay for subscription does not entitle you to a game you like. 2. This is not the AFK cloaking thread. I'd also like to see the module that prevents you from undocking while someone is cloaked AFK. I don't particularly like that the camper can increase risk for you while not recieving any in return, but it doesn't keep you from playing. 3. Your corp will kick you because you lost ships? I advise you to find a better corp. I can't imagine having any fun in a corp that obsessed with killboards. 4. What exactly do you mean that 90% of your allies lose 90% of their boost time? Just put them in the same ore anom/belt. Enough rocks for everyone. There's also no reason you have to siege your rorqual, it still gives the best boosts in the game while retaining mobility. 5. OK, so what about ratting in carriers? I wouldn't want to rat in a carrier without some sort of defense fleet? Should I go whine to CCP about how it's not fair and muh ticks and I should be able to rat in perfect safety? Why do you think it's CCP's job to defend your Rorqual? (which does 2000DPS and can tank around 50000DPS with blue pill) I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Cade Windstalker 587	Posted - 2016.10.18 01:43:17 - [325] - Quote capitotutto Saken wrote: This new rorqual is the worst thing CCP has done since years. I'm really thinking to sell my 4 Hulk toons and close my paid account. I'd like to understand why this patch should be so profitable for just 4 5 biggest alliance and why CCP has to forget the rest of the players!! For me it's just unbelivable. small & medium size allies seems to be not so important for CCP!! Then they cry if they loose online players.... CCP: do you want more active players? start with avoiding camper AFK cloacked ship.. It's a shame not able to play cause a player decide to be logged cloacked and AFK in your system. These Rorqual changes actually do a pretty good job of mitigating the potential impact of AFK cloakies. A mining fleet can't quite take on a cap drop, but it can probably defend from a Black Ops drop at least enough to make the droppers think twice about whether or not they want to engage. capitotutto Saken wrote: do not say more isk more risk, cause you really know that If I made 10b a day mining with a rorqual but I loose 2 rorqual, I get a positive balance of 4b but my corp will not like too much the new killboard and I will be kicked off. So people who says' more isk more risk' just ignore ns living. This seems like more of a problem with your Alliance than with the Rorqual. Not only are they apparently not defending their mining ops, but they're getting angry when unsupported mining Ops lose ships. That's a pretty good way to lose all of your industrialists. If they really need a green killboard then go make "Government Industries" or something, throw all the miners in there, and presto, instant Killboard cleaning for the corp. capitotutto Saken wrote: Ok, you want rorqual to be on grid (and against now, means 90% of player will lose 90% of their actaul boost time) but having the rorqual stopped in belt is so stupid. I just imagine how many bomber squad will hit rorqual just when panic button will ends or how many bubble you could find all around you. and then? how to save your rorqual? Some quick math says that you would need around 100 bombers to kill a Rorqual with a bombing run. Even with, say, 50 or so (so, half-ish with Bombs, the rest with Torps) you're going to have issues, and that assumes that the Rorqual doesn't just have a couple of smart-bombs fitted to nuke your bombs. At the end of the day though that's called getting out played, though honestly if you failed to notice the ~50 people sat in local for 7 minutes and couldn't call for help you kinda deserve it. capitotutto Saken wrote: Do not tell me 'your ally has all times needed to create a defense fleet' cause this idea worth just for big allies who has pvp fleet of 100 200 people. This patch means that all allies without a big pvp fleet, couldn't use Rorqual. I'm so disappointed, this is not acceptable. Strong will become strongest, weak will become weakest If you don't have the people to defend your stuff then of course your risk goes up. This is Null, what do you expect? Seriously though, you're going to have around 10 minutes to scramble something to help out the miners. That's a lot of time, especially with Cynos and Jump Bridges. If your Alliance can't manage to save a ship that has literally been sitting invulnerable then I'm not sure what to tell you. I certainly don't think you would be happy with any at all reasonably balanced version of a Rorqual that CCP might possibly present.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1534	Posted - 2016.10.19 08:56:56 - [326] - Quote Morrigan LeSante wrote: Well the thing would be that people already drop FAX on nodes and going PANIC with a bunch of skiffs or procurers around you means you force the enemy to bring a predictable and weak as all hell set of ships to handle it. Battle barges still do a startling amount of DPS in numbers and the FAX can rep like a monster right up until it has to hit the "no fun allowed" button. It really wouldn't be remotely healthy for that aspect of the game. Ed: No entosis for PANIC confirmed in tweetfleet. Woopwoop Quick question. If CCP proposed blops with multimillion ehp, 1000 DPS and a 10 LY 90% reduction range (you could drop ratters in VFK from pure blind, lonetrek), would y'all be ok with that? Because that's what this is. Man, you just don't stop with the A+ posting do you? No, a paniced skiff or procurer cannot do a single point of damage, even with drones. No, you cannot jump a rorqual into a cyno jammed system No, you cannot quickly get your rorqual off grid if something in a drop goes bad No, you do not need a weak setup of ships to handle drone swarms. A large smartbomb is a thing. So no, your battle barge fleet will not work as you suggest, and no, a rorqual doesn't have real blops potential.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1756	Posted - 2016.10.19 13:04:59 - [327] - Quote I am entirely confused by the Rorqual's drone bandwidth in relation to the new excavator drones. Rorqual has a total of 125 Mbit/sec bandwidth. Excavator drones, by all accounts, need 200Mbit/sec bandwidth. So unless the currently numbers for excavator drones are completely made up I don't see that working. Some more real numbers on these things would be nice. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3129	Posted - 2016.10.19 19:56:35 - [328] - Quote Have we gotten any final stats on the excavator drones yet?
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1535	Posted - 2016.10.19 20:10:04 - [329] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: I am entirely confused by the Rorqual's drone bandwidth in relation to the new excavator drones. Rorqual has a total of 125 Mbit/sec bandwidth. Excavator drones, by all accounts, need 200Mbit/sec bandwidth. So unless the currently numbers for excavator drones are completely made up I don't see that working. Some more real numbers on these things would be nice. Just checked the latest build on SISI and the numbers make sense now. Excavators need 25Mbit/sec and now move at a speed of 200m/s. So you can use 5 of them and they take 50 seconds to move to a roid 10km away. On average this will lower the projected 18400m3 per minute quite substantially (it's more in the area of 3000 - 6000m3 per minute if you factor in travel time) but that's still more than triple what a boosted Hulk can pull in. So overall I'm quite happy. Looks good! The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1756	Posted - 2016.10.19 22:09:35 - [330] - Quote Arronicus wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: I am entirely confused by the Rorqual's drone bandwidth in relation to the new excavator drones. Rorqual has a total of 125 Mbit/sec bandwidth. Excavator drones, by all accounts, need 200Mbit/sec bandwidth. So unless the currently numbers for excavator drones are completely made up I don't see that working. Some more real numbers on these things would be nice. Just checked the latest build on SISI and the numbers make sense now. Excavators need 25Mbit/sec and now move at a speed of 200m/s. So you can use 5 of them and they take 50 seconds to move to a roid 10km away. On average this will lower the projected 18400m3 per minute quite substantially (it's more in the area of 3000 - 6000m3 per minute if you factor in travel time) but that's still more than triple what a boosted Hulk can pull in. So overall I'm quite happy. Looks good! The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way. Let's suppose for a moment that the rorq does actually have 18400m3/60s, that'd put you at 55seconds flight time, 60sec yield time, and 5 seconds of mining drones being mining drones (sitting still and doing nothing), we're looking at 9200m3/minute on a 10km roid, the equalization point with a hulk is actually quite a bit further out., I have no problem with 9200m3/min :D My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 89	Posted - 2016.10.20 00:07:25 - [331] - Quote Rowells wrote: Have we gotten any final stats on the excavator drones yet? Current test server stats are: The excavator ice harvesting drone has a base velocity of 100m/s and an activation time of 225s and a volume of 1km3. The excavator mining drone has a base velocity of 200m/s, an activation time of 90s and the base mining volume is 325m3. Both take 25mb and seem to cost about 100m worth of material each with un-researched BPs, not counting the cost of the BP.
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 89	Posted - 2016.10.20 01:08:23 - [332] - Quote Arronicus wrote: The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way. Let's suppose for a moment that the rorq does actually have 18400m3/60s, that'd put you at 55seconds flight time, 60sec yield time, and 5 seconds of mining drones being mining drones (sitting still and doing nothing), we're looking at 9200m3/minute on a 10km roid, the equalization point with a hulk is actually quite a bit further out., Only thing I can think of is that the industrial core modifier is applied multiplicatively with the other modifiers. If you do the math that way it looks like this: Drone interfacing: 50% yield bonus Mining drones: 25% yield bonus Rorqual skill bonus: 50% Mining drone specialization: 10% 2x Capital drone mining augmenter II and 1x capital drone mining augmenter I (which as of last check aren't stacking penalized) 15%x2+10%= 40% Excavator yield: 325m3 per 90s Which leaves us with the following for raw yield per min: (1+.5+.25+.5+.1+.4)x(325x5)x(60/90)=2979.166...m3/min. If the the industrial core's bonus is multiplicative with this final value, rather than additive, it will be 17875m3/min. If it's additive the first parenthesis simply gets +5 and the per min yield becomes about 8400m3/sec. As for travel times, in the case that the core is multiplicative I'm getting speeds at about 495m/s with 2x drone navigation computer IIs, which is pretty acceptable given it's 90s mining time. Just a little rough math, again, assuming the industry core multiplicative bonus gives me about 9.5km3/min on a roid 20km, 12km3/min on a roid 10k away, and 14.5km3/min at 5km. Those are pretty respectable yields still and you could always put on a prop mod now that cap prop mods are available to periodically re-position.
Grookshank Jump Drive Appreciation Society 125	Posted - 2016.10.20 08:53:48 - [333] - Quote Quote: reduced mass (allowing the Rorqual to travel through the same wormholes as Freighters) Can we please have clarification on this: will the Rorqual be able to enter Thera or will it be denied by a "no capital" rule?
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM 6226	Posted - 2016.10.20 11:54:29 - [334] - Quote FT Cold wrote: Arronicus wrote: The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way. Let's suppose for a moment that the rorq does actually have 18400m3/60s, that'd put you at 55seconds flight time, 60sec yield time, and 5 seconds of mining drones being mining drones (sitting still and doing nothing), we're looking at 9200m3/minute on a 10km roid, the equalization point with a hulk is actually quite a bit further out., Only thing I can think of is that the industrial core modifier is applied multiplicatively with the other modifiers. If you do the math that way it looks like this: Drone interfacing: 50% yield bonus Mining drones: 25% yield bonus Rorqual skill bonus: 50% Mining drone specialization: 10% 2x Capital drone mining augmenter II and 1x capital drone mining augmenter I (which as of last check aren't stacking penalized) 15%x2+10%= 40% Excavator yield: 325m3 per 90s Which leaves us with the following for raw yield per min: (1+.5+.25+.5+.1+.4)x(325x5)x(60/90)=2979.166...m3/min. If the the industrial core's bonus is multiplicative with this final value, rather than additive, it will be 17875m3/min. If it's additive the first parenthesis simply gets +5 and the per min yield becomes about 8400m3/sec. As for travel times, in the case that the core is multiplicative I'm getting speeds at about 495m/s with 2x drone navigation computer IIs, which is pretty acceptable given it's 90s mining time. Just a little rough math, again, assuming the industry core multiplicative bonus gives me about 9.5km3/min on a roid 20km, 12km3/min on a roid 10k away, and 14.5km3/min at 5km. Those are pretty respectable yields still and you could always put on a prop mod now that cap prop mods are available to periodically re-position. Uh, all modifiers multiply. not add. That's how things work in eve. (only place they add, is when you get a skill bonus. And that's just to work out the size of the bonus. so a skill with a 5% bonus per level is a 25% bonus. but that gets multiplied in with the others.) so it's 11.51.251.51.11.4 or 4.33, rather than the 2.75 you get by adding them. So the core is an an additional 6 on top of that. (500% bonus = *6 multiplier) Woo! CSM XI! Fuzzwork Enterprises Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 151	Posted - 2016.10.20 12:15:25 - [335] - Quote Steve Ronuken wrote: FT Cold wrote: Arronicus wrote: The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way. Let's suppose for a moment that the rorq does actually have 18400m3/60s, that'd put you at 55seconds flight time, 60sec yield time, and 5 seconds of mining drones being mining drones (sitting still and doing nothing), we're looking at 9200m3/minute on a 10km roid, the equalization point with a hulk is actually quite a bit further out., Only thing I can think of is that the industrial core modifier is applied multiplicatively with the other modifiers. If you do the math that way it looks like this: Drone interfacing: 50% yield bonus Mining drones: 25% yield bonus Rorqual skill bonus: 50% Mining drone specialization: 10% 2x Capital drone mining augmenter II and 1x capital drone mining augmenter I (which as of last check aren't stacking penalized) 15%x2+10%= 40% Excavator yield: 325m3 per 90s Which leaves us with the following for raw yield per min: (1+.5+.25+.5+.1+.4)x(325x5)x(60/90)=2979.166...m3/min. If the the industrial core's bonus is multiplicative with this final value, rather than additive, it will be 17875m3/min. If it's additive the first parenthesis simply gets +5 and the per min yield becomes about 8400m3/sec. As for travel times, in the case that the core is multiplicative I'm getting speeds at about 495m/s with 2x drone navigation computer IIs, which is pretty acceptable given it's 90s mining time. Just a little rough math, again, assuming the industry core multiplicative bonus gives me about 9.5km3/min on a roid 20km, 12km3/min on a roid 10k away, and 14.5km3/min at 5km. Those are pretty respectable yields still and you could always put on a prop mod now that cap prop mods are available to periodically re-position. Uh, all modifiers multiply. not add. That's how things work in eve. (only place they add, is when you get a skill bonus. And that's just to work out the size of the bonus. so a skill with a 5% bonus per level is a 25% bonus. but that gets multiplied in with the others.) so it's 11.51.251.51.11.4 or 4.33, rather than the 2.75 you get by adding them. So the core is an an additional 6 on top of that. (500% bonus = 6 multiplier) Your math feels a bit off too... 325(2/3)=216.67m3/min 5 drones=1083.35m3/min your 4.33 multiplier=4690.91m3/min 6=28145.46m3/min which is way above the projected theoretical max yield of 18400m3/min, which doesn't make sense since they changed the drones to take longer to mine less. I'm not unhappy about that amount, but it seems too high. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1535	Posted - 2016.10.20 17:54:09 - [336] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: Steve Ronuken wrote: FT Cold wrote: Arronicus wrote: The 18400 number is a product of someone not having access to a functional calculator. That number was provided when excavators still had 400m3/60s base, which put them at 18000 with all skills level 5 on a t2 indy core rorqual, and without the effect of mining drone specialization, which is confirmed to affect excavators. With the new mining volume of 325m3/90s on the excavator, I can't find any combination that comes anywhere close to 18000. As for travel time, you are forgetting to factor in drone navigation skills, which put the excavators to 278m/s, the industrial core which grants up to 30% increase to speed, putting your travel time to a 10km roid at 55 seconds, round trip, not 50seconds one way. Let's suppose for a moment that the rorq does actually have 18400m3/60s, that'd put you at 55seconds flight time, 60sec yield time, and 5 seconds of mining drones being mining drones (sitting still and doing nothing), we're looking at 9200m3/minute on a 10km roid, the equalization point with a hulk is actually quite a bit further out., Only thing I can think of is that the industrial core modifier is applied multiplicatively with the other modifiers. If you do the math that way it looks like this: Drone interfacing: 50% yield bonus Mining drones: 25% yield bonus Rorqual skill bonus: 50% Mining drone specialization: 10% 2x Capital drone mining augmenter II and 1x capital drone mining augmenter I (which as of last check aren't stacking penalized) 15%x2+10%= 40% Excavator yield: 325m3 per 90s Which leaves us with the following for raw yield per min: (1+.5+.25+.5+.1+.4)x(325x5)x(60/90)=2979.166...m3/min. If the the industrial core's bonus is multiplicative with this final value, rather than additive, it will be 17875m3/min. If it's additive the first parenthesis simply gets +5 and the per min yield becomes about 8400m3/sec. As for travel times, in the case that the core is multiplicative I'm getting speeds at about 495m/s with 2x drone navigation computer IIs, which is pretty acceptable given it's 90s mining time. Just a little rough math, again, assuming the industry core multiplicative bonus gives me about 9.5km3/min on a roid 20km, 12km3/min on a roid 10k away, and 14.5km3/min at 5km. Those are pretty respectable yields still and you could always put on a prop mod now that cap prop mods are available to periodically re-position. Uh, all modifiers multiply. not add. That's how things work in eve. (only place they add, is when you get a skill bonus. And that's just to work out the size of the bonus. so a skill with a 5% bonus per level is a 25% bonus. but that gets multiplied in with the others.) so it's 11.51.251.51.11.4 or 4.33, rather than the 2.75 you get by adding them. So the core is an an additional 6 on top of that. (500% bonus = 6 multiplier) Your math feels a bit off too... 325(2/3)=216.67m3/min 5 drones=1083.35m3/min your 4.33 multiplier=4690.91m3/min 6=28145.46m3/min which is way above the projected theoretical max yield of 18400m3/min, which doesn't make sense since they changed the drones to take longer to mine less. I'm not unhappy about that amount, but it seems too high. That's exactly my point, the theoretical max yield was never accurate to begin with. With ship fittings alone and no skills, you got way more than it.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3129	Posted - 2016.10.20 18:43:10 - [337] - Quote FT Cold wrote: Rowells wrote: Have we gotten any final stats on the excavator drones yet? Current test server stats are: The excavator ice harvesting drone has a base velocity of 100m/s and an activation time of 225s and a volume of 1km3. The excavator mining drone has a base velocity of 200m/s, an activation time of 90s and the base mining volume is 325m3. Both take 25mb and seem to cost about 100m worth of material each with un-researched BPs, not counting the cost of the BP. Yeah, I think they've been on the server for quite a bit, but I can't remember if they've changed at all or are just place holders.
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 91	Posted - 2016.10.20 19:30:44 - [338] - Quote Steve Ronuken wrote: Uh, all modifiers multiply. not add. That's how things work in eve. (only place they add, is when you get a skill bonus. And that's just to work out the size of the bonus. so a skill with a 5% bonus per level is a 25% bonus. but that gets multiplied in with the others.) so it's 11.51.251.51.11.4 or 4.33, rather than the 2.75 you get by adding them. So the core is an an additional 6 on top of that. (500% bonus = *6 multiplier) Yup I was wrong I checked. Kind of weird how the numbers coincidentally ended up being so close to CCPs original values.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1535	Posted - 2016.10.20 20:08:22 - [339] - Quote Rowells wrote: FT Cold wrote: Rowells wrote: Have we gotten any final stats on the excavator drones yet? Current test server stats are: The excavator ice harvesting drone has a base velocity of 100m/s and an activation time of 225s and a volume of 1km3. The excavator mining drone has a base velocity of 200m/s, an activation time of 90s and the base mining volume is 325m3. Both take 25mb and seem to cost about 100m worth of material each with un-researched BPs, not counting the cost of the BP. Yeah, I think they've been on the server for quite a bit, but I can't remember if they've changed at all or are just place holders. They changed. Up until a couple days ago, ore was 400m3/60s/100m/s. Now they're 325m3/90s/200m/s. Amusingly enough, CCP also made a typo on the stats on the mining drone specialization skillbook, so now a bunch of spergs on reddit are convinced that their excavators are going to move at approx. 2.1km/s without nav comps, despite it being a very obvious typo. FT Cold wrote: Steve Ronuken wrote: Uh, all modifiers multiply. not add. That's how things work in eve. (only place they add, is when you get a skill bonus. And that's just to work out the size of the bonus. so a skill with a 5% bonus per level is a 25% bonus. but that gets multiplied in with the others.) so it's 11.51.251.51.11.4 or 4.33, rather than the 2.75 you get by adding them. So the core is an an additional 6 on top of that. (500% bonus = *6 multiplier) Yup I was wrong I checked. Kind of weird how the numbers coincidentally ended up being so close to CCPs original values. And yet not the same. Would love to have a member of CCP show where the 18,400 came from lol
Bobb Bobbington Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 350	Posted - 2016.10.21 00:04:51 - [340] - Quote How much heavy water does the PANIC button consume? This is a signature. It has a 25m signature. No it's not a cosmic signature. Probably. Btw my corp's recruiting.

Cade Windstalker 595	Posted - 2016.10.21 02:52:03 - [341] - Quote Bobb Bobbington wrote: How much heavy water does the PANIC button consume? None, it completely burns the module out after one use.
Doggy Dogwoofwoof I'm fine and You aren't Goonswarm Federation 37	Posted - 2016.10.21 06:34:22 - [342] - Quote Arronicus wrote: And yet not the same. Would love to have a member of CCP show where the 18,400 came from lol CCP Math, The only thing worse than CCP Rounding
Bobb Bobbington Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 350	Posted - 2016.10.21 10:54:32 - [343] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Bobb Bobbington wrote: How much heavy water does the PANIC button consume? None, it completely burns the module out after one use. It says it uses heavy water as fuel though, how much heavy fuel does it consume when you click the button, even if you only do it once? This is a signature. It has a 25m signature. No it's not a cosmic signature. Probably. Btw my corp's recruiting.
Cade Windstalker 595	Posted - 2016.10.21 14:43:41 - [344] - Quote Bobb Bobbington wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Bobb Bobbington wrote: How much heavy water does the PANIC button consume? None, it completely burns the module out after one use. It says it uses heavy water as fuel though, how much heavy fuel does it consume when you click the button, even if you only do it once? There is nothing anywhere in the original post or in the dev blog that says the PANIC module uses Heavy Water or fuel of any sort. The Industrial Core uses fuel, but the PANIC module does not.
Edek Hawker Serpent Sun 0	Posted - 2016.10.21 16:08:33 - [345] - Quote I am a miner and industrialist. I've always made my "living" in Eve from mining first and foremost. I do not multibox mine I run 2 accounts only (for extra research slots to those who are curious). Now that being said The only thing I do not like about the proposed changes to the rorqual is the panic button preventing warping for the barges. In the PvP world miners have always been easy meat to be destroyed because we are not combat pilots in combat ships. Therefore our main defense against aggression has always been to escape extend and run. As a miner in a mining ship you will not win a fight so you run it is that simple. Let a 3 bil investment plus time and skills be worth it let the foreman protect his miners allowing them to escape and mine another day without a ship lost. Mining is pretty much the worst isk per hr in the game this has been stated over and over allowing miners to save their ships and mine another day would be a great help in balancing the lack of income from mining. It is my opinion that combat pilots will not care about saving mining fleets because of the general mentality against miners in general. So the invulnerable panic button to allow a defense fleet time to save you makes no sense to me. Nobody is coming to save you nobody cares about saving you they are to busy laughing at you for being stupid enough to mine in the first place (stating a pvp pilot perspective here... obviously) and get killed. Let a miner protect himself by making escape possible we are independent pilots that would prefer that option. My .02 A new eden miner
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 152	Posted - 2016.10.21 19:20:29 - [346] - Quote Edek Hawker wrote: I am a miner and industrialist. I've always made my "living" in Eve from mining first and foremost. I do not multibox mine I run 2 accounts only (for extra research slots to those who are curious). Now that being said The only thing I do not like about the proposed changes to the rorqual is the panic button preventing warping for the barges. In the PvP world miners have always been easy meat to be destroyed because we are not combat pilots in combat ships. Therefore our main defense against aggression has always been to escape extend and run. As a miner in a mining ship you will not win a fight so you run it is that simple. Let a 3 bil investment plus time and skills be worth it let the foreman protect his miners allowing them to escape and mine another day without a ship lost. Mining is pretty much the worst isk per hr in the game this has been stated over and over allowing miners to save their ships and mine another day would be a great help in balancing the lack of income from mining. It is my opinion that combat pilots will not care about saving mining fleets because of the general mentality against miners in general. So the invulnerable panic button to allow a defense fleet time to save you makes no sense to me. Nobody is coming to save you nobody cares about saving you they are to busy laughing at you for being stupid enough to mine in the first place (stating a pvp pilot perspective here... obviously) and get killed. Let a miner protect himself by making escape possible we are independent pilots that would prefer that option. My .02 A new eden miner It won't matter since if you're tackled you can't warp out and as far as I can tell the PANIC doesn't affect target locks, so they'll just hold you down anyway. Just make sure the Rorqual pilot PANICs after everyone who can escape has escaped. Also, join a better corp. If your barge is tackled in Horde standing fleet will do their best to clobber the attacker. Not saying join Horde, but there must be some corps out there that will do more than laugh at their miners when they die. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 1379	Posted - 2016.10.21 19:38:57 - [347] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: Also, join a better corp. If your barge is tackled in Horde standing fleet will do their best to clobber the attacker. Not saying join Horde, but there must be some corps out there that will do more than laugh at their miners when they die. And those are the corps that will reap the rewards of putting themselves at greater risk, which is how it should be. Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Gevlin Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 289	Posted - 2016.10.21 21:02:42 - [348] - Quote Will the panic module allow the miners to switch ships or switch modules. I can see a fleet of hulks get jump, panic button and the hulks switch into tackle, Ewar and DPS skiffs. Or is this a viable tactic? Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Bobb Bobbington Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 350	Posted - 2016.10.21 21:06:33 - [349] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Bobb Bobbington wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: Bobb Bobbington wrote: How much heavy water does the PANIC button consume? None, it completely burns the module out after one use. It says it uses heavy water as fuel though, how much heavy fuel does it consume when you click the button, even if you only do it once? There is nothing anywhere in the original post or in the dev blog that says the PANIC module uses Heavy Water or fuel of any sort. The Industrial Core uses fuel, but the PANIC module does not. and yet I'm afraid it says it consumes heavy water on sisi http://imgur.com/9Su2dZe This is a signature. It has a 25m signature. No it's not a cosmic signature. Probably. Btw my corp's recruiting.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1535	Posted - 2016.10.22 01:00:38 - [350] - Quote Gevlin wrote: Will the panic module allow the miners to switch ships or switch modules. I can see a fleet of hulks get jump, panic button and the hulks switch into tackle, Ewar and DPS skiffs. Or is this a viable tactic? Not really, when considering the fact that under panic, you can deal no damage at all, so tackle and ewar skiffs? Sure. dps, nope. That said, if you're popping your panic button the moment hostiles enter system, instead of just warping the hulks off, you're going to lose that rorqual a LOT sooner than if you use the button strategically. Think of the panic button like a paladin bubble, the old pally bubble. Did you pop it the moment you entered a fight? Not unless you were a complete noob. You used it as an ace in the hole when you were about to die, and fully healed up, and furthermore, took steps to try to avoid ending up in that situation in the first place. Similarly with the panic module, decent rorqual pilots will not rely on it, they will rely on intel, on their tank, and on their mining barges getting the heck out before hostiles even land on grid. Then they'll rely on their damage drones to kill hostiles, saving panic for the moment once they're almost into armor.

Cade Windstalker 595	Posted - 2016.10.22 02:06:51 - [351] - Quote Gevlin wrote: Will the panic module allow the miners to switch ships or switch modules. I can see a fleet of hulks get jump, panic button and the hulks switch into tackle, Ewar and DPS skiffs. Or is this a viable tactic? Yup, the PANIC effect is on the ship hull and there's nothing stopping you from refitting from the Rorqual, already confirmed earlier in the thread. Edek Hawker wrote: I am a miner and industrialist. I've always made my "living" in Eve from mining first and foremost. I do not multibox mine I run 2 accounts only (for extra research slots to those who are curious). Now that being said The only thing I do not like about the proposed changes to the rorqual is the panic button preventing warping for the barges. In the PvP world miners have always been easy meat to be destroyed because we are not combat pilots in combat ships. Therefore our main defense against aggression has always been to escape extend and run. As a miner in a mining ship you will not win a fight so you run it is that simple. Let a 3 bil investment plus time and skills be worth it let the foreman protect his miners allowing them to escape and mine another day without a ship lost. Mining is pretty much the worst isk per hr in the game this has been stated over and over allowing miners to save their ships and mine another day would be a great help in balancing the lack of income from mining. It is my opinion that combat pilots will not care about saving mining fleets because of the general mentality against miners in general. So the invulnerable panic button to allow a defense fleet time to save you makes no sense to me. Nobody is coming to save you nobody cares about saving you they are to busy laughing at you for being stupid enough to mine in the first place (stating a pvp pilot perspective here... obviously) and get killed. Let a miner protect himself by making escape possible we are independent pilots that would prefer that option. My .02 A new eden miner If you could warp off like that it would be way too powerful. If you wish to warp off then just use the Rorqual's RR instead of immediately hitting the PANIC button. Other than that I'm echoing those saying join a better corp that protects its miners (or at least does a decent job using them as bait). Bobb Bobbington wrote: and yet I'm afraid it says it consumes heavy water on sisi http://imgur.com/9Su2dZe Pretty sure that's still Work in Progress and may not reflect the final product. I'm going with it doesn't take fuel until there's some word otherwise or we at least have a final version on SiSi.
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 91	Posted - 2016.10.24 05:50:19 - [352] - Quote For those who are interested, drone mining rigs apparently have a new attribute as a bonus to rate of fire. There isn't any other description, but my guess would be that it applies to the new ice mining drones.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1539	Posted - 2016.10.24 11:35:44 - [353] - Quote FT Cold wrote: For those who are interested, drone mining rigs apparently have a new attribute as a bonus to rate of fire. There isn't any other description, but my guess would be that it applies to the new ice mining drones. Should really be to cycle time. Also, for anyone who is wondering, most of the relevant stuff is now up on the test server (Except t2 indy cores don't work, and there's no way to get excavator drones, plus the rorq ship bonuses are wrong) Panic button is now reusable, and doesn't burn out, but has a 10m cooldown
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 92	Posted - 2016.10.24 22:12:57 - [354] - Quote Arronicus wrote: FT Cold wrote: For those who are interested, drone mining rigs apparently have a new attribute as a bonus to rate of fire. There isn't any other description, but my guess would be that it applies to the new ice mining drones. Should really be to cycle time. Also, for anyone who is wondering, most of the relevant stuff is now up on the test server (Except t2 indy cores don't work, and there's no way to get excavator drones, plus the rorq ship bonuses are wrong) Panic button is now reusable, and doesn't burn out, but has a 10m cooldown Probably just an oversight on the part of whoever wrote the new attributes for the module. I'll give it a test soon to see if it does anything. Also, excavator drones and skillbooks are seeded in syndicate space, and rorqual attributes have been updated. Not sure about the t2 industrial core though, no skill injectors left to use :(.
Kenneth Fritz DND Industries FUBAR. 11	Posted - 2016.10.25 14:13:17 - [355] - Quote My corp and I were on the test server last night for about 3-4 hrs yesterday. We are heavy indy, and as such such the rorqual is our life blood. I don't know if it's been fixed but the only thing the panic button did was make stuff immune to damage. Otherwise it was broken in such a way that we could atill do all the things it said we couldn't to include light a cyno with the rorqual and jumping the roqual out. Also the module wouldn't burn out. Now on to my two bits on the improved rorqual: The tankability of the rorqual is finally in lone with the other captials. As such we are very happy. A saiged rorqual can now defend itself against all but a dedicated effort to brong one down. The fear of losing one to a random roam of destroyers, cruiser, or frigates is gone. Battleships in fair enough numbrs and the right fit could give one a run for its money with a chance of bringing it down but not without heavy losses. And yes I'm include blops in that assessment. Carriers will be the bane of these new rorquals. Dreads might need some help but that will depend heavily on each ships respective fit and weather the rorqual is seiged or not. As far as mining is concerned I have zero complaints and I think CCP hit the nail on the head like a vertean carpenter. I'm not pandering here, I mean CCP have jacked up stuff in the past, sometimes royally. But not this time. PANIC module needs fix on test server (maby it has alrwady) before I can weigh in on it for a fair assessment. Who's your end of the world buddy?
Sergeant L CPE1704TKS SWARTA. 3	Posted - 2016.10.25 14:41:47 - [356] - Quote A few changes I would like to suggest. Since the Rorqual by far is not cheap we should make it possible for it to survive at least given the risk vs isk on mining. With the following: 1. Make the industrial core timer only 1 minute just like the marauders. Keep thee same consumption that there is now just divide it accordingly. 2. Either make the ore from the new mining drones instantly appear at the end of the cycle in the ore hold or make all the ore coming from the drones already compressed. The movement of the drones to the rorqual to dump is time consuming and lowers the mining yield for the isk/hr. Other than that I think your spot on. Sitting for 5 min just because its old code doesn't make sense, change it and let the miners have a bit of a chance to get out and live another day for once. Nice work cant wait for the 8th of November.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 161	Posted - 2016.10.25 15:00:00 - [357] - Quote Sergeant L wrote: A few changes I would like to suggest. Since the Rorqual by far is not cheap we should make it possible for it to survive at least given the risk vs isk on mining. With the following: 1. Make the industrial core timer only 1 minute just like the marauders. Keep thee same consumption that there is now just divide it accordingly. 2. Either make the ore from the new mining drones instantly appear at the end of the cycle in the ore hold or make all the ore coming from the drones already compressed. The movement of the drones to the rorqual to dump is time consuming and lowers the mining yield for the isk/hr. Other than that I think your spot on. Sitting for 5 min just because its old code doesn't make sense, change it and let the miners have a bit of a chance to get out and live another day for once. Nice work cant wait for the 8th of November. You already can make like 300M isk/hour while tanking 50k DPS, dealing 2k DPS, and becoming invulnerable on command. What more do you want? A Rorqual mining away in a cynojammed system would be almost impossible to kill with a 1 min siege timer. Anything capable of killing it won't be able to get there before it jumps out. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Quriel Arjar School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 7	Posted - 2016.10.25 15:29:51 - [358] - Quote Could anyone check, if it's possible to get in warp in one MWD cycle? I did some testing and, as it turns out, with Capital Ships III and 3 Inertia Stabilisers in low slots one 500MN MWD II cycle is not enough. Rorqual still needs to align for 3-5 seconds after MWD ran it's cycle and then, finally, enter warp. For whatever reason this works almost perfectly in today's Rorqual with only two, not three, inertial stabs fitted and the same MWD. I may be doing something wrong, hence I am asking for a little help here.
Kenneth Fritz DND Industries FUBAR. 11	Posted - 2016.10.25 15:56:12 - [359] - Quote Quriel Arjar wrote: Could anyone check, if it's possible to get in warp in one MWD cycle? I did some testing and, as it turns out, with Capital Ships III and 3 Inertia Stabilisers in low slots one 500MN MWD II cycle is not enough. Rorqual still needs to align for 3-5 seconds after MWD ran it's cycle and then, finally, enter warp. For whatever reason this works almost perfectly in today's Rorqual with only two, not three, inertial stabs fitted and the same MWD. I may be doing something wrong, hence I am asking for a little help here. Use 500mn mwd. Let it cycle only once either by turning it off or disabling the auto-repeat. Either way you'll see sideways warps that would make a superstructure cry uncle. I also don't think you need inertials for this trick either. Who's your end of the world buddy?
Gaia Albosa The church of Evil Justice Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2016.10.25 16:23:27 - [360] - Quote New Rorqual changes seem awesome for big Alliances and Corporations with the numbers, but not so much for the many smaller (or normal sized) corporations in new Eden. It's a bit of a wind up giving the Rorqual the ability to mine as much as 5 exhumers at the press of a button, when it would leave way to many fleets totally screwed when being hot dropped. I understand risk vs reward but there seems to be a lot of agreement out there on this. Only thing I can think of is to go silly and have enough Exhumers out there bringing in massive amounts of ISK to pay for all the ganks. I'd say the pirates of New Eden are going to be having a field day with all this...

Quriel Arjar School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 7	Posted - 2016.10.25 17:12:06 - [361] - Quote Kenneth Fritz wrote: Use 500mn mwd. Let it cycle only once either by turning it off or disabling the auto-repeat. Either way you'll see sideways warps that would make a superstructure cry uncle. I also don't think you need inertials for this trick either. That's exactly what I do. It doesn't, however, work without inertia stabs and neither it does perfectly (by what I mean Rorqual entering warp instantaneously after the MWD cycle ends) with 3 of them. From what I remember this MWD 10 seconds to enter warp trick used to work better and was more reliable with the "old" Rorqual, not the one we have on Sisi right now. EDIT: Alright, I've totally forgot about overheating the MWD
Quriel Arjar School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 7	Posted - 2016.10.25 17:24:09 - [362] - Quote Whoops, double post.
Sergeant L CPE1704TKS SWARTA. 3	Posted - 2016.10.25 19:05:26 - [363] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: Sergeant L wrote: A few changes I would like to suggest. Since the Rorqual by far is not cheap we should make it possible for it to survive at least given the risk vs isk on mining. With the following: 1. Make the industrial core timer only 1 minute just like the marauders. Keep thee same consumption that there is now just divide it accordingly. 2. Either make the ore from the new mining drones instantly appear at the end of the cycle in the ore hold or make all the ore coming from the drones already compressed. The movement of the drones to the rorqual to dump is time consuming and lowers the mining yield for the isk/hr. Other than that I think your spot on. Sitting for 5 min just because its old code doesn't make sense, change it and let the miners have a bit of a chance to get out and live another day for once. Nice work cant wait for the 8th of November. You already can make like 300M isk/hour while tanking 50k DPS, dealing 2k DPS, and becoming invulnerable on command. What more do you want? A Rorqual mining away in a cynojammed system would be almost impossible to kill with a 1 min siege timer. Anything capable of killing it won't be able to get there before it jumps out. I see your point of more ganking miners. Has it ever occurred to you why people leave eve? They are tired of getting jumped all the time, even in HS if they wanted a fight they would just go to NS, LS or WH's.. The proof of being worried about users leaving is the now, the clones states. All of us old eve players are pretty set, new players get frustrated about the constant ambushing etc. You know it, you just said no fair, what you don't want a good fight with someone shooting back at you?. Well look at it his way, you don't even have to scan to find the miners, they are in a easy anomaly belt for you just to instantly warp in as you hit the system. Heck you don't even have to hit the scanner as you get free information on who is there and the system sov, so you know they are mining. Free intel all for the roaming gank fleets. Its okay but, have you seen the price of ships lately? I wonder why they are getting so high? Well, enjoy it was just a suggestion to put in on par with those that run all the PVE sites. There is no reason the best mining ship should be stuck when the best PVE ships can get out easily as well. Eve needs balance and they at least are on a better track right now. Cheers and happy hunting!
Trespasser S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore 57	Posted - 2016.10.25 22:02:50 - [364] - Quote so you go from 3000m3 to 18000+ m3 by siege I kind of feel that the out of siege number is to low, i would personally like to see it half of the siege so 9000m3 for unsieged and 18000+ for sieged. That way your still doing better then a couple of hulks (as you should be since its a 3 billion isk ship and the drones are over a hulks cost each) this also makes it worth it even in regions that are less then friendly alot of the time.
Nam Dnilb Universal Frog 273	Posted - 2016.10.25 22:12:48 - [365] - Quote Quriel Arjar wrote: Kenneth Fritz wrote: Use 500mn mwd. Let it cycle only once either by turning it off or disabling the auto-repeat. Either way you'll see sideways warps that would make a superstructure cry uncle. I also don't think you need inertials for this trick either. That's exactly what I do. It doesn't, however, work without inertia stabs and neither it does perfectly (by what I mean Rorqual entering warp instantaneously after the MWD cycle ends) with 3 of them. From what I remember this MWD 10 seconds to enter warp trick used to work better and was more reliable with the "old" Rorqual, not the one we have on Sisi right now. EDIT: Alright, I've totally forgot about overheating the MWD New option is to agility command boost yourself. Gives aggro, but with the Rorqual most warps are long enough for that to expire.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 162	Posted - 2016.10.25 22:40:38 - [366] - Quote Sergeant L wrote: Dark Lord Trump wrote: Sergeant L wrote: A few changes I would like to suggest. Since the Rorqual by far is not cheap we should make it possible for it to survive at least given the risk vs isk on mining. With the following: 1. Make the industrial core timer only 1 minute just like the marauders. Keep thee same consumption that there is now just divide it accordingly. 2. Either make the ore from the new mining drones instantly appear at the end of the cycle in the ore hold or make all the ore coming from the drones already compressed. The movement of the drones to the rorqual to dump is time consuming and lowers the mining yield for the isk/hr. Other than that I think your spot on. Sitting for 5 min just because its old code doesn't make sense, change it and let the miners have a bit of a chance to get out and live another day for once. Nice work cant wait for the 8th of November. You already can make like 300M isk/hour while tanking 50k DPS, dealing 2k DPS, and becoming invulnerable on command. What more do you want? A Rorqual mining away in a cynojammed system would be almost impossible to kill with a 1 min siege timer. Anything capable of killing it won't be able to get there before it jumps out. I see your point of more ganking miners. Has it ever occurred to you why people leave eve? They are tired of getting jumped all the time, even in HS if they wanted a fight they would just go to NS, LS or WH's.. The proof of being worried about users leaving is the now, the clones states. All of us old eve players are pretty set, new players get frustrated about the constant ambushing etc. You know it, you just said no fair, what you don't want a good fight with someone shooting back at you?. Well look at it his way, you don't even have to scan to find the miners, they are in a easy anomaly belt for you just to instantly warp in as you hit the system. Heck you don't even have to hit the scanner as you get free information on who is there and the system sov, so you know they are mining. Free intel all for the roaming gank fleets. Its okay but, have you seen the price of ships lately? I wonder why they are getting so high? Well, enjoy it was just a suggestion to put in on par with those that run all the PVE sites. There is no reason the best mining ship should be stuck when the best PVE ships can get out easily as well. Eve needs balance and they at least are on a better track right now. Cheers and happy hunting! "I see your point of more ganking miners" Please point out where I said this. I just said that the rorqual shouldn't be nigh-invunlnerable. "Has it ever occurred to you why people leave eve? They are tired of getting jumped all the time, even in HS if they wanted a fight they would just go to NS, LS or WH's.." You are aware that by your logic anyone using the rorqual wants a fight? Since they have to go to lowsec, nullsec, or wormholes to fly it. Also, EvE is a PvP game built around the fact that anyone can show up and wreck your stuff. Love it or leave it. "what you don't want a good fight with someone shooting back at you?" The Rorqual itself deals 2000DPS max while in siege, and any skiffs supporting it can be nasty themselves. And there will be combat ships showing up as the Rorqual takes a while to kill. Does that qualify as shooting back yet? "Well, enjoy it was just a suggestion to put in on par with those that run all the PVE sites. There is no reason the best mining ship should be stuck when the best PVE ships can get out easily as well." A tackled carrier can run as easily as a sieged rorqual. The difference is the carrier can't tank 50000DPS and become invulnerable on command for 5+ minutes. Personally, I think the Rorqual will be far too safe in a cynojammed system if you set the core to 1 minute. By the time anything large enough to kill the Rorqual gets there, the Rorq will have sieged down and cynoed out. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Grookshank Jump Drive Appreciation Society 125	Posted - 2016.10.26 10:38:52 - [367] - Quote Grookshank wrote: Quote: reduced mass (allowing the Rorqual to travel through the same wormholes as Freighters) Can we please have clarification on this: will the Rorqual be able to enter Thera or will it be denied by a "no capital" rule? Is there a chance to get a definitive answer before the patch hits tranq?
Confirmed Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.10.26 14:00:45 - [368] - Quote I was doing some intial testing with the changes and have two questions: 1) the ore bay was only 250,000? I thought it was moving to 300,000. 2) The iniability to dock at a Large Indy is a bit of an issue. This is making things really difficult for the sake of being a pita. Initially there are ways around it but as existing things are removed from the game, this is really unbalanced.. This isn't about combat logistics, this is about the amount of ore moving around. 250,000 or 300,000 of compressed ore being moved for building things in null will be extremely difficult to accomplish as long as docking isn't allowed in a large. I understand the medium (to some extent) though they shouldn't allow freighters either then in my view. However Larges are going to be the more common deployment even in large alliances and not being able to put your major backbone of ore generation into them is a huge drawback. Now, if it was something like 'can dock for now, but when the patch of you can put things in from the outside' comes along that will change things somewhat but initially it's very drudgery inducing for the sake of drudgery, not the sake of game play.
Zockhandra Dystopian Heaven Circle-Of-Two 33	Posted - 2016.10.26 16:12:23 - [369] - Quote P.A.N.I.C. Module: Requires Invulnerability Core Operation skill level 1 Duration: 5 minutes base, up to 7.5 minutes based on skills 200km range Applies to all mining and industrial ships within the same fleet, except other Rorquals Runs once and then burns out Limit of one module per ship Bonuses to all affected ships: +99.99% Shield Resists -90% Shield recharge duration (increases passive shield regen rate) All turret, missile, drone and smart bomb damage set to 0 +100% Mass -50% velocity Prevents warp, cloak, jump, dock, tethering (if already tethered do not apply) -75% scan resolution [/quote] So Basically not only was dropping on miners hard before. But now they have a 5-7.5 Minute invuln period where any aggressors are forced to disengage if they don't have serious support.... How is the module burning out any loss at all, when you can repair them for free at stations? Why couldn't it be that this module did the mining boosts instead? so instead you had: -Massively increased mining yield for fleet -Fleet immobilized for extended periods -Slightly increased shield resistances and bonuses to local reps on those ships All the P.A.N.I.C module is going to do, is make miners un-killable in an already hard to hunt environment. That being said, i like the idea of the rorq taking part in operations and actually getting to mine on a proper level i think that its a very positive change especially given the risk involved. But i reserve my opinion on the panic module..... I think that the module is going to cause some horrible horrible problems for everyone. Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you. Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned, across from the bubble and into your hull.
H3llHound hogyoku Goonswarm Federation 91	Posted - 2016.10.26 16:20:52 - [370] - Quote Zockhandra wrote: P.A.N.I.C. Module: Requires Invulnerability Core Operation skill level 1 Duration: 5 minutes base, up to 7.5 minutes based on skills 200km range Applies to all mining and industrial ships within the same fleet, except other Rorquals Runs once and then burns out Limit of one module per ship Bonuses to all affected ships: +99.99% Shield Resists -90% Shield recharge duration (increases passive shield regen rate) All turret, missile, drone and smart bomb damage set to 0 +100% Mass -50% velocity Prevents warp, cloak, jump, dock, tethering (if already tethered do not apply) -75% scan resolution So Basically not only was dropping on miners hard before. But now they have a 5-7.5 Minute invuln period where any aggressors are forced to disengage if they don't have serious support.... How is the module burning out any loss at all, when you can repair them for free at stations? Why couldn't it be that this module did the mining boosts instead? so instead you had: -Massively increased mining yield for fleet -Fleet immobilized for extended periods -Slightly increased shield resistances and bonuses to local reps on those ships All the P.A.N.I.C module is going to do, is make miners un-killable in an already hard to hunt environment. That being said, i like the idea of the rorq taking part in operations and actually getting to mine on a proper level i think that its a very positive change especially given the risk involved. But i reserve my opinion on the panic module..... I think that the module is going to cause some horrible horrible problems for everyone.[/quote] They wont be unkillable. Just wait 5-7min and then kill them. PANIC mod burns out with one use like the capital hull energizer

Trevize Demerzel 16	Posted - 2016.10.26 17:54:55 - [371] - Quote Very happy with the proposed changes. On test I do see an area of concern however. The new mining drones are painfully slow, thus making the mining yields MUCH less then what has been stated. -
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 191	Posted - 2016.10.27 00:46:35 - [372] - Quote Arronicus wrote: That's exactly my point, the theoretical max yield was never accurate to begin with. With ship fittings alone and no skills, you got way more than it. Is also worth noting excavator mining drones are going to be stupidly expensive The theoretical yield was accurate assuming mining rigs were stacking penalized. This would give a total Rig multiplier of 1.374048938. All things in EvE being multiplicative, you multiply the stat by the effect of one rig. Then you multiply the new total by the effect of the next module, reduced by stacking penalties, and so on. This results in a yield of ~27626.67 per cycle with 5 drones, which works out to 18,417.78 per min. I'm leaving the tilde in there because there's other funky stuff going on with how it's calculated on the current sisi build and I can't get my sheet to add up at certain points. The final yield in practice does mach my sheet when sieged, but with the core off there's about a 10% discrepancy - which is really odd, as that number is just multiplied by the core effect. Since the rigs are not incurring stacking penalties, It's Yied1.151.15*1.1 which gives us a 1.45475 multiplier from the combined rigs. With my test character (t1 core, ship skill to 4, drone spec 3), this means a theoretical yield of 6,577.74 m3 per drone per cycle, which matches the 411 spod that appeared in my ore bay from a single drone. Setting all skills to 5, shows 29,226.67 per cycle of 5 drones, or 19,484.44 m3 per minute. If I get the sheet sorted (or give up trying) I'll post it in the thread. What does get stacking penalized, is the drone speed bonus of the core with Drone Nav Computers.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 1544	Posted - 2016.10.27 10:34:53 - [373] - Quote Trespasser wrote: so you go from 3000m3 to 18000+ m3 by siege I kind of feel that the out of siege number is to low, i would personally like to see it half of the siege so 9000m3 for unsieged and 18000+ for sieged. That way your still doing better then a couple of hulks (as you should be since its a 3 billion isk ship and the drones are over a hulks cost each) this also makes it worth it even in regions that are less then friendly alot of the time. Given your ability to move around while unsieged, you would be pulling roughly the same yield out of siege, as in siege, which would be completely broken in itself. Ultimately though, I think the reason is so big in siege is because you are actually vulnerable. An attentive out of siege rorqual is impossible to catch. There is simply no way to catch it when the pilot piloting the rorqual either has it aligned, or has an emergency escape cyno ready. The rorqual in siege though is extremely vulnerable to getting tackled. When hostiles come in, it's almost a garauntee that the sieged rorqual will get tackled, whereas the unsieged wont, so WHY would you give unsieged such comparable yield?
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2759	Posted - 2016.10.27 14:49:15 - [374] - Quote Nam Dnilb wrote: Quriel Arjar wrote: Kenneth Fritz wrote: Use 500mn mwd. Let it cycle only once either by turning it off or disabling the auto-repeat. Either way you'll see sideways warps that would make a superstructure cry uncle. I also don't think you need inertials for this trick either. That's exactly what I do. It doesn't, however, work without inertia stabs and neither it does perfectly (by what I mean Rorqual entering warp instantaneously after the MWD cycle ends) with 3 of them. From what I remember this MWD 10 seconds to enter warp trick used to work better and was more reliable with the "old" Rorqual, not the one we have on Sisi right now. EDIT: Alright, I've totally forgot about overheating the MWD New option is to agility command boost yourself. Gives aggro, but with the Rorqual most warps are long enough for that to expire. If your area is so insecure that going into siege mode is not really an option, you can do wonderful things fitting a Higgs Anchor rig and boosting while aligned. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Trevize Demerzel 16	Posted - 2016.10.27 15:34:33 - [375] - Quote Trevize Demerzel wrote: Very happy with the proposed changes. On test I do see an area of concern however. The new mining drones are painfully slow, thus making the mining yields MUCH less then what has been stated. Another tidbit.. Since the mining drones are so incredibly slow... they get nuked almost instantly when a dread pops in your mining anom. For that matter they are easily killed by normal rats in an anom as well, before you can pull them in. -
Frances Voltaire Eldorado Exhumers 0	Posted - 2016.10.27 16:24:03 - [376] - Quote Trevize Demerzel wrote: Trevize Demerzel wrote: Very happy with the proposed changes. On test I do see an area of concern however. The new mining drones are painfully slow, thus making the mining yields MUCH less then what has been stated. Another tidbit.. Since the mining drones are so incredibly slow... they get nuked almost instantly when a dread pops in your mining anom. For that matter they are easily killed by normal rats in an anom as well, before you can pull them in. Rorqual can lock 7targets and has long range remote shield rep bonuses. You can pre-lock all your 5 excavators and rep those under fire until they return. You can still have a rock targeted and lock up a rat while you recall excavators. This solves the Rat problem. For those rare capital rats, we will all likely loose an excavator or two. Pretty much cost of doing business.
Erasmus Grant Immortal Wanderers Zaibatsu Mercantile 31	Posted - 2016.10.27 21:09:47 - [377] - Quote Please allow the Rorqual to use all isotope types instead of just Oxygen.
Kenneth Fritz DND Industries FUBAR. 11	Posted - 2016.10.27 23:36:16 - [378] - Quote Erasmus Grant wrote: Please allow the Rorqual to use all isotope types instead of just Oxygen. While I understand your plight, the Rorqual was designed by ORE whose ship technology is based on Gallente designs. Thus it uses oxygen isotopes. Just because you want to use it as a poor man's jump freighter doesn't constitute changing it to a one size fits all isotope user. Who's your end of the world buddy?
Erasmus Grant Immortal Wanderers Zaibatsu Mercantile 31	Posted - 2016.10.28 00:47:28 - [379] - Quote Kenneth Fritz wrote: Erasmus Grant wrote: Please allow the Rorqual to use all isotope types instead of just Oxygen. While I understand your plight, the Rorqual was designed by ORE whose ship technology is based on Gallente designs. Thus it uses oxygen isotopes. Just because you want to use it as a poor man's jump freighter doesn't constitute changing it to a one size fits all isotope user. Sorry mate not as poor as you think. I own a JF. So do not assume ****.
Kenneth Fritz DND Industries FUBAR. 11	Posted - 2016.10.28 14:10:49 - [380] - Quote Erasmus Grant wrote: Kenneth Fritz wrote: Erasmus Grant wrote: Please allow the Rorqual to use all isotope types instead of just Oxygen. While I understand your plight, the Rorqual was designed by ORE whose ship technology is based on Gallente designs. Thus it uses oxygen isotopes. Just because you want to use it as a poor man's jump freighter doesn't constitute changing it to a one size fits all isotope user. Sorry mate not as poor as you think. I own a JF. So do not assume ****. Fair enough. It was simply the reason I hear most when someone complains about having to import oxygen isotopes because it isn't found in the space they live. While dangerous I would try wormholes with an Endurance or skiff (if your feeling lucky). Who's your end of the world buddy?

Dreamslayer Anzomi Thirteenth Empire Hell's Pirates 0	Posted - 2016.10.28 23:28:50 - [381] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Industrial Core II: Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5 Duration: 5 minutes Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water Enables Ore and Ice Compression Movement Effects: -100% Rorqual velocity +900% Rorqual mass Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering Assistance and Electronic warfare: 100% remote repair impedance (prevents other ships from repairing the Rorqual) 80% remote assistance impedance (reduces the effect of remote assistance modules like remote sensor boosters) 80% sensor dampener resistance Full ECM immunity +120% Scan resolution Mining Foreman Burst Bonuses: +30% Mining foreman burst strength +200% Command burst range Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range Drone Damage and Mining Bonuses: +100% Drone damage and hitpoints +30% Drone MWD speed +500% Drone mining yield -80% Drone ice harvesting duration Why not have industrial core 1 max output be 9k instead of 3k? 3k seems pretty low and you have to train 38 days for 6 times as much for industrial reconfig 5 . Perhaps have this go up per level eventually getting to 18k max when you get level 5? but 3k max when you have level 3/4 industry reconfig is pushing it
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 164	Posted - 2016.10.28 23:34:45 - [382] - Quote Dreamslayer Anzomi wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Industrial Core II: Requires Industrial Reconfiguration skill level 5 Duration: 5 minutes Consumption: 1500 units of Heavy Water Enables Ore and Ice Compression Movement Effects: -100% Rorqual velocity +900% Rorqual mass Prevents warping, docking, jumping, cloaking, tethering Assistance and Electronic warfare: 100% remote repair impedance (prevents other ships from repairing the Rorqual) 80% remote assistance impedance (reduces the effect of remote assistance modules like remote sensor boosters) 80% sensor dampener resistance Full ECM immunity +120% Scan resolution Mining Foreman Burst Bonuses: +30% Mining foreman burst strength +200% Command burst range Tanking and Remote Repair Bonuses: +140% Local shield booster repair amount -60% Local shield booster duration -75% Remote shield booster duration and cap use +120% Remote shield booster optimal and falloff range Drone Damage and Mining Bonuses: +100% Drone damage and hitpoints +30% Drone MWD speed +500% Drone mining yield -80% Drone ice harvesting duration Why not have industrial core 1 max output be 9k instead of 3k? 3k seems pretty low and you have to train 38 days for 6 times as much for industrial reconfig 5 . Perhaps have this go up per level eventually getting to 18k max when you get level 5? but 3k max when you have level 3/4 industry reconfig is pushing it 3k is without an industrial core at all, i.e. unsieged. The industrial core 1 won't get you all the way to 18k but it will be up there. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Ali Virgo The Collective DARKNESS. 100	Posted - 2016.10.29 04:21:04 - [383] - Quote Rorquals-á go into siege to amp up boost but they don't require -áany Capital Siege Array to be made. why is that
Ali Virgo The Collective DARKNESS. 100	Posted - 2016.10.29 04:26:56 - [384] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: For now I agree with the devs, let's just see how this plays out first before imposing all kinds of restrictions. But it does need to be closely monitored for the first few weeks and quickly jumped on if need be. Players weren't able to light a cyno inside a POS shield, and I don't think they can do it while tethered either (without losing the tether and becoming vulnerable). Why should they be able to do it while invulnerable with the panic module? light a cyno and go into panic mode as you titan and super fleet jumps to you . or bridge indy ships with ewar to a rorqual as it turns on it panic mode. it wont just be for mining :)
Emma Davaham Natak Heavy Industries All My Friends Are Ded 0	Posted - 2016.10.29 18:07:32 - [385] - Quote Is anyone finding the rorq fleet boosts to be underwhelming? The best I can get is down to 49 second ice cycle times.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2759	Posted - 2016.10.30 23:59:52 - [386] - Quote The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 13	Posted - 2016.10.31 05:36:30 - [387] - Quote Here are some concerns. First of all, I didn't test this, but CCPls don't screw up and make it so that they can jump/tether right after the invul expires and before getting pointed again. Remember, a Rorqual in distress is most likely a non-consensual PvP issue, and most of hunters in that area use non-bubblers as tacklers. I don't think you are intending on making Rorquals safe vs. anything except bubblers, which would make them immune to covert cyno hotdrops, which would make them safe from one of the most common and balanced risks for PvE ships in Eve for example. Also refitting rafter PANIC expires seem problematic as many others have stated. These ships don't need to warp or move around much in their PvE activity. They will have anchored mobile depots and spare modules with them. You need to give them a debuff of some sort, or what's gonna keep people from exploiting it by getting multiple PANICs? Even extending 1 minute combat timer until after the PANIC expires is not enough. An unsieged Rorq will still survive 1 minute to many groups. Then he will just refit, because he anchored a depot while mining before getting caught. Furthermore, 5-7 minutes seem too long. Tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think you would want %100 safe PvE activity for even the most organized group in nullsec. There should be interesting ways for them to protect their PvE capitals, and interesting ways for small/medium sized fleets to snatch a capital every once in a while. You want to give Rorquals the ability to call their corpmates and online their PvP toons after getting tackled and that seems OK, but you take away the surprise element from hunting fleets. One of the key elements in nullsec hunting is killing the enemy before support arrives, so know this a PANIC button means heavily messing with nullsec hunting mechanics in its deep roots. You need to think more about how balance it if you want to have the PANIC button. Right now the capability of response is on a regional level. Half of a region (10 jumps) can respond to a Rorqual getting tackled given 7.5 minutes. If you drop in a major alliance's space, people can even take mid-points in their titans or faxes, wait out their orange timer, and still save that Rorqual. And you are giving them 10ly jump range. So all the miners need to do is have cynoes and drop on each other when they get tackled. You are giving them immense combat capabilities but you are assuming that there will be one or a couple of these ships on belts sort of "leading" the herd, so its OK to give them 3000 DPS. What will happen is that people are gonna have cynoes in their belts and jump on each other. How many Rorquals do you expect to be mining at the same time in 10 LY range in any given region? I would say it will be more than 30 in some. No pirate group will be able to take that fleet down. It requires an invading fleet. But whenever those kinds (150 man battleship fleet etc) of fleets appear in their intel they will stop mining from 10 jumps away anyway. If you want to keep this an interesting mechanic, you should keep the responset at a pocket (3-4 jumps) level. The respondents should be limited to PvP alts or friends in the system, and people readily in PvP ships in the pocket. Even a main pocket of a decent alliance will be 100 people, with a lot of capitals to drop to save the Rorqual. And you are giving them tank an entire batch of damage, and regen it back during invul. That alone is an additional 2 minutes for the response. I too thought mining capitals needed a reason to be taken out from their poses, but the changes you propose just overdoes it and I am having seriously doubts on CCP ever talks to a non-consensual PvPer when they ever are making a change. All those people on CSM are major null entities, they only represent the Rorqual side. You need to heed the other side if you wanna have a balance. Problem is people who don't have the spare time to commit to a major null entity won't have time to run for CSM or make themselves heard on forums/reddit either. Someone in CCP seriously needs to start playing Eve on tranquility as a person who tries to hunt these ships you are designing under conditions you are proposing. You rely too much on the feedback from people who represent just one aspect of this game. I know this last part was less relevant but it needs to be voiced every single time you make a change in non-consensual pvp. Also do you want small/solo blopsers to switch to Rorquals for hotdropping on other PvE ships? Are you seriously intending this? Couldn't EFT with it yet, but given the combat capability, jump range and the fatigue that's looks likely to happen really.
Anthar Thebess 1659	Posted - 2016.10.31 10:15:52 - [388] - Quote With the influx of all this ore, capitals will be so cheap. I like it! Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists Show your support to The Cause!
Rena Skyfall Trald Raised By Wolves Inc Blades of Grass 0	Posted - 2016.10.31 12:14:49 - [389] - Quote The panic button makes it so you can't be killed but you can be targeted tackled held and have your cap drained. The panic button will be very dangerous for a mining fleet if the rorqual pilot actual panics.
Ded Akara Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.10.31 12:57:52 - [390] - Quote As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game. The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do. Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandly they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking.

Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 111	Posted - 2016.10.31 17:01:59 - [391] - Quote Ded Akara wrote: As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game. The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do. Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandably they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking. Wrong. This is if you have mined enough to cover your losses, which you may or may not. There is a great deal of risk putting one in the field and a small organized fleet will have no problem smashing one. You must not fly the same null sec I do, I promise a group of 8 good pvpers will kill this no problem in T3's. What is good here is the risk vs reward. It is quite a threat to put it out, but they also made it strong enough where you have to have a degree of organization to kill one. Eve players in general are cowards, they want the biggest kill without having to risk any ship themselves. This is the way it has always been and always will be, human nature dictates it. The changes are coming so embrace it. If this kills the ore market, oh well cheaper ships and more pvp time. If it makes ore prices rise, thats good. Either way the changes are coming regardless.
Zhul Chembull Booze and Blues inc. Soviet-Union 111	Posted - 2016.10.31 17:04:57 - [392] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Here are some concerns. First of all, I didn't test this, but CCPls don't screw up and make it so that they can jump/tether right after the invul expires and before getting pointed again. Remember, a Rorqual in distress is most likely a non-consensual PvP issue, and most of hunters in that area use non-bubblers as tacklers. I don't think you are intending on making Rorquals safe vs. anything except bubblers, which would make them immune to covert cyno hotdrops, which would make them safe from one of the most common and balanced risks for PvE ships in Eve for example. Also refitting rafter PANIC expires seem problematic as many others have stated. These ships don't need to warp or move around much in their PvE activity. They will have anchored mobile depots and spare modules with them. You need to give them a debuff of some sort, or what's gonna keep people from exploiting it by getting multiple PANICs? Even extending 1 minute combat timer until after the PANIC expires is not enough. An unsieged Rorq will still survive 1 minute to many groups. Then he will just refit, because he anchored a depot while mining before getting caught. Furthermore, 5-7 minutes seem too long. Tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think you would want %100 safe PvE activity for even the most organized group in nullsec. There should be interesting ways for them to protect their PvE capitals, and interesting ways for small/medium sized fleets to snatch a capital every once in a while. You want to give Rorquals the ability to call their corpmates and online their PvP toons after getting tackled and that seems OK, but you take away the surprise element from hunting fleets. One of the key elements in nullsec hunting is killing the enemy before support arrives, so know this a PANIC button means heavily messing with nullsec hunting mechanics in its deep roots. You need to think more about how balance it if you want to have the PANIC button. Right now the capability of response is on a regional level. Half of a region (10 jumps) can respond to a Rorqual getting tackled given 7.5 minutes. If you drop in a major alliance's space, people can even take mid-points in their titans or faxes, wait out their orange timer, and still save that Rorqual. And you are giving them 10ly jump range. So all the miners need to do is have cynoes and drop on each other when they get tackled. You are giving them immense combat capabilities but you are assuming that there will be one or a couple of these ships on belts sort of "leading" the herd, so its OK to give them 3000 DPS. What will happen is that people are gonna have cynoes in their belts and jump on each other. How many Rorquals do you expect to be mining at the same time in 10 LY range in any given region? I would say it will be more than 30 in some. No pirate group will be able to take that fleet down. It requires an invading fleet. But whenever those kinds (150 man battleship fleet etc) of fleets appear in their intel they will stop mining from 10 jumps away anyway. If you want to keep this an interesting mechanic, you should keep the responset at a pocket (3-4 jumps) level. The respondents should be limited to PvP alts or friends in the system, and people readily in PvP ships in the pocket. Even a main pocket of a decent alliance will be 100 people, with a lot of capitals to drop to save the Rorqual. And you are giving them tank an entire batch of damage, and regen it back during invul. That alone is an additional 2 minutes for the response. I too thought mining capitals needed a reason to be taken out from their poses, but the changes you propose really overdo it and upon hearing change by change I am having more and more doubts on whether CCP ever talks to a non-consensual PvPer when they ever are making a change. All those people on CSM are major null entities, they only represent the Rorqual side. You need to heed the other side if you wanna have a balance. Problem is people who don't have the spare time to commit to a major null entity won't have time to run for CSM or make themselves heard on forums/reddit either. Someone in CCP seriously needs to start playing Eve on tranquility as a person who tries to hunt these ships you are designing under conditions you are proposing. You rely too much on the feedback from people who represent just one aspect of this game. I know this last part was less relevant but it needs to be voiced every single time you make a change in non-consensual pvp. Also do you want small/solo blopsers to switch to Rorquals for hotdropping on other PvE ships? Are you seriously intending this? Couldn't EFT with it yet, but given the combat capability, jump range and the fatigue that's looks likely to happen really. You must not fly the same null sec I do. I have never seen a ping and a fleet able to respond in 7.5 minutes. Hell 15 minutes if your alliance is on point and closer to half an hour otherwise. I see some silly posts sometimes. You want to kill one, learn some organization skills and have the appropriate ships. It is a single ship and it will go down easily rest assured. We can have this discussion two weeks after these changes go into effect, there will be lots of rorqual losses rest assured.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 171	Posted - 2016.10.31 17:13:27 - [393] - Quote Zhul Chembull wrote: Ded Akara wrote: As a result of the new Rorqual I predict a faster than before loss of players, resulting in ever decreasing player numbers. The new Rorqual is too powerful, and benefits only a small number of players, who are mostly already at the top of the game anyway. As for all other players, many are going to feel outcompeted and driven from the game. The argument I see people making is, is that 'the Rorqual should be this strong, players using it are risking more than 3 bill'. - Not exactly, after insurance, you barely lose 1 bill if you lose a Rorqual - that's nothing compared to what this thing can do. Also, the PANIC mode is a joke, and should be removed so roaming fleets have a chance at killing these things. CCP are trying too hard to get players to take Rorqs into the belts, by giving it too much all at once. I suggest they ever balance things a bit more carefully. Understandably they wanted to give it a significant boost, but to this extent? Something not powerful enough? "Let's boost it by 500%! It's six times better than before!." So much for tweaking. Wrong. This is if you have mined enough to cover your losses, which you may or may not. There is a great deal of risk putting one in the field and a small organized fleet will have no problem smashing one. You must not fly the same null sec I do, I promise a group of 8 good pvpers will kill this no problem in T3's. What is good here is the risk vs reward. It is quite a threat to put it out, but they also made it strong enough where you have to have a degree of organization to kill one. Eve players in general are cowards, they want the biggest kill without having to risk any ship themselves. This is the way it has always been and always will be, human nature dictates it. The changes are coming so embrace it. If this kills the ore market, oh well cheaper ships and more pvp time. If it makes ore prices rise, thats good. Either way the changes are coming regardless. Please show me your T3 fit that does 6500 DPS while tanking Rorqual drones. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
FT Cold R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry 92	Posted - 2016.10.31 18:01:42 - [394] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling. I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy.
Flashmala Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 50	Posted - 2016.10.31 20:06:14 - [395] - Quote I may have posted this in the wrong place, so I'll post it here as well - With regard to the PANIC module, the dev blog stated the following : "The module only requires Invulnerability Core Operation level 1 to operate, and the skill increases the duration of the P.A.N.I.C. effect by 10% per level. This means that Rorqual pilots can strategically train the Invulnerability Core Operation skill to whatever level they wish and ensures that the Rorqual pilot and its fleet have more information about when the effect will end than the attackers do." This would indicate that some element of question was intended to not give away the timing of the PANIC cycle end. However, on Sisi, the bubble surrounding the Rorqual, when the PANIC module is engaged, starts to wobble when it nears the end of its cycle, so the enemy can visually see when the cycle is about to end. These seem counter to each other and we are wondering which of these scenarios was the intended one? Age does not diminish the extreme disappointment of having a scoop of ice cream fall from the cone.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2760	Posted - 2016.10.31 23:39:12 - [396] - Quote FT Cold wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling. I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy. Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Gaia Albosa The church of Evil Justice Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2016.11.01 09:37:53 - [397] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: FT Cold wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling. I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy. Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability. ` No, this won't work we have been told already... We will have to take a 5 Billion ISK risk to put a Rorqual and mining drones out in the belts and that is that. Way to go CCP!!!
Gaia Albosa The church of Evil Justice Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2016.11.01 09:55:21 - [398] - Quote Gaia Albosa wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: FT Cold wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: The PANIC module needs to have a weapons timer that prevents refitting until at least one minute after the module is done cycling. I agree, the thing to do, even if you're only using the industrial core, is going to be to refit to a combat fit as soon as you're in trouble. PANIC makes it too easy. Even more problematic is that it appears that a pair of Rorquals side by side could refit new PANIC modules off each other and thereby keep extending their invulnerability. ` No, this won't work we have been told already... We will have to take a 5 Billion ISK risk to put a Rorqual and mining drones out in the belts and that is that. Way to go CCP!!! P.S. Minus the insurance that is...
Jean-Luc II United Federation of Planets - Star Fleet Division 0	Posted - 2016.11.01 11:19:50 - [399] - Quote So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration.
ahllamaar 1	Posted - 2016.11.01 12:22:32 - [400] - Quote I think these changes are going to completely disrupt the root of the industrial playing style. This is going to kill the mining ops.

Trinkets friend Empty Vessels 3035	Posted - 2016.11.01 13:36:29 - [401] - Quote I, for one, have bought a Rorqual for elite solo mining operations and await the dankest ISK to pour into my wallet as I crash the market for minerals into the sea of tears on this thread. bathes in sea of tears sails yacht through sea of tears yacht has banner on back saying WHERE IS YOUR RORQUAL PEASANTS ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Ded Akara Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2016.11.01 17:07:34 - [402] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: I, for one, have bought a Rorqual for elite solo mining operations and await the dankest ISK to pour into my wallet as I crash the market for minerals into the sea of tears on this thread. bathes in sea of tears sails yacht through sea of tears yacht has banner on back saying WHERE IS YOUR RORQUAL PEASANTS By all means, let the market crash. If they're intent on replacing the rorqual with this new freak ship they can't blame the players.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 14	Posted - 2016.11.01 22:38:08 - [403] - Quote Zhul Chembull wrote: You must not fly the same null sec I do. I have never seen a ping and a fleet able to respond in 7.5 minutes. Hell 15 minutes if your alliance is on point and closer to half an hour otherwise. I see some silly posts sometimes. You want to kill one, learn some organization skills and have the appropriate ships. It is a single ship and it will go down easily rest assured. We can have this discussion two weeks after these changes go into effect, there will be lots of rorqual losses rest assured. As a Bombers Bar whaling FC I have been whaling in nullsec for years now. And every single region, not a few ones. I bet my sample space is much broader than your experience, which is probably limited to being in a few alliances. If your alliance not capable or you own vast spaces with nobody in it then sure, by all means you can't form something in 15 minutes. But some are more vigilant in protecting their space. If you tackle anything in Delve, you will get 20 smartbombing titans on you. Here we tackle a Wyvern in Cobalt Edge and the first FAX logs in upon the ping lands under 4 minutes (with more to follow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84FOs7CwXGc And don't think its just because its a super. People come to aid to their carriers too. And by all means I don't say there won't be Rorqual losses. Small, unorganized groups with nobody that can help a tackled Rorqual around will lose them. I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. But I believe even they are not entitled to %100 safe ratting. Now if PANIC had a shorter duration maybe this would increase the risk of organized groups to the appropriate level. Meanwhile it wouldn't change anything for the unorganized group. Right now it is like you take a good risk if you are an unorganized by corp mining with a Rorqual, and approx. zero risk if you are an organized corp. I would have loved it to be changed so you at least take SOME risk in an organized corp.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 14	Posted - 2016.11.01 22:50:45 - [404] - Quote Jean-Luc II wrote: So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration. 1) Nobody mines so "people of New Eden can enjoy ships". They mine for profit. I lol everything I see this miner self righteousness. 2) Probably the ratio of fair fights in Eve is below %1. Can you get over this fact and stop with the "poor defenseless miners" rhetoric. Also PANIC is designed so you can actually defend your mining group with PvP ships now. 3) Eve is a risk reward based game and getting ganked is the risk you take for better reward. You can go back to hisec if you don't want fighting unwanted fights or having to defend yourself. 4) The PANIC button right is designed such that its gonna be too hard or impossible to kill major nullsec groups' Rorquals. It positively discriminates them with too much safety, to the extent it might be way less profitable to mine as a solo/small group anymore. This is bad for miner population too, as much as it is bad for people who hunt Rorquals.
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 154	Posted - 2016.11.01 23:57:54 - [405] - Quote Jean-Luc II wrote: So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration. Everyone is scared of a rorqual that can fight back.
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 154	Posted - 2016.11.02 00:02:50 - [406] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Jean-Luc II wrote: So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration. 1) Nobody mines so "people of New Eden can enjoy ships". They mine for profit. I lol everything I see this miner self righteousness. 2) Probably the ratio of fair fights in Eve is below %1. Can you get over this fact and stop with the "poor defenseless miners" rhetoric. Also PANIC is designed so you can actually defend your mining group with PvP ships now. 3) Eve is a risk reward based game and getting ganked is the risk you take for better reward. You can go back to hisec if you don't want fighting unwanted fights or having to defend yourself. 4) The PANIC button right is designed such that its gonna be too hard or impossible to kill major nullsec groups' Rorquals. It positively discriminates them with too much safety, to the extent it might be way less profitable to mine as a solo/small group anymore. This is bad for miner population too, as much as it is bad for people who hunt Rorquals. I actually like the idea of would be gankers getting caught with their pants down and losing their ships. Maybe more people will man up and roam with better fleet comps instead of the usual T3D/Frig cancer.
Dan Jintao What Could Go Wrong Escalating Entropy 4	Posted - 2016.11.02 00:56:29 - [407] - Quote These changes are amazing. I look forward to using Rorqual skills for the first time ever. Instead of being a pos ornament, they will not actually generate content, for miners and for pvpers. Great work CCP. They may be a bit OP as shield rep/boost ships atm, but remains to be seen.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2760	Posted - 2016.11.02 11:45:12 - [408] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. You must not know Goons very well. I admit that they are very well-organized, but they also have their window-lickers who will find a way to lose an invulnerable ship. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2760	Posted - 2016.11.02 11:47:04 - [409] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Jean-Luc II wrote: So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration. 1) Nobody mines so "people of New Eden can enjoy ships". They mine for profit. I lol everything I see this miner self righteousness. 2) Probably the ratio of fair fights in Eve is below %1. Can you get over this fact and stop with the "poor defenseless miners" rhetoric. Also PANIC is designed so you can actually defend your mining group with PvP ships now. 3) Eve is a risk reward based game and getting ganked is the risk you take for better reward. You can go back to hisec if you don't want fighting unwanted fights or having to defend yourself. 4) The PANIC button right is designed such that its gonna be too hard or impossible to kill major nullsec groups' Rorquals. It positively discriminates them with too much safety, to the extent it might be way less profitable to mine as a solo/small group anymore. This is bad for miner population too, as much as it is bad for people who hunt Rorquals. These are all very valid points. The only thing I take issue with is I think that even in High Sec you have to fight unwanted fights and defend yourself. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Cade Windstalker 600	Posted - 2016.11.02 14:03:02 - [410] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: As a Bombers Bar whaling FC I have been whaling in nullsec for years now. And every single region, not a few ones. I bet my sample space is much broader than your experience, which is probably limited to being in a few alliances. If your alliance not capable or you own vast spaces with nobody in it then sure, by all means you can't form something in 15 minutes. But some are more vigilant in protecting their space. If you tackle anything in Delve, you will get 20 smartbombing titans on you. Here we tackle a Wyvern in Cobalt Edge and the first FAX logs in upon the ping lands under 4 minutes (with more to follow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84FOs7CwXGc And don't think its just because its a super. People come to aid to their carriers too. And by all means I don't say there won't be Rorqual losses. Small, unorganized groups with nobody that can help a tackled Rorqual around will lose them. I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. But I believe even they are not entitled to %100 safe ratting. Now if PANIC had a shorter duration maybe this would increase the risk of organized groups to the appropriate level. Meanwhile it wouldn't change anything for the unorganized group. Right now it is like you take a good risk if you are an unorganized by corp mining with a Rorqual, and approx. zero risk if you are an organized corp. I would have loved it to be changed so you at least take SOME risk in an organized corp. Really good post, and the example especially is appreciated. Too many people post about "this one thing they saw this one time" and, especially for timing examples, rely on their perceptions of time rather than hard numbers. I don't think it's accurate to say that an organized group will never lose a Rorqual though. They'll just lose it due to either a mistake (like someone forgetting to repair their PANIC button), a logistical failing (the guy they thought was on scout duty went to the bathroom, or the bridging Titan couldn't log in), or just raw stupid in its innumerable forms. It's no more fair to say that no one who is remotely good will lose a Rorqual than it is to say that no one who is remotely good will lose a ratting Carrier, and zKill is full of examples of by all accounts good players who have lost ratting carriers (or Supers, or Titans...) for one reason or another.

Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3131	Posted - 2016.11.02 15:12:44 - [411] - Quote Ok, so I've had a little playtime on SISI with the rorq, and while it's definitely unique and interesting compared to what was done before, the experience was heavily hampered by numerous annoying little details and was overall a difficult experience to play with. It has plenty of potential, and I really am starting to clear away some doubts I had about it before. It definitely chews through roids pretty well (although the skills were really confusing compared to what the devblog said before). Took about 28-30 minutes to fill the ore gold (without compression) in a regular asteroid belt (-0.2 sec status), this was using lvl III mining drone spec skills and 2 T2 capital mining drone rigs (I giggled a little when I saw this was an option). . Pretty good, but normal asteroids were often smaller than the mining amount of individual drones, which (when considering 5x drones and the survey scanner doesn't tell you volume) was practically impossible for me to calculate to be of any benefit. Also another REALLY annoying bug/feature was the way drones and asteroids interacted in their displayed states. Whenever a drone would return to drop its load, it show in the drone window as "returning" and its little tag would dissapear from the asteroid. This makes sense, until you have to decide whether or not that asteroid is being mined (recall the over-mining issue) or is in fact a dead asteroid. It doesn't dissapear until the ore is dropped into your hold for some reason. Not a hugely fundamental issue, but it gets really annoying when you have to juggle multiple asteroids of unknown statuses with only 7 targets available (and it's hella annoying when you have to drop all asteroids in order to fend of some rats). Ice mining was a much easier experience and pretty much similar in comparison to ice mining in a barge. Low input required from the user as compared to the variables of asteroids. However, what was really weird to see, was that the drones spent little to no time actually mining. It was a straight line from ship to iceberg and back again, unlike with ore that took some time. I'd really like to see less mining potential so dependent on drone speed rather than anything else. And for those curious, my fit could get the drones up to 450m/s travel speed, which isn't bad in of itself, but combined with all of the other issues, really makes any attempt to calculate or plan efficiency a fruitless chore. Also tested the tank in an optimized fit: it's pretty good, but it was a heavily specialized fit so I take that with a grain of salt. Could tank about 3-4 dreads before armor bleeding and PANIC was useful for taking a breather.
NextDarkKnight Mental Disorders Inc. Guardians of the Asylum 52	Posted - 2016.11.02 17:59:26 - [412] - Quote When you hit the Panic button it should pull all the industrial ships into the ship bay and allow the miners to reship to PVP ships. Seriously how could this be missed. If the miners can defend then the rorq dies with all the ships anyway.
Jean-Luc II United Federation of Planets - Star Fleet Division 0	Posted - 2016.11.03 08:28:56 - [413] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Jean-Luc II wrote: So, now we have all the pirates who are spending their time going around ganking poor defenseless miners complaining that it's not going to be so easy. When without these hard working miners there would be no ships to fly in the 1st place. Respect is due! Meanwhile a whole bunch of miners who will be giving up using their Rorquals altogether as it will be too easy to gank them and the risks are way to high... The cost of a Rorqual and the drones is huge even taking the insurance into consideration. 1) Nobody mines so "people of New Eden can enjoy ships". They mine for profit. I lol everything I see this miner self righteousness. 2) Probably the ratio of fair fights in Eve is below %1. Can you get over this fact and stop with the "poor defenseless miners" rhetoric. Also PANIC is designed so you can actually defend your mining group with PvP ships now. 3) Eve is a risk reward based game and getting ganked is the risk you take for better reward. You can go back to hisec if you don't want fighting unwanted fights or having to defend yourself. 4) The PANIC button right is designed such that its gonna be too hard or impossible to kill major nullsec groups' Rorquals. It positively discriminates them with too much safety, to the extent it might be way less profitable to mine as a solo/small group anymore. This is bad for miner population too, as much as it is bad for people who hunt Rorquals. Yes we do it for the ISK for sure, and the shear excitement of course... And I'm not complaining about the pirates trying to gank miners. Mining would be really boring if we didn't have to run away and hide from time to time. But industry is where it all starts and needs to be respected. While it may be fun to actually fight back, pop a few pirates and lose some Rorquals, this is no good if the economy collapses as the prices of Ores go into a tailspin due to Muliboxing Rorquals and brave miners earning trillions per month.
Salpun Global Telstar Federation Offices Masters of Flying Objects 842	Posted - 2016.11.04 03:05:02 - [414] - Quote Is everyone else getting a repair cost of 239,999,760 ISK to repair a PANIC module? If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide See you around the universe.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1777	Posted - 2016.11.04 17:57:29 - [415] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. If you know null so well you should know one of our dumbfuck members is probably the first to lose a Rorqual (it might even be me, knock on wood). With the current state of affairs (on SISI) only fairly large (and noticeable) fleets will be capable of taking down a Rorqual (not including hot drops). Any decent Rorq pilot will see them coming 10 jumps away and prepare accordingly. However a lot can happen in the (worst case) 5 minutes it takes for an indy core to wind down. Should the fleet reach the Rorq first and tackle it, a decent fit Rorq will be able to hold out for roughly 2 to 10 minutes before hitting the PANIC button is even needed depending on how hard the fleet is hitting. Lighting a cyno under those circumstances would bring in reinforcements, but would also force the Rorq to stay on the field for another 10 minutes, only 7,5 of which are covered by the PANIC button at most. Hitting the PANIC button would be the very very very last thing I would do because it doesn't prevent you from being pointed and it prevents you from helping in the defense. Ultimately I think we'll see plenty of Rorquals die, even in deep 0.0 where reinforcements are on standby. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
13kr1d1 Hedion University Amarr Empire 226	Posted - 2016.11.04 19:20:17 - [416] - Quote Why isnt there a seperate feedback for changes to boosts and how we'll need to use consumables? Consumable group boosts is awful. The passive is fine on grid. Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3134	Posted - 2016.11.04 23:33:22 - [417] - Quote 13kr1d1 wrote: Why isnt there a seperate feedback for changes to boosts and how we'll need to use consumables? Consumable group boosts is awful. The passive is fine on grid. There is. It's under the command boost changes devblog thread.
Jonathon Silence Celestial Horizon Corp. Badfellas Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.04 23:58:33 - [418] - Quote I have been trying out things on the test server and have noticed something which has me a bit worried. 5 Run Excavator Mining Drone BPC's are available from the ORE LP store. Generally when this kind of thing happens BPO's for the item will not be seeded. That has me very concerned. The 'Excavator' type drones are designed for the Rorqual, they are how it mines. Having this function of the Rorqual 'nerfed' so that they can only be got by running ORE missions (or running Incursions and converting LP). Can CCP please confirm if this is going to the ONLY way to get Excavator Drones (via the LP BPC's) or if this is an additional way of getting them if you do not want a BPO? If this is an additional way then all good and PLEASE ignore the rest of the Post, but this this is the only way then that is, well to put it mildly, B******t. To force players to run out to 0.0 (ORE space) to get a 5 Run BPC for a required Piece of equipment is not on. You do not force Carrier pilots to run missions to get BPC's for fighters and for the fighters to be racially limited, why are you doing this for the Rorqual? The risk reward of having a Rorqual in the belt is based round the amount they can mine, if they can not mine this amount except by running missions/incursions to get a special piece of equipment then the risk/reward calculation fails, and people will use Orca's instead as the risk/reward from the boosts still works out.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 177	Posted - 2016.11.05 00:01:21 - [419] - Quote Jonathon Silence wrote: I have been trying out things on the test server and have noticed something which has me a bit worried. 5 Run Excavator Mining Drone BPC's are available from the ORE LP store. Generally when this kind of thing happens BPO's for the item will not be seeded. That has me very concerned. The 'Excavator' type drones are designed for the Rorqual, they are how it mines. Having this function of the Rorqual 'nerfed' so that they can only be got by running ORE missions (or running Incursions and converting LP). Can CCP please confirm if this is going to the ONLY way to get Excavator Drones (via the LP BPC's) or if this is an additional way of getting them if you do not want a BPO? If this is an additional way then all good and PLEASE ignore the rest of the Post, but this this is the only way then that is, well to put it mildly, B******t. To force players to run out to 0.0 (ORE space) to get a 5 Run BPC for a required Piece of equipment is not on. You do not force Carrier pilots to run missions to get BPC's for fighters and for the fighters to be racially limited, why are you doing this for the Rorqual? The risk reward of having a Rorqual in the belt is based round the amount they can mine, if they can not mine this amount except by running missions/incursions to get a special piece of equipment then the risk/reward calculation fails, and people will use Orca's instead as the risk/reward from the boosts still works out. Buy them from someone who does that sort of thing. I don't see any carrier pilots complaining about having to build their own fighters, because they don't. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1777	Posted - 2016.11.05 02:22:14 - [420] - Quote Jonathon Silence wrote: I have been trying out things on the test server and have noticed something which has me a bit worried. 5 Run Excavator Mining Drone BPC's are available from the ORE LP store. Generally when this kind of thing happens BPO's for the item will not be seeded. That has me very concerned. The 'Excavator' type drones are designed for the Rorqual, they are how it mines. Having this function of the Rorqual 'nerfed' so that they can only be got by running ORE missions (or running Incursions and converting LP). Can CCP please confirm if this is going to the ONLY way to get Excavator Drones (via the LP BPC's) or if this is an additional way of getting them if you do not want a BPO? If this is an additional way then all good and PLEASE ignore the rest of the Post, but this this is the only way then that is, well to put it mildly, B******t. To force players to run out to 0.0 (ORE space) to get a 5 Run BPC for a required Piece of equipment is not on. You do not force Carrier pilots to run missions to get BPC's for fighters and for the fighters to be racially limited, why are you doing this for the Rorqual? The risk reward of having a Rorqual in the belt is based round the amount they can mine, if they can not mine this amount except by running missions/incursions to get a special piece of equipment then the risk/reward calculation fails, and people will use Orca's instead as the risk/reward from the boosts still works out. You mean like how the BPO for every ORE ship ever is only initially available in Outer Ring? Yeah that's such a big problem in the availability of mining barges My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 19	Posted - 2016.11.05 03:37:34 - [421] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. You must not know Goons very well. I admit that they are very well-organized, but they also have their window-lickers who will find a way to lose an invulnerable ship. The only group that has killed ratting carriers in their space in past 5 months is us (Bombers Bar). So I know them very well, and they are the most organized group when it comes to protecting their ratters.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 19	Posted - 2016.11.05 04:00:51 - [422] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: I say organized people will never lose a Rorqual. For example there will never be a Rorq loss in Delve. If you know null so well you should know one of our dumbfuck members is probably the first to lose a Rorqual (it might even be me, knock on wood). With the current state of affairs (on SISI) only fairly large (and noticeable) fleets will be capable of taking down a Rorqual (not including hot drops). Any decent Rorq pilot will see them coming 10 jumps away and prepare accordingly. However a lot can happen in the (worst case) 5 minutes it takes for an indy core to wind down. Should the fleet reach the Rorq first and tackle it, a decent fit Rorq will be able to hold out for roughly 2 to 10 minutes before hitting the PANIC button is even needed depending on how hard the fleet is hitting. Lighting a cyno under those circumstances would bring in reinforcements, but would also force the Rorq to stay on the field for another 10 minutes, only 7,5 of which are covered by the PANIC button at most. Hitting the PANIC button would be the very very very last thing I would do because it doesn't prevent you from being pointed and it prevents you from helping in the defense. Ultimately I think we'll see plenty of Rorquals die, even in deep 0.0 where reinforcements are on standby. Well it looks funny how your paragraph progresses but your conclusion is totally unexpected. When you guys were in Deklein we relied on not dropping in your staging titan range. Delve range covers much more. II have tested your defenses a little bit and it looks like you have sufficient supers / titans and fatigue to drop at any given time to deter any battleship sized fleet or smaller. We get those who were not smart enough to light a cyno. Now with the initial tank, plus 7 minutes (after which the Rorq will recharge a lot of shield too) even those people who didn't fit a cyno have a guarantee to bring in a cyno ship and cyno up. They can even afk from their Rorqual toon if need be. Cyno inhibitors will not change that fact too as the ship can just cyno offgrid and the supers can just warp in as there is enough time. At this rate frankly I would be very very surprised if we ever kill a Rorq in your space, and even if we did the risk that you take to mine that much won't be at the level of what it needs to be. You have your local, you have your intel network, your ship is tanky/dpsy enough to not die to a solo/duo blops group, and you still want people from 15 jumps to be able to come save you when tackled if it comes to that. That's just greedy imho.
Jonathon Silence Celestial Horizon Corp. Badfellas Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.05 04:59:06 - [423] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Jonathon Silence wrote: I have been trying out things on the test server and have noticed something which has me a bit worried. 5 Run Excavator Mining Drone BPC's are available from the ORE LP store. Generally when this kind of thing happens BPO's for the item will not be seeded. That has me very concerned. The 'Excavator' type drones are designed for the Rorqual, they are how it mines. Having this function of the Rorqual 'nerfed' so that they can only be got by running ORE missions (or running Incursions and converting LP). Can CCP please confirm if this is going to the ONLY way to get Excavator Drones (via the LP BPC's) or if this is an additional way of getting them if you do not want a BPO? If this is an additional way then all good and PLEASE ignore the rest of the Post, but this this is the only way then that is, well to put it mildly, B******t. To force players to run out to 0.0 (ORE space) to get a 5 Run BPC for a required Piece of equipment is not on. You do not force Carrier pilots to run missions to get BPC's for fighters and for the fighters to be racially limited, why are you doing this for the Rorqual? The risk reward of having a Rorqual in the belt is based round the amount they can mine, if they can not mine this amount except by running missions/incursions to get a special piece of equipment then the risk/reward calculation fails, and people will use Orca's instead as the risk/reward from the boosts still works out. You mean like how the BPO for every ORE ship ever is only initially available in Outer Ring? Yeah that's such a big problem in the availability of mining barges I would have no problem if it was the BPO in ORE space, that is fine. What I am saying is it looks like there will be NO BPO's only BPC's from the ORE LP store.
Jonathon Silence Celestial Horizon Corp. Badfellas Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.05 05:01:22 - [424] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: Jonathon Silence wrote: I have been trying out things on the test server and have noticed something which has me a bit worried. 5 Run Excavator Mining Drone BPC's are available from the ORE LP store. Generally when this kind of thing happens BPO's for the item will not be seeded. That has me very concerned. The 'Excavator' type drones are designed for the Rorqual, they are how it mines. Having this function of the Rorqual 'nerfed' so that they can only be got by running ORE missions (or running Incursions and converting LP). Can CCP please confirm if this is going to the ONLY way to get Excavator Drones (via the LP BPC's) or if this is an additional way of getting them if you do not want a BPO? If this is an additional way then all good and PLEASE ignore the rest of the Post, but this this is the only way then that is, well to put it mildly, B******t. To force players to run out to 0.0 (ORE space) to get a 5 Run BPC for a required Piece of equipment is not on. You do not force Carrier pilots to run missions to get BPC's for fighters and for the fighters to be racially limited, why are you doing this for the Rorqual? The risk reward of having a Rorqual in the belt is based round the amount they can mine, if they can not mine this amount except by running missions/incursions to get a special piece of equipment then the risk/reward calculation fails, and people will use Orca's instead as the risk/reward from the boosts still works out. Buy them from someone who does that sort of thing. I don't see any carrier pilots complaining about having to build their own fighters, because they don't. I bet carrier Pilots would complain if there was no BPO's for the fighters only BPC's available from the 4 NPC state LP stores in 5 run copies.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1777	Posted - 2016.11.05 12:28:49 - [425] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: You have your local, you have your intel network, your ship is tanky/dpsy enough to not die to a solo/duo blops group, and you still want people from 15 jumps to be able to come save you when tackled if it comes to that. That's just greedy imho. It's not greedy, it's just good organisation and cooperation. I'm not going to let my multi billion ISK ship die to honor the illusion of a fair fight when there's 10 dudes standing by to jump in and save my ass, and give them something to shoot at in the process. No-one would, including you. That said, plenty of Rorquals will die in Delve due to utter stupidity and miscommunication. Hunting Rorquals in Delve is going to be like playing on hard difficulty, absolutely. Plenty of other places with easier kills to score. But that's not to say that it's impossible. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
COMMANDER KATMAN DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax 0	Posted - 2016.11.07 01:30:31 - [426] - Quote Just wanted to post the numbers on the very max u can mine in here: With Max all Level 5 skills, T2Core, x2 T2 Mining drone rigs & 1x T1... the Very best you can Yield = 8,768m3 per Excavator Drone // 45,024m3 per set of 5 Drones, Per 90 Seconds cycle. Ice Excavator Drones = 10sec cycle time... So 5 units of ice per 10sec, per set of 5 drones. If you are mining the right stuff and have level 4-5 mining anoms or better on tap... you can easy pull over 10m per min, MWD on to mining spot, flash green for a few cycles then move to next spot keeping your drones mining within 0-10km. Also you can get them up and past 650m/s with 3 drone navs if you wanted. Thanks Kat
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 21	Posted - 2016.11.08 01:10:31 - [427] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: You have your local, you have your intel network, your ship is tanky/dpsy enough to not die to a solo/duo blops group, and you still want people from 15 jumps to be able to come save you when tackled if it comes to that. That's just greedy imho. It's not greedy, it's just good organisation and cooperation. I'm not going to let my multi billion ISK ship die to honor the illusion of a fair fight when there's 10 dudes standing by to jump in and save my ass, and give them something to shoot at in the process. No-one would, including you. That said, plenty of Rorquals will die in Delve due to utter stupidity and miscommunication. Hunting Rorquals in Delve is going to be like playing on hard difficulty, absolutely. Plenty of other places with easier kills to score. But that's not to say that it's impossible. Have you ever checked how many carriers you (Goonswarm Federation) have lost since past 5 months? I did. 4. All of them died to us (Bombers Bar) in two separate occasions. And those carriers we killed didn't have or light a cyno. Imagine giving them a PANIC button. Entire 10 minutes to burn a cyno or a support fleet to the system. Meanwhile there has been at least one or two occasions per month where you smartbombed entire ganking fleets to nonexistence. Other people seems to have given up coming to your space. Given the enormous PvE activity in your space I would say statistically this is already about %100 safe PvE capability. If you lose one carrier a month you will lose Rorquals at an even slower rate. Perhaps once every 6 months? That's not plenty. PvE in this game is about risk/reward. You are supposed to be taking more risk when you are moving your PvE activity from more secure to less secure space, whilst increasing the reward to be worth it. And the gankers are supposed to be the biggest risk you take, and hotdrop groups are supposed to be the epitome of this risk for their ability to infiltrate behind enemy lines and snatch a kill before help arrives. You talk about how your ship costs multi billions but you ignore the reward side of it. You are getting 300m/hr mining machines. They make up their cost in 10 hours of activity. A ratting carrier might be 20 hours. Given these rates a healthy risk/reward balance I think is around losing a ship every 70-100 hours of ratting. Given the risk you are supposed to take, 1/10th of your earnings is a fair amount to lose to the risk factors. Now being from a highly organized alliance I think you are under this illusion that you are somehow entitled to above-described approximately %100 safe ratting statistics just because you are organized, but you are not. Organization should at best improve your statistics greatly. Say maybe a death 150 or 200 hours of PvE. Given hundreds of carrier accounts ratting in Delve and NPC killing stats we see on Dotlan every day, I would safe the stats are nowhere even closely near this balance. And for Rorquals it is even going to be less risk and more reward. The whole PvE-ganking mechanics of nullsec should be designed with the above mentioned balance factors in mind and tuned until the desired statistics (mine was an example, there can be talk more on these numbers) are reached. The fine tuning might include rethinking local, mobile cyno inhibs, PANIC buttons, and other factors, and definitely increasing reward in less secure space (for which the Rorq changes are appropriate) as well. This is not because I am a ganker and I want more targets. This is because a proper risk/reward balance makes a more meaningful game for all of us. For example, you will now have a huge competitive advantage vs. unorganized, small group Rorquals/miners. You should have some due to your organization needing to be rewarded, but not this much. PS: I won't even get into the discussion regarding a fair fights. I'm sure you are not new to Eve.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2762	Posted - 2016.11.08 02:01:26 - [428] - Quote I didn't realize that Goons had only lost four ratting Carriers in the last five months. That's pretty impressive. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 22	Posted - 2016.11.08 06:30:31 - [429] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: I didn't realize that Goons had only lost four ratting Carriers in the last five months. That's pretty impressive. They lost more ratter ISK to NPCs than gankers.
Caldari Superiority State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.11.08 21:57:23 - [430] - Quote Currently Rorqual on sisi have bugged dps, maximum what i could get with officer ddas, industrial core II and geckos was ~1300 dps. More over nothing of ewar modifiers seem to work on npcs, they will shoot rorqual's drones regardless of any ewar (even combat drones). Maybe i'm just bad at testing but i doubt this will be the old carrier afk ratting like some people think. Unless it is a bug?

Vickers Secretary Weyland Inc. 4	Posted - 2016.11.09 11:15:19 - [431] - Quote I'm not really sure what to think of these changes. All of the follwing only if my math is correct: You can get up to 1,78million m3 per hour and rorqual (assuming perfect skills and no drone travel time). Even with travel time, can easily get more than a million m3 per hour. This means, a single player in a single ship can mine his own supercapital in under a day. This is just madness and has the potential to crash the whole market! Imagine those null miners with 20+ accounts at once in combination with the new engineering complexes - they can easily outproduce the whole highsec with just a bit of coordination and turn the import market into an export market. Mineral prices probably will fall into the abyss. In the current state, it really looks way tol overpowered to me. With just a few accounts and rorquals you can build your own citadel empire in a few weeks...
Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues Hookers N' Blow 13	Posted - 2016.11.09 16:11:44 - [432] - Quote I apologize if this question has been asked. If you are in a Rorqual, drones deployed, and you hit your panic/invuln modules can your drones still be recalled or are they blocked out by the invulnerability module?
Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues Hookers N' Blow 13	Posted - 2016.11.09 21:15:41 - [433] - Quote Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues wrote: I apologize if this question has been asked. If you are in a Rorqual, drones deployed, and you hit your panic/invuln modules can your drones still be recalled or are they blocked out by the invulnerability module? It would be nice if you gave them some kind of achilles heel like not being able to pull in their drones while they are invuln.
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM 6249	Posted - 2016.11.10 02:08:18 - [434] - Quote Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues wrote: I apologize if this question has been asked. If you are in a Rorqual, drones deployed, and you hit your panic/invuln modules can your drones still be recalled or are they blocked out by the invulnerability module? Yes, they can be recalled. Woo! CSM XI! Fuzzwork Enterprises Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Cade Windstalker 605	Posted - 2016.11.10 20:17:39 - [435] - Quote Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues wrote: Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues wrote: I apologize if this question has been asked. If you are in a Rorqual, drones deployed, and you hit your panic/invuln modules can your drones still be recalled or are they blocked out by the invulnerability module? It would be nice if you gave them some kind of achilles heel like not being able to pull in their drones while they are invuln. I'm pretty sure the Achilles heel of the Rorqual is "being a mining ship".
Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 0	Posted - 2016.11.12 19:22:04 - [436] - Quote I bet most people complaining about the P.A.N.I.C button in fact just wanted to say: "I don't want to loose my Rorqual. I want to use it but I don't want to loose it". And I'm saying that because that was the first thought I had while reading this thread. Took me a lot of time and hard work to get a Rorqual, so personally I wish I had at least a chance of getting away from the belt. That's from my personal point of view (as a solo/micro corp guy) I'd rather it be an escape mechanism. On the other hand, it sounds good for people who play in medium/large corps/alliances with lots of active players on the system or nearby. In that sense it makes using the Rorqual something that requires everyone to be paying attention, just like PVP and PVE fleets, rather than just having an alt slumbering inside a POS's shield. "OK, lets fire up the Rorqual, everybody stay tunned for possible hotdrops". It definetivelty ain't as "convenient" as before, but it has the potential to generate content. Thing is, solo/small corp players are also "content". There's a cool thing to a guy able to run of a band of bloodthirsty pirates in a big fat old Rorqual. For those guys, the PANIC button the way it is is simply put useless. Bottomline about the PANIC button, almost completely useless for me as a solo/small-corp guy, but certainly fun for active groups. About making the Rorqual an uber-mining ship, I don't know... I kinda like the idea of having the mining output of 5 ships into one, but the risk is so high that I think most people will never do it AND there's the abusive multiboxing thing people pointed out.
Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 0	Posted - 2016.11.12 19:23:00 - [437] - Quote Sry for double post
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 25	Posted - 2016.11.13 05:18:44 - [438] - Quote Feng Yotosashi wrote: Bottomline about the PANIC button, almost completely useless for me as a solo/small-corp guy, but certainly fun for active groups. About making the Rorqual an uber-mining ship, I don't know... I kinda like the idea of having the mining output of 5 ships into one, but the risk is so high that I think most people will never do it AND there's the abusive multiboxing thing people pointed out Yeah I wish it was something like a button that instantly teleports you to somewhere random at current system, leaving you unable to move/cloak for some balanced amount of time (20 to 40 seconds perhaps). Then it would rely on the hunters' skill to find/tackle you with combat probes, rather than your corporation's ability to muster numbers at a given time. If your corp can muster a response it does it with a cyno/bridge anyway, like big corps do. Currently it gives so much unfair competitive advantage to people like NC or Goons, over people like you. Solo Rorq will not be profitable due to losses, but organized Rorq will be profitable to the extent of 30 multiboxing alts per system.
Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 1	Posted - 2016.11.13 06:15:40 - [439] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Feng Yotosashi wrote: Bottomline about the PANIC button, almost completely useless for me as a solo/small-corp guy, but certainly fun for active groups. About making the Rorqual an uber-mining ship, I don't know... I kinda like the idea of having the mining output of 5 ships into one, but the risk is so high that I think most people will never do it AND there's the abusive multiboxing thing people pointed out Yeah I wish it was something like a button that instantly teleports you to somewhere random at current system, leaving you unable to move/cloak for some balanced amount of time (20 to 40 seconds perhaps). Then it would rely on the hunters' skill to find/tackle you with combat probes, rather than your corporation's ability to muster numbers at a given time. That's certainly more in line with an escape mechanism concept, but I'm not sure about the "unable to move" part, IDK... Rorqual already takes forever to align GÇô but then again, if the idea is teleporting instantly instead of a "forced warp", it would be fair. About the Rorqual being unable to cloak, it would be totally fair. In that scenario, gankers/whalers would always bring combat probes (as they actually already do), and they'd just wait for the Rorqual to "teleport" somewhere, scan it down and warp in for the kill. In the meantime, the Rorqual pilot is hammering warp key, spamming friendly channels and praying for his beloved ship. You'd have to take into account the time it takes for a Rorqual to align, warp, the time it takes for a combat probe to lock it and the gankers to arrive or at least point it. Anyway, sounds like fun for both sides. "The carp and the cutting board" - s+ìFÇàtöúµÑ¡
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 26	Posted - 2016.11.13 08:09:12 - [440] - Quote Feng Yotosashi wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: Feng Yotosashi wrote: Bottomline about the PANIC button, almost completely useless for me as a solo/small-corp guy, but certainly fun for active groups. About making the Rorqual an uber-mining ship, I don't know... I kinda like the idea of having the mining output of 5 ships into one, but the risk is so high that I think most people will never do it AND there's the abusive multiboxing thing people pointed out Yeah I wish it was something like a button that instantly teleports you to somewhere random at current system, leaving you unable to move/cloak for some balanced amount of time (20 to 40 seconds perhaps). Then it would rely on the hunters' skill to find/tackle you with combat probes, rather than your corporation's ability to muster numbers at a given time. That's certainly more in line with an escape mechanism concept, but I'm not sure about the "unable to move" part, IDK... Rorqual already takes forever to align GÇô but then again, if the idea is teleporting instantly instead of a "forced warp", it would be fair. About the Rorqual being unable to cloak, it would be totally fair. In that scenario, gankers/whalers would always bring combat probes (as they actually already do), and they'd just wait for the Rorqual to "teleport" somewhere, scan it down and warp in for the kill. In the meantime, the Rorqual pilot is hammering warp key, spamming friendly channels and praying for his beloved ship. You'd have to take into account the time it takes for a Rorqual to align, warp, the time it takes for a combat probe to lock it and the gankers to arrive or at least point it. Anyway, sounds like fun for both sides. Even though the Rorq is a slow aligner it would be impossible for anyone to probe you down, warp to you, land on grid and tackle you before you warp off without a unable to move timer. As long as the timer is balanced this would create the desired variation depending on hunter probing skill, how big the system is, where did you teleport etc. I rather the chances of Rorq dying depend on the hunter skill than the miner capability. Miners are not PvPers and they shouldn't have to show off PvP skill to avoid unwanted fights. In current PANIC button those who can muster people will, and those who cannot will not. Thus people will hunt Rorqs in the same regions and avoid others, and those regions won't use Rorqs much to begin with. That is not an interesting mechanic.

Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.13 18:39:10 - [441] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Even though the Rorq is a slow aligner it would be impossible for anyone to probe you down, warp to you, land on grid and tackle you before you warp off without a unable to move timer. As long as the timer is balanced this would create the desired variation depending on hunter probing skill, how big the system is, where did you teleport etc. I rather the chances of Rorq dying depend on the hunter skill than the miner capability. Miners are not PvPers and they shouldn't have to show off PvP skill to avoid unwanted fights. In current PANIC button those who can muster people will, and those who cannot will not. Thus people will hunt Rorqs in the same regions and avoid others, and those regions won't use Rorqs much to begin with. That is not an interesting mechanic. I think the chances of a Roqual dying should depend on both parties' skills. The PvPers are there to score a well executed, valuable kill, sure, and they deserve that, hands down. But if the miner is capable of getting a slow, 3 billion ship out of a really tight situation, he earned it and no player should be ruled out of that. Maybe not a random teleport, but a "super microjumpdrive" that makes the Rorqual move 10000km away or so. Make everything really tight in a way that the party that takes a split-second longers to react accordingly fails. The Rorqual guy wins if he activate everything in time. The hunters win if they do everything right and the Rorqual guy takes a second longer to initiate warp. Something along this line. I sugest this as long as the thing is well-balanced, of course, and I even think the scales could be tipped on hunters' favor, because after all we're talking about a slow industrial behemoth versus a pack of swift, especiallized killers. The point is to at least give smaller entities a chance to win. They'll risk it if the chance is there. The way it is now people will most likely avoid using it at all. I'd suggest a new module, with the escape mechanism but a penallty on ore income, placing the "escape Rorqual" lower then the "PANIC" and "Industrial Core" Rorquals, but higher than an Orca, income-wise. "The carp and the cutting board" - s+ìFÇàtöúµÑ¡
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 27	Posted - 2016.11.14 04:33:46 - [442] - Quote "Activating buttons on time'" is not an interesting mechanic tho. It's like paying attention to local. Those who do it right will always survive without any choice of counterplay by hunters. At any rate, enough discussion on a feature that's never gonna happen I guess.
AzTrackGuy Repubblica Indipendente di Genova EVIAN NATION 0	Posted - 2016.11.14 05:08:54 - [443] - Quote 5ly jump range? why can't we get this back up to where it used to be? or at the very least, 10ly's to be more in line with a JF trying to move industry 5lys at a time is a major pain, and something needs to be done about that, especially since the rorq's ship bay is specific to indy ships only - please bump the jump range "If you put forth the effort to succeed... you will"
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 189	Posted - 2016.11.14 12:05:23 - [444] - Quote AzTrackGuy wrote: 5ly jump range? why can't we get this back up to where it used to be? or at the very least, 10ly's to be more in line with a JF trying to move industry 5lys at a time is a major pain, and something needs to be done about that, especially since the rorq's ship bay is specific to indy ships only - please bump the jump range 5ly base jump range. Train JDC V for 10ly. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.14 13:11:10 - [445] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: "Activating buttons on time'" is not an interesting mechanic tho. It's like paying attention to local. Those who do it right will always survive without any choice of counterplay by hunters. At any rate, enough discussion on a feature that's never gonna happen I guess. But basically every known game is about activating buttons; the decision making about which buttons to press and when/how fast you do it is what makes it fun. Anyway, fair enough. Good hunting out there and let's hope the Rorqual changes bring good content for everybody. o7 "The carp and the cutting board" - s+ìFÇàtöúµÑ¡
Cade Windstalker 606	Posted - 2016.11.14 15:23:40 - [446] - Quote Feng Yotosashi wrote: I bet most people complaining about the P.A.N.I.C button in fact just wanted to say: "I don't want to loose my Rorqual. I want to use it but I don't want to loose it". And I'm saying that because that was the first thought I had while reading this thread. Took me a lot of time and hard work to get a Rorqual, so personally I wish I had at least a chance of getting away from the belt. That's from my personal point of view (as a solo/micro corp guy) I'd rather it be an escape mechanism. On the other hand, it sounds good for people who play in medium/large corps/alliances with lots of active players on the system or nearby. In that sense it makes using the Rorqual something that requires everyone to be paying attention, just like PVP and PVE fleets, rather than just having an alt slumbering inside a POS's shield. "OK, lets fire up the Rorqual, everybody stay tunned for possible hotdrops". It definetivelty ain't as "convenient" as before, but it has the potential to generate content. Thing is, solo/small corp players are also "content". There's a cool thing to a guy able to run of a band of bloodthirsty pirates in a big fat old Rorqual. For those guys, the PANIC button the way it is is simply put useless. Bottomline about the PANIC button, almost completely useless for me as a solo/small-corp guy, but certainly fun for active groups. About making the Rorqual an uber-mining ship, I don't know... I kinda like the idea of having the mining output of 5 ships into one, but the risk is so high that I think most people will never do it AND there's the abusive multiboxing thing people pointed out. You've just contradicted yourself here. You've said that no one will ever use the thing and then pointed out a situation you're concerned about where someone is clearly using the ship in question. Beyond that I think there's a bit of a conception that every play style should be cleanly open and available to everyone no matter what other conditions they impose on their play. If you want to play completely solo then it makes sense that you're going to be exposing yourself to more risk than a group of players able to pool their collective resources, risk mitigation, and firepower. Strictly speaking here there's nothing stopping a solo player from using a Rorqual in the same way that there's nothing stopping a solo player from using a Carrier to rat with, but as noted above you're going to be exposing yourself to more risk than someone in a group. Eve is, at the end of the day, a group focused game. It's perfectly reasonable to make some content require large group cooperation. Olmeca Gold wrote: Yeah I wish it was something like a button that instantly teleports you to somewhere random at current system, leaving you unable to move/cloak for some balanced amount of time (20 to 40 seconds perhaps). Then it would rely on the hunters' skill to find/tackle you with combat probes, rather than your corporation's ability to muster numbers at a given time. If your corp can muster a response it does it with a cyno/bridge anyway, like big corps do. Currently it gives so much unfair competitive advantage to people like NC or Goons, over people like you. Solo Rorq will not be profitable due to losses, but organized Rorq will be profitable to the extent of 30 multiboxing alts per system. Grouping up will always give an advantage, but that's not unfair that's just the advantage of working with others. If you don't like it go form your own group. As for the idea to make this a random teleport somewhere in the system, just no. An experienced prober will have you nailed in seconds at which point it's entirely down to the size of the system and the random position you landed as to whether or not you can get away. This makes a "balanced timer" probably longer than 40 seconds and large enough that even a half competent aggressor will catch you 99 times out of 100, making the Rorqual not only useless for small groups but also large ones since it's still going to burn down before help can arrive. The entire point of this invulnerability period is for combat pilots to be able to support mining pilots without having to babysit them all the time to stop them from dying before help can arrive. If you want to mine solo then either fly an aligned mining barge fleet with Orca support or ninja mine with a Venture or Prospect.
Feng Yotosashi Yamato Inc. 2	Posted - 2016.11.14 16:07:36 - [447] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: You've just contradicted yourself here. You've said that no one will ever use the thing and then pointed out a situation you're concerned about where someone is clearly using the ship in question. I said that without an escape mechanism, "nobody" (as in "most people") would be able to viably use a Rorqual except for larger groups of players. The situation I pointed out was exactly a suggestion to make it viable (even with risk involved) to those outside of larger groups. No contradiction at all here. Cade Windstalker wrote: Eve is, at the end of the day, a group focused game. It's perfectly reasonable to make some content require large group cooperation. I totally agree with that. Eve is a social game and the fact that a single player can't defend himself against a group of players don't mean the game is unfair. But the Rorqual changes simply lock the ship to the "I have friends to defend me" group of players ( (which is not "wrong"), and rules everyone else out. That's the nature of the game, "Swim with the big fish" they say. My whole point is just that, as a solo/small corp player, I'd still like to be able to use a Rorqual somehow, and the current changes makes it very, very hard to do that. Again, I don't mean it's necessarily "unfair", but i'd still would like to see a middleground option for people like me. "The carp and the cutting board" - s+ìFÇàtöúµÑ¡
Cade Windstalker 606	Posted - 2016.11.14 17:36:16 - [448] - Quote Feng Yotosashi wrote: I said that without an escape mechanism, "nobody" (as in "most people") would be able to viably use a Rorqual except for larger groups of players. The situation I pointed out was exactly a suggestion to make it viable (even with risk involved) to those outside of larger groups. No contradiction at all here. The only people who can use a Rorqual at all are people mining in Low and Null, and almost everyone in Low and Null who is mining is part of some group or other. Between that and the current jump range restrictions you don't have to worry too much about someone dropping massive numbers of caps on your Roqual, so even a moderately sized group (say, large enough to have both Miners and other players active at the same time) should be able to bring reinforcements to help besieged miners, even if all they can do is jump in Griffins to jam the points and let the ships warp off as soon as the PANIC effect drops. If you're not in a group that's large enough for that then... find more friends? Honestly if you're not in a group large enough for that I'm kind of questioning what you're even doing mining out in Low and Null in the first place. Renting maybe, I guess, but even then you could potentially make friends with neighboring renters enough that if you say "hey, something to shoot here! Next 10 minutes only!" they'll jump over at least at the prospect of something to kill. Feng Yotosashi wrote: I totally agree with that. Eve is a social game and the fact that a single player can't defend himself against a group of players don't mean the game is unfair. But the Rorqual changes simply lock the ship to the "I have friends to defend me" group of players ( (which is not "wrong"), and rules everyone else out. That's the nature of the game, "Swim with the big fish" they say. My whole point is just that, as a solo/small corp player, I'd still like to be able to use a Rorqual somehow, and the current changes makes it very, very hard to do that. Again, I don't mean it's necessarily "unfair", but i'd still would like to see a middleground option for people like me. There is never going to be something that makes the Rorqual feel worthwhile to the larger group that also makes it viable for you without making it functionally unkillable when used by the larger group. If it's powerful, like it is now, then it needs to be high risk to deploy. The best way to mitigate risks like siege timers is to bring lots of friends, either to make people wary of dropping you in the first place or to be able to bring aid in the event that a drop does occur. If it's relatively weak then making it "safer" becomes more viable, but then it becomes just a thing people have rather than this big ball of risk vs reward, except for the smaller groups because so much of the risk mitigation is now built into the hull. On top of that there are two things working against the sort of design you're talking about. The first is a decision that's been explicitly if not loudly stated by CCP a couple of times and that's that they would like for end-game content to be group content. That's why the end-game for High Sec PvE is currently Incursions, as opposed to solo Level 4 missions. It's also come up with respect to Null PvE and how CCP aren't happy that the current end-game is basically solo farming sites and belts. The second is just the inherent N+1 nature of a game like Eve that tries to avoid arbitrary brick walls and player limits. More players will always have an inherent advantage over less players. That doesn't mean that more players will always win, but it does mean that more players will probably win the vast majority of times if all other things are equal (especially the level of incompetence on both sides). If you want a middle ground then either don't Siege the Rorqual and mine aligned, which significantly increases your safety and ability to warp off quickly, or use an Orca.
AzTrackGuy Repubblica Indipendente di Genova EVIAN NATION 0	Posted - 2016.11.15 03:14:09 - [449] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: AzTrackGuy wrote: 5ly jump range? why can't we get this back up to where it used to be? or at the very least, 10ly's to be more in line with a JF trying to move industry 5lys at a time is a major pain, and something needs to be done about that, especially since the rorq's ship bay is specific to indy ships only - please bump the jump range 5ly base jump range. Train JDC V for 10ly. i have JDC5, but currently is only 5lys, so after the patch WILL the rorq be 10lys?, there's been no mension of the rorq's jump range getting buffed that i have found "If you put forth the effort to succeed... you will"
Dusty Meg Echelon Research Goonswarm Federation 100	Posted - 2016.11.15 08:12:22 - [450] - Quote AzTrackGuy wrote: Dark Lord Trump wrote: AzTrackGuy wrote: 5ly jump range? why can't we get this back up to where it used to be? or at the very least, 10ly's to be more in line with a JF trying to move industry 5lys at a time is a major pain, and something needs to be done about that, especially since the rorq's ship bay is specific to indy ships only - please bump the jump range 5ly base jump range. Train JDC V for 10ly. i have JDC5, but currently is only 5lys, so after the patch WILL the rorq be 10lys?, there's been no mension of the rorq's jump range getting buffed that i have found Base jump drive range: 5ly (+2.5) Its literally in the dev blog you are posting on the thread for. A base jump range of 5ly will give you 10 ly at JDC5 Creater of the EVE animated influence map http://www.youtube.com/user/DustMityEVE

Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 28	Posted - 2016.11.16 04:21:59 - [451] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Grouping up will always give an advantage, but that's not unfair that's just the advantage of working with others. If you don't like it go form your own group. Absolutely. I explicitly stated that grouping/organization should be rewarded. But if we talk fairness, the relevant question is what kind of advantage will best possible grouping and organization give to players. Will it give a properly balanced decrease in risk taken, or will it reduce all the risk to approximate zero. Right now it is the latter, and approximate zero risk does not suit Eve nullsec. Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the idea to make this a random teleport somewhere in the system, just no. An experienced prober will have you nailed in seconds at which point it's entirely down to the size of the system and the random position you landed as to whether or not you can get away. This makes a "balanced timer" probably longer than 40 seconds and large enough that even a half competent aggressor will catch you 99 times out of 100, making the Rorqual not only useless for small groups but also large ones since it's still going to burn down before help can arrive. You realize I avoided talking numbers, but since its a time factor you can easily achieve a balance. CCP can just have 10 hunters with different levels of experience and make them try and catch randomly teleported Rorquals in systems with different radius. Let's say CCP can decide if the timer gives a consistent %25 chance of getting caught across all variables the timer is balanced. This is really achievable by just one or two days experimentation. The system radius, the hunters' capability, the spot that the Rorq lands, all these add additional interesting flavor based on luck or skill. I agree that my proposal wouldn't reward capability of a PvP response, but you know what, if you are capable, you can fit a cyno to your Rorq and counter-drop the gank group like organized groups already do, or at least undock some ships in the time you gain by that capital tank and teleportation which is at least 5 minutes anyway. Hell you can even bait. So ability of a PvP response is currently already rewarded in nullsec gank situations. Cade Windstalker wrote: The entire point of this invulnerability period is for combat pilots to be able to support mining pilots without having to babysit them all the time to stop them from dying before help can arrive. If you want to mine solo then either fly an aligned mining barge fleet with Orca support or ninja mine with a Venture or Prospect Yeah, and we have argued this is a bad approach, since it gives too much advantage to the organized groups, and people with hundred titans waiting in case a Rorq gets tackled. The entire point of nullsec PvE is that there is a chance that you can get ganked no matter which corp you are from.
Fey Artwik Stargate Command - Beta Site 4 Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2016.11.17 13:15:36 - [452] - Quote Initial reaction so far. Not a chance in hell I'd put my Rorqual into siege. You never know what a hot dropper is going to drop. What a windup...
Cade Windstalker 608	Posted - 2016.11.17 22:01:49 - [453] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Absolutely. I explicitly stated that grouping/organization should be rewarded. But if we talk fairness, the relevant question is what kind of advantage will best possible grouping and organization give to players. Will it give a properly balanced decrease in risk taken, or will it reduce all the risk to approximate zero. Right now it is the latter, and approximate zero risk does not suit Eve nullsec. Only with a ton of organization and effort on the part of the players though, and at the end of the day that's just as much a result of the attacking players as the defenders. You're looking at it, as a potential aggressor, and saying "I don't think this is worth it" and there will always be a point where players can group up and organize to the point where they can only be seriously inconvenienced by an almost equally sized and organized group of players. I firmly believe there is nothing CCP can do to avoid a limit like that existing while still leaving Eve as an open and player driven sandbox, and I don't think they should try. Olmeca Gold wrote: You realize I avoided talking numbers, but since its a time factor you can easily achieve a balance. CCP can just have 10 hunters with different levels of experience and make them try and catch randomly teleported Rorquals in systems with different radius. Let's say CCP can decide if the timer gives a consistent %25 chance of getting caught across all variables the timer is balanced. This is really achievable by just one or two days experimentation. The system radius, the hunters' capability, the spot that the Rorq lands, all these add additional interesting flavor based on luck or skill. I agree that my proposal wouldn't reward capability of a PvP response, but you know what, if you are capable, you can fit a cyno to your Rorq and counter-drop the gank group like organized groups already do, or at least undock some ships in the time you gain by that capital tank and teleportation which is at least 5 minutes anyway. Hell you can even bait. So ability of a PvP response is currently already rewarded in nullsec gank situations. Couple more problems with this. First, teleporting away leaves the mining fleet high and dry. Part of the point of the PANIC button is that it doesn't just protect your Rorqual it also protects the billions of ISK in T2 mining ships you have on grid with it. After insurance those ships represent a far larger capital loss than the Rorqual does, assuming you're filling up at least one Squad with T2 mining ships. Second you're assuming a flat level of 'experience' and that difficulty can be graded on a curve like that. In practice these things end up pretty binary in most cases, with the hunters either having a strategy that they feel is very very very likely to succeed at catching the target or they just won't drop. You saw the same sort of thing with unprobable boosting ships for years. Yes, it was theoretically fairly easy to scan one down and nail him, but in practice it happened quite rarely because the time and effort aren't worth it. You'd likely see something similar with a "random teleport" system. Either the gankers determine that it's easy enough to beat that it's not a worthwhile defense or they decide that it's not going to result in kills or fun often enough to be worth attacking. At least with the current system the attackers are almost guaronteed to get a fight, even if that fight kills them. People have been dropping on obvious bait for years, but now there's an entire hull that deserves a SKIN with "OBVIOUS BAIT" written on the bumper. Except that ship is worth ~3B ISK, plus the other ships on the field, and it's designed to start a fight. From a player interaction perspective that's fantastic. A "run away teleport module" does the exact opposite, it removes players from conflict and interaction and basically turns whether or not you get the kill on the target into a chore of scanning and warping rather than a fight or an anxious 7 minutes while you wait to see if you get dropped. Olmeca Gold wrote: Yeah, and we have argued this is a bad approach, since it gives too much advantage to the organized groups, and people with hundred titans waiting in case a Rorq gets tackled. The entire point of nullsec PvE is that there is a chance that you can get ganked no matter which corp you are from, or should be anyway. I pretty much addressed this above. If you feel that someone has so many friends that they're "gank proof" then go get more friends and start the next B-R over someone's pink Rorqual.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 28	Posted - 2016.11.18 07:35:19 - [454] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Only with a ton of organization and effort on the part of the players though, and at the end of the day that's just as much a result of the attacking players as the defenders. You're looking at it, as a potential aggressor, and saying "I don't think this is worth it" and there will always be a point where players can group up and organize to the point where they can only be seriously inconvenienced by an almost equally sized and organized group of players. I firmly believe there is nothing CCP can do to avoid a limit like that existing while still leaving Eve as an open and player driven sandbox, and I don't think they should try. I usually lead blops fleets, and blops is the epitome of being able to snatch kills in places where you could not have contended the victims otherwise. I can safely say what you say above is simply not true. A nullsec entity, if it wants to PvE sufficiently, will be spread to a multiplicity of systems and will not be able to cover all its area with active fleets. Sure you can't contest PL titan fleet, but those who own such fleets have to spread around to rat properly. The only way you can defend all your sov is having a capital counterdrop force ready at all times. Some alliances do that and are pretty good at it. And there is almost no way to frag a carrier or a rorqual of them. Then again with small tweaks, like making mobile cyno inhibitor relevant again, CCP can take steps to make sure even they lose Rorquals every now and then. Cade Windstalker wrote: First, teleporting away leaves the mining fleet high and dry. Part of the point of the PANIC button is that it doesn't just protect your Rorqual it also protects the billions of ISK in T2 mining ships you have on grid with it. After insurance those ships represent a far larger capital loss than the Rorqual does, assuming you're filling up at least one Squad with T2 mining ships. This is entirely right, but can be solved by teleporting the fleet together. Given MJFGs or Hand of God doomsday it shouldn't be so hard to code. It is actually the reverse of Hand of God. Cade Windstalker wrote: Second you're assuming a flat level of 'experience' and that difficulty can be graded on a curve like that. In practice these things end up pretty binary in most cases, with the hunters either having a strategy that they feel is very very very likely to succeed at catching the target or they just won't drop. You saw the same sort of thing with unprobable boosting ships for years. Yes, it was theoretically fairly easy to scan one down and nail him, but in practice it happened quite rarely because the time and effort aren't worth it. You'd likely see something similar with a "random teleport" system. Either the gankers determine that it's easy enough to beat that it's not a worthwhile defense or they decide that it's not going to result in kills or fun often enough to be worth attacking. You see, the luck factors (sytem radius, where does the fleet actually get teleported to etc.) in my proposal make it sure that even most experienced hunters fail at times, and mediocre ones get their capture at times. Other than that, players' probing skill is indeed a scale and not a binary. Your example is not analogous, because in that case you need a virtue t3 which you will never ever use again, so most people deem its worthless to get one just to probe OG boosters. Meanwhile in my approach Rorqual hunting is accessible to every combat prober, and most hunters are hunting in combat prober ships anyway. And if not, they can get a prober hunting ship, still do their main job, and still hunt Rorquals if they wanted to as well. But in your example you need an expensive dedicated ship for just a niche job. Now whether you can take down the Rorq itself or not is often a binary, but that is the case for every ratting ship and not relevant. Cade Windstalker wrote: At least with the current system the attackers are almost guaronteed to get a fight, even if that fight kills them. People have been dropping on obvious bait for years, but now there's an entire hull that deserves a SKIN with "OBVIOUS BAIT" written on the bumper. Except that ship is worth ~3B ISK, plus the other ships on the field, and it's designed to start a fight. From a player interaction perspective that's fantastic. A "run away teleport module" does the exact opposite, it removes players from conflict and interaction and basically turns whether or not you get the kill on the target into a chore of scanning and warping rather than a fight or an anxious 7 minutes while you wait to see if you get dropped. I recognize the advantage above, and we will fully make use of it. But it gives complete immunity to organized group Rorquals and non-organized groups will not use them much (just see my next message). I think giving people risk-free PvE is more loss than the hypothetical gain from the fights that a PANIC button will start. Most of the times if a defender entity has stuff to defend their capitals from the attacking fleet, they manage to warp them in before the capital dies. If not they won't engage anyway. The first Rorq died after patch died in 40 minutes, vs a not so big fleet, in which time no defender fleet came in. PANIC button will just give people in Delve who didn't even fit cynoes one more chance to survive. Cade Windstalker wrote: If you feel that someone has so many friends that they're "gank proof" then go get more friends and start the next B-R over someone's pink Rorqual. They will just jump out and evac, and go stage in another nullsec whenever they see me coming.
Berengar Barnes Men of Business Ltd. Keep Calm and Parley 2	Posted - 2016.11.18 07:36:38 - [455] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: At least with the current system the attackers are almost guaronteed to get a fight, even if that fight kills them. Thats a good point. We all know that attackers love engaging into battles that they might not win. And this is also the reason why miners love to fight in their exhumers instead of proper combatships. Its all about the challenge.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 28	Posted - 2016.11.18 07:37:02 - [456] - Quote Fey Artwik wrote: Initial reaction so far. Not a chance in hell I'd put my Rorqual into siege. You never know what a hot dropper is going to drop. What a windup... I will just leave this here: http://i.imgur.com/YUZawWk.jpg So exactly as I anticipated above, those who can drop 100 titans to defend their Rorqauls will abuse them to the fullest, and those who can't will not bother.
Berengar Barnes Men of Business Ltd. Keep Calm and Parley 2	Posted - 2016.11.18 07:48:37 - [457] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: I will just leave this here: http://i.imgur.com/YUZawWk.jpg So exactly as I anticipated above, those who can drop 100 titans to defend their Rorqauls will abuse them to the fullest, and those who can't will not bother. Where is the abuse? This looks like an slightly above avarage sized mining-operation and this is absolutly fine. If you are not able to protect your mining-fleet with at least a super-carrier and 2 Minokawas you probably should not field expensive stuff like rorquals.
Calimity State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.11.18 11:31:14 - [458] - Quote Any chance ccp plans on fixing the current excavator drone prices? You have failed to take into account the ability of manipulating the entire production chain and now the startup cost of any rorqual mining ship, even without backup drones is 8 bil. Some number crunch can maybe step in here and figure out how many hours of successful mining results in breaking even but, in any case, the mining drones are more than five times the estimated production cost. Prior to the extortion of elite drone ais maybe there was some argument that the bpc price (ORE/concord lp) would have the largest price variance, but in fact, price gouging is and always has been part of new content release. In light of that could ccp punish these ridiculous market and game content manipulator by making the drones themselves and/or the components for them npc items for whatever fixed price was intended.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3714	Posted - 2016.11.18 12:38:15 - [459] - Quote Calimity wrote: Any chance ccp plans on fixing the current excavator drone prices? You have failed to take into account the ability of manipulating the entire production chain and now the startup cost of any rorqual mining ship, even without backup drones is 8 bil. Some number crunch can maybe step in here and figure out how many hours of successful mining results in breaking even but, in any case, the mining drones are more than five times the estimated production cost. Prior to the extortion of elite drone ais maybe there was some argument that the bpc price (ORE/concord lp) would have the largest price variance, but in fact, price gouging is and always has been part of new content release. In light of that could ccp punish these ridiculous market and game content manipulator by making the drones themselves and/or the components for them npc items for whatever fixed price was intended. There are missions that drop them, and plenty of sites, run them and fix the price.
Cade Windstalker 608	Posted - 2016.11.18 18:00:16 - [460] - Quote Calimity wrote: Any chance ccp plans on fixing the current excavator drone prices? You have failed to take into account the ability of manipulating the entire production chain and now the startup cost of any rorqual mining ship, even without backup drones is 8 bil. Some number crunch can maybe step in here and figure out how many hours of successful mining results in breaking even but, in any case, the mining drones are more than five times the estimated production cost. Prior to the extortion of elite drone ais maybe there was some argument that the bpc price (ORE/concord lp) would have the largest price variance, but in fact, price gouging is and always has been part of new content release. In light of that could ccp punish these ridiculous market and game content manipulator by making the drones themselves and/or the components for them npc items for whatever fixed price was intended. We're also, what, two days after release? Prices for new items are always high right after release and then drop as supply increases and the market finds a price most are able to pay. Beyond that you should know that CCP generally keeps their hands out of the market. It's possible to count on one hand the number of times CCP have stepped in to curtail player market actions in any kind of overt and direct way, and the only time they've stepped in and stopped anything that could be considered "price gouging" was when PLEX was involved. In short your expectations here are unrealistic, CCP will likely only adjust the build requirements for these drones if they're still massively expensive after a few months, not after three days, and even that's unlikely.

Quinthell New Corporate Order Explicit Associates 0	Posted - 2016.11.18 22:40:23 - [461] - Quote Not sure if this is ok to ask here as I've never posted on the forums. Does anyone have a fitting for the new Rorq? Or can you point me to someone or somewhere that does?
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 157	Posted - 2016.11.19 20:23:02 - [462] - Quote CCP, plz fix the build requirements of the excavator drones. The blueprints are down to 300mil but that doesn't stop a full set of squishy drones costing 2.5bil at the very least. CMON. This is ridiculous on all counts.
Cade Windstalker 609	Posted - 2016.11.20 02:12:27 - [463] - Quote I said it before I'll say it again... though if you're not informed on how market prices react around patch releases then you may want to go read up. The price will drop as supply increases. We're still in the first few weeks after a patch, we won't see prices stabilize for a month or more. If you want the new goodies early then expect to pay a premium for it.
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.21 06:37:29 - [464] - Quote Does anyone else see the bonus's applied to the Rorqs dps and mining drones when in indy mode? The damage modifiers, speed, mining amounts do not change ounce the indy mode is onlined.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3135	Posted - 2016.11.22 00:06:59 - [465] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: I said it before I'll say it again... though if you're not informed on how market prices react around patch releases then you may want to go read up. The price will drop as supply increases. We're still in the first few weeks after a patch, we won't see prices stabilize for a month or more. If you want the new goodies early then expect to pay a premium for it. Honestly, even without the blueprint cost, these things are rediculously exspensive. Just the mats put the build cost anywhere between 400-700mil. Vast majority of it depends on Elite Drone AI which was already the bottleneck for the rest of the 'augmented' drone line. And unless I've missed something, there hasn't been a change in supply. The fact that a single drone has a comparable price tag to a full loadout of T2 fighter bombers + T2 support fighters seems well out of line. Only drone/fighter that seems o have a comparable price tag is the shadow. I could probably list a dozen other considerations about these excavators, but I really don't see the price dropping lower than 400 on a good day.
Cade Windstalker 609	Posted - 2016.11.22 04:09:59 - [466] - Quote Rowells wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: I said it before I'll say it again... though if you're not informed on how market prices react around patch releases then you may want to go read up. The price will drop as supply increases. We're still in the first few weeks after a patch, we won't see prices stabilize for a month or more. If you want the new goodies early then expect to pay a premium for it. Honestly, even without the blueprint cost, these things are rediculously exspensive. Just the mats put the build cost anywhere between 400-700mil. Vast majority of it depends on Elite Drone AI which was already the bottleneck for the rest of the 'augmented' drone line. And unless I've missed something, there hasn't been a change in supply. The fact that a single drone has a comparable price tag to a full loadout of T2 fighter bombers + T2 support fighters seems well out of line. Only drone/fighter that seems o have a comparable price tag is the shadow. I could probably list a dozen other considerations about these excavators, but I really don't see the price dropping lower than 400 on a good day. Possibly, then again we're talking about something that replaces a ship worth about 300m with fittings, and the Rorqual itself isn't that expensive after insurance. That said, I do agree that 400m for a drone that's pretty easily killed does seem like a bit much. Kind of amazed no one looked at the build requirements for these and brought it up though.
TomyLobo Bros Before Holes The Devils' Rejects 158	Posted - 2016.11.22 05:57:34 - [467] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: I said it before I'll say it again... though if you're not informed on how market prices react around patch releases then you may want to go read up. The price will drop as supply increases. We're still in the first few weeks after a patch, we won't see prices stabilize for a month or more. If you want the new goodies early then expect to pay a premium for it. The current price for a set is 6bil and that isn't first day prices so 2.5bil for a set is hoping the mats drop in price to much lower than it ever was even before this drone was announced.
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.22 06:09:43 - [468] - Quote 1. Those saying the cost is right compared to how much they mine! Either you know nothing about mining or indy play for that matter or your just one of the many grps wanting to farm for nice Rorq kills with 5B worth of capital mining drones in it belly. 2. The Risk = Reward , Many of you hardcore PvP players like content and hunting indy players along with hunting ratters, and if you get lucky catching a carrier or super with your bomber fleet in range to jump in. The rorq if maxed skilled could mine 18,000 m3 /min which let me relate it in terms you non indy players can understand. Every hr a Rorq could mine 1m m3 of ore /Hr which is about 250m isk/hr for reg ore. 3. It would take a rorq 20hrs just to mine 5B isk worth of ore to pay for the capital drones but that is only if a rorq is right up against the rocks it mines. 4. The risk , does not out way the reward so the only option is to either mine with just a porpise or indy players switch to just ratting. 5. There are not many grps in eve that are able to form a grp fast enough to help a Rorq if caught, so the 2000dps, which if fitted right can shield boost 7800k dps for 5mins with resist at 75%. So now Rorq will not be used nearly as much once enough ppl lose there rorqs risking them in the belts. 6. If you want a mining drone to mine the same as a hulk then they should cost about the same as a hulk. 1B isk per capital drone is way to high even though it was just implemented this week. 7. boost the drop rate of the Elite drone AI's till the prices drop and reset it. that simple.
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 212	Posted - 2016.11.22 14:51:08 - [469] - Quote Cptcarter wrote: 1. Those saying the cost is right compared to how much they mine! Either you know nothing about mining or indy play for that matter or your just one of the many grps wanting to farm for nice Rorq kills with 5B worth of capital mining drones in it belly. 2. The Risk = Reward , Many of you hardcore PvP players like content and hunting indy players along with hunting ratters, and if you get lucky catching a carrier or super with your bomber fleet in range to jump in. The rorq if maxed skilled could mine 18,000 m3 /min which let me relate it in terms you non indy players can understand. Every hr a Rorq could mine 1m m3 of ore /Hr which is about 250m isk/hr for reg ore. 3. It would take a rorq 20hrs just to mine 5B isk worth of ore to pay for the capital drones but that is only if a rorq is right up against the rocks it mines. 4. The risk , does not out way the reward so the only option is to either mine with just a porpise or indy players switch to just ratting. 5. There are not many grps in eve that are able to form a grp fast enough to help a Rorq if caught, so the 2000dps, which if fitted right can shield boost 7800k dps for 5mins with resist at 75%. So now Rorq will not be used nearly as much once enough ppl lose there rorqs risking them in the belts. 6. If you want a mining drone to mine the same as a hulk then they should cost about the same as a hulk. 1B isk per capital drone is way to high even though it was just implemented this week. 7. boost the drop rate of the Elite drone AI's till the prices drop and reset it. that simple. If you can only squeeze a tank of 7800dps out of a sieged Rorqual, you are terrible at fitting. I can pretty easily squeeze 50000 DPS tank out of it, and that's before links. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Cade Windstalker 609	Posted - 2016.11.22 19:44:26 - [470] - Quote Cptcarter wrote: 1. Those saying the cost is right compared to how much they mine! Either you know nothing about mining or indy play for that matter or your just one of the many grps wanting to farm for nice Rorq kills with 5B worth of capital mining drones in it belly. 2. The Risk = Reward , Many of you hardcore PvP players like content and hunting indy players along with hunting ratters, and if you get lucky catching a carrier or super with your bomber fleet in range to jump in. The rorq if maxed skilled could mine 18,000 m3 /min which let me relate it in terms you non indy players can understand. Every hr a Rorq could mine 1m m3 of ore /Hr which is about 250m isk/hr for reg ore. 3. It would take a rorq 20hrs just to mine 5B isk worth of ore to pay for the capital drones but that is only if a rorq is right up against the rocks it mines. 4. The risk , does not out way the reward so the only option is to either mine with just a porpise or indy players switch to just ratting. 5. There are not many grps in eve that are able to form a grp fast enough to help a Rorq if caught, so the 2000dps, which if fitted right can shield boost 7800k dps for 5mins with resist at 75%. So now Rorq will not be used nearly as much once enough ppl lose there rorqs risking them in the belts. 6. If you want a mining drone to mine the same as a hulk then they should cost about the same as a hulk. 1B isk per capital drone is way to high even though it was just implemented this week. 7. boost the drop rate of the Elite drone AI's till the prices drop and reset it. that simple. First off I agree that the price of these drones is pretty prohibitive right now and should be looked at. That said, I take issue with a few of your logical points here. First off, the idea that not many people are able to scramble a fleet in 10 minutes to protect a Rorqual. Speaking as someone who spent years with Eve Uni helping newbies I can say from experience that this is mostly a matter of numbers and practice on the part of those in charge. If you have leadership that is practiced at getting people into a fleet and deployed quickly then even if you're working with week old newbies you can absolutely get a fleet out and shooting things in under 10 minutes. So while this may be true right now there's no reason it has to remain true except for laziness and a lack of organization. It's also not really true that the cost of the drones is going to make Rorquals used less than they are right now considering the only use for a Rorqual before this patch was an off-grid booster, which is a role that could have been seamlessly replaced with an anchorable structure. There's also still a fairly strong incentive to use a boosting Rorqual without the Excavator Drones. It's not like you need the Excavators to make the Rorqual worth using in a mining fleet, they're just very nice to have.

Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 62	Posted - 2016.11.23 08:01:47 - [471] - Quote Dark Lord Trump wrote: Cptcarter wrote: 1. Those saying the cost is right compared to how much they mine! Either you know nothing about mining or indy play for that matter or your just one of the many grps wanting to farm for nice Rorq kills with 5B worth of capital mining drones in it belly. 2. The Risk = Reward , Many of you hardcore PvP players like content and hunting indy players along with hunting ratters, and if you get lucky catching a carrier or super with your bomber fleet in range to jump in. The rorq if maxed skilled could mine 18,000 m3 /min which let me relate it in terms you non indy players can understand. Every hr a Rorq could mine 1m m3 of ore /Hr which is about 250m isk/hr for reg ore. 3. It would take a rorq 20hrs just to mine 5B isk worth of ore to pay for the capital drones but that is only if a rorq is right up against the rocks it mines. 4. The risk , does not out way the reward so the only option is to either mine with just a porpise or indy players switch to just ratting. 5. There are not many grps in eve that are able to form a grp fast enough to help a Rorq if caught, so the 2000dps, which if fitted right can shield boost 7800k dps for 5mins with resist at 75%. So now Rorq will not be used nearly as much once enough ppl lose there rorqs risking them in the belts. 6. If you want a mining drone to mine the same as a hulk then they should cost about the same as a hulk. 1B isk per capital drone is way to high even though it was just implemented this week. 7. boost the drop rate of the Elite drone AI's till the prices drop and reset it. that simple. If you can only squeeze a tank of 7800dps out of a sieged Rorqual, you are terrible at fitting. I can pretty easily squeeze 50000 DPS tank out of it, and that's before links. 1. They make way more then 250m/h I'd suggest you fit Drone Mining Rigs (2x T2 1xT1) second if you don't have an alliance that can form a response in ~7min to help you you shouldnt use it? 2. If you do not know where the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual come from and have eyes there you deserve whats coming to you. 3. We life in fountain goons, fcore and REDMEME are gunning for our rorquals all the time yet we haven't lost a single one yet and our alliance is tiny compared to goons and stuff. If we can do it pretty sure everyone other then renters can.
Jean-Luc II United Federation of Planets - Star Fleet Division 0	Posted - 2016.11.23 19:18:06 - [472] - Quote https://zkillboard.com/ship/28352/losses/ ...
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3135	Posted - 2016.11.23 20:11:19 - [473] - Quote Baki Yuku wrote: 1. They make way more then 250m/h I'd suggest you fit Drone Mining Rigs (2x T2 1xT1) second if you don't have an alliance that can form a response in ~7min to help you you shouldnt use it? 2. If you do not know where the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual come from and have eyes there you deserve whats coming to you. 3. We life in fountain goons, fcore and REDMEME are gunning for our rorquals all the time yet we haven't lost a single one yet and our alliance is tiny compared to goons and stuff. If we can do it pretty sure everyone other then renters can. 4. If you active (local tank) your rorqual you are doing it wrong. Local tank will never safe you the magic that is the cyno always will doh asuming your alliance is able to form a half decent fleet in time and have non ** fit fax. 5. All the nerds crying over the price of the drones suck it up the price is more then justified for a drone that allows you to mine 1.8milliion m-¦ per hour. The rorqual is to people that want to mine what the nyx is to people that what to drop . Endgame it shouldn't come cheap. It takes ~7 hours of mining to make back what the drones cost you if you are mining in +10% hidden belts. Fully decked out rorqual with really good fit is 12b which you make back in ~20 hours of mining that seems pretty balanced to me. Especially when compared to carrier ratting decent ratting carrier with t2 figthers etc is ~5b if you include refits and and makes ~200m/h that means it takes 25 hours before you start turning a "profit". So all of you stop being a *! I can't belive people still havent figured this out in 2000 freaking 16. 1. Most people probably can't form a fleet and travel to rescue in that time. Best ive heard recently was PL getting in blops in just under 5 minutes. So for any group that doesn't have 40 blops on standby, geuss they're screwed? 2. "Hostiles that might gun for your Rorqual" so what's that? 50k people in eve? Couple hundred different staging systems? Might get lucky if you have eyes in a pipe. Hopefully. 3. Ok? 4. Geuss it depends on what situations think will happen more. Matter of opinion I geuss. 5. youll never reach 1.8m/hr, gauruntee it. In the most efficient of scenarios you're probably looking at closer to 1.4 - 1.5. And of course, under the absolute best circumstances, you could potentially mine 400m/hr. But that's absolutely perfect circumstances. Which don't happen often, unless you've figured out a way to spawn 1.8mil m/3 Prime Ark asteroid. And of course them we have to consider whether or not you fit modules to get closer to that max yield, otherwise we're back down to the more reasonable 250m/hr average, which comes at the cost of that buffer tank you were looking at earlier. A fair decision to make, but let's not pretend we can do everything at once. 12B fittings? Honestly I'd probably geuss 7-8 bil once the prices come down (assuming they get to 400mil). But even once they reach that low, you're still using a drone that costs as much as a flight of T2 fighter bombers. Doesn't seem quite fair to make them cost as much as the only pirate faction fighter. Or a full carrier hangar of T2 fighters. If the price doesn't drop substantially in the next few months, then it is definitely broken. I'm very loathe to seriously consider the math of someone who spent 5b on a ratting carrier. Refits or not, unless you've got officer mods in there, you got scammed. I think my fit only ranges around 2.5-3 bil? Also I make 200m/r running some really **** sites in bad truesec. And of the two ships, I'm pretty confident that carriers have a much higher chance of escaping from a threat. I geuss we'll have to how the rorq plays out in the future a bit more. If you're going to assume the best case for the rorq, I think it's a little unfair of you to use average numbers for your counter argument. The rorqual isn't as big of a money grinding machine as you play it out to be.
Berengar Barnes Men of Business Ltd. Keep Calm and Parley 5	Posted - 2016.11.24 08:16:56 - [474] - Quote Scrolling down the rorqual-losses on zkillboard is hilarious. What a brutal slaughter. It doesnt matter what your rorqual-fitting looks like .. most of the fits are terrible but even a expensive faction-fit wont help you against 2 supercarrier or 100 bombers. Its time to realize that this update was not about mining or industry. -It is about social structures in eve: Your alliance is not able to counter a massive hotdrop on your miners just in time? Ok, in this case you should join an bigger alliance.Nah, i dont want to be rude BUT: There are a lot of small corps and alliances in nullsec that are not able to hold their own SOV and at this point CCP decided that they should not be able to protect their (rorq-boosted )mining-fleets as well, because not being able to hold and defend SOV results in not being able to make profit from the most lucrative harvesting-methods. I am not a big player and i am not in a big nullsec-alliance. So.. yeah.. the time of making billions of isk with offgrid-boosts is over for mee too (as soon as my rorq appears on zkill). Its time to adapt to the new situation: 1) Maybe you're ok with having only orca-boost. In this case your profits will be lower but you can go on like before the update. 2) You can join an alliance that actually has the power to save your fleet. I'm sure many small nullsec-corps will be affected by this update in the way that miners/industrials will leave. 3) You can quit mining and do something else. 4) You can try to mine with rorqual-boost and maybe you're lucky and make more profit than mining with orca-boost even if you lose your rorqual on a regular basis.
Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 62	Posted - 2016.11.24 13:01:38 - [475] - Quote Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: 1. They make way more then 250m/h I'd suggest you fit Drone Mining Rigs (2x T2 1xT1) second if you don't have an alliance that can form a response in ~7min to help you you shouldnt use it? 2. If you do not know where the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual come from and have eyes there you deserve whats coming to you. 3. We life in fountain goons, fcore and REDMEME are gunning for our rorquals all the time yet we haven't lost a single one yet and our alliance is tiny compared to goons and stuff. If we can do it pretty sure everyone other then renters can. 4. If you active (local tank) your rorqual you are doing it wrong. Local tank will never safe you the magic that is the cyno always will doh asuming your alliance is able to form a half decent fleet in time and have non ** fit fax. 5. All the nerds crying over the price of the drones suck it up the price is more then justified for a drone that allows you to mine 1.8milliion m-¦ per hour. The rorqual is to people that want to mine what the nyx is to people that what to drop . Endgame it shouldn't come cheap. It takes ~7 hours of mining to make back what the drones cost you if you are mining in +10% hidden belts. Fully decked out rorqual with really good fit is 12b which you make back in ~20 hours of mining that seems pretty balanced to me. Especially when compared to carrier ratting decent ratting carrier with t2 figthers etc is ~5b if you include refits and and makes ~200m/h that means it takes 25 hours before you start turning a "profit". So all of you stop being a *! I can't belive people still havent figured this out in 2000 freaking 16. 1. Most people probably can't form a fleet and travel to rescue in that time. Best ive heard recently was PL getting in blops in just under 5 minutes. So for any group that doesn't have 40 blops on standby, geuss they're screwed? 2. "Hostiles that might gun for your Rorqual" so what's that? 50k people in eve? Couple hundred different staging systems? Might get lucky if you have eyes in a pipe. Hopefully. 3. Ok? 4. Geuss it depends on what situations think will happen more. Matter of opinion I geuss. 5. youll never reach 1.8m/hr, gauruntee it. In the most efficient of scenarios you're probably looking at closer to 1.4 - 1.5. And of course, under the absolute best circumstances, you could potentially mine 400m/hr. But that's absolutely perfect circumstances. Which don't happen often, unless you've figured out a way to spawn 1.8mil m/3 Prime Ark asteroid. And of course them we have to consider whether or not you fit modules to get closer to that max yield, otherwise we're back down to the more reasonable 250m/hr average, which comes at the cost of that buffer tank you were looking at earlier. A fair decision to make, but let's not pretend we can do everything at once. 12B fittings? Honestly I'd probably geuss 7-8 bil once the prices come down (assuming they get to 400mil). But even once they reach that low, you're still using a drone that costs as much as a flight of T2 fighter bombers. Doesn't seem quite fair to make them cost as much as the only pirate faction fighter. Or a full carrier hangar of T2 fighters. If the price doesn't drop substantially in the next few months, then it is definitely broken. I'm very loathe to seriously consider the math of someone who spent 5b on a ratting carrier. Refits or not, unless you've got officer mods in there, you got scammed. I think my fit only ranges around 2.5-3 bil? Also I make 200m/r running some really ** sites in bad truesec. And of the two ships, I'm pretty confident that carriers have a much higher chance of escaping from a threat. I geuss we'll have to how the rorq plays out in the future a bit more. If you're going to assume the best case for the rorq, I think it's a little unfair of you to use average numbers for your counter argument. The rorqual isn't as big of a money grinding machine as you play it out to be. It's definitely good, especially as mining is concerned. However, it's a bit off balance to its costs. Not sure if serious but we have fax on standby at all times so if carriers or rorquals get tackled while jewing first thing that goes in is a ton of combat carriers and a few fax.. and if then there is still a need you have all the time in the world to form a subcap fleet. So ya if your alliance can't figure out to have a standing fleet with fax alts on standby maybe they should not use rorquals. And nop Ratting carrier which for our alliance is simply our combat carriers with all the refits and is about 5b atleast they life and dont just die before triage loads grid when bombersbar unloads 80 bombers. Which did happen and guess what we didnt loss all. Jewing is fine everyone has to make isk somehow the difference is doing it in non **** ways. As for the argument that there are 50k people in eve no not really most of the time its more like 25k... and even then dudes from WH's arent really something you'd fear because they can't cap escalate you while you can unload everything on them at reasonable risk. The real risk is the dudes living around the corner which in our case is goons and they have tried to snagg our multiple times yet never get it because we see them coming exit industry mode and ** off.. Like having eyes also means having a freaking brain. The only thing I'd argue for is more base speed on the drones given the price tag and given that they are supposed to be the big brother of the other augmented harvester drones yet they only got 1/3 of their base speed. Otherwise everything else is perfectly fine.
Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 62	Posted - 2016.11.24 13:09:07 - [476] - Quote Berengar Barnes wrote: Scrolling down the rorqual-losses on zkillboard is hilarious. What a brutal slaughter. It doesnt matter what your rorqual-fitting looks like .. most of the fits are terrible but even a expensive faction-fit wont help you against 2 supercarrier or 100 bombers. Its time to realize that this update was not about mining or industry. -It is about social structures in eve: Your alliance is not able to counter a massive hotdrop on your miners just in time? Ok, in this case you should join an bigger alliance.Nah, i dont want to be rude BUT: There are a lot of small corps and alliances in nullsec that are not able to hold their own SOV and at this point CCP decided that they should not be able to protect their (rorq-boosted )mining-fleets as well, because not being able to hold and defend SOV results in not being able to make profit from the most lucrative harvesting-methods. I am not a big player and i am not in a big nullsec-alliance. So.. yeah.. the time of making billions of isk with offgrid-boosts is over for mee too (as soon as my rorq appears on zkill). Its time to adapt to the new situation: 1) Maybe you're ok with having only orca-boost. In this case your profits will be lower but you can go on like before the update. 2) You can join an alliance that actually has the power to save your fleet. I'm sure many small nullsec-corps will be affected by this update in the way that miners/industrials will leave. 3) You can quit mining and do something else. 4) You can try to mine with rorqual-boost and maybe you're lucky and make more profit than mining with orca-boost even if you lose your rorqual on a regular basis. If your alliance/corp can not deal with 2 supers and ~15 subcaps you should not use rorquals? They are not for everyone if you do not like the risk do not use them! It takes effort to make them "safe" to use. If your alliance/corp is/are unable or unwilling to put forth that effort you do not deserve the reward sorry. But that's balance.
Berengar Barnes Men of Business Ltd. Keep Calm and Parley 5	Posted - 2016.11.24 15:23:52 - [477] - Quote Baki Yuku wrote: Berengar Barnes wrote: Scrolling down the rorqual-losses on zkillboard is hilarious. What a brutal slaughter. It doesnt matter what your rorqual-fitting looks like .. most of the fits are terrible but even a expensive faction-fit wont help you against 2 supercarrier or 100 bombers. Its time to realize that this update was not about mining or industry. -It is about social structures in eve: Your alliance is not able to counter a massive hotdrop on your miners just in time? Ok, in this case you should join an bigger alliance.Nah, i dont want to be rude BUT: There are a lot of small corps and alliances in nullsec that are not able to hold their own SOV and at this point CCP decided that they should not be able to protect their (rorq-boosted )mining-fleets as well, because not being able to hold and defend SOV results in not being able to make profit from the most lucrative harvesting-methods. I am not a big player and i am not in a big nullsec-alliance. So.. yeah.. the time of making billions of isk with offgrid-boosts is over for mee too (as soon as my rorq appears on zkill). Its time to adapt to the new situation: 1) Maybe you're ok with having only orca-boost. In this case your profits will be lower but you can go on like before the update. 2) You can join an alliance that actually has the power to save your fleet. I'm sure many small nullsec-corps will be affected by this update in the way that miners/industrials will leave. 3) You can quit mining and do something else. 4) You can try to mine with rorqual-boost and maybe you're lucky and make more profit than mining with orca-boost even if you lose your rorqual on a regular basis. If your alliance/corp can not deal with 2 supers and ~15 subcaps you should not use rorquals? They are not for everyone if you do not like the risk do not use them! It takes effort to make them "safe" to use. If your alliance/corp is/are unable or unwilling to put forth that effort you do not deserve the reward sorry. But that's balance. Did you even read the post? Give it a try!
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.25 01:20:50 - [478] - Quote 1. If your going to say something please know what your talking about. 2. 50,000 player..LMAO, more like total of 21k accounts on a good day, since most hardcore players have mutli acounts, give say 1/3 of these accounts are alts doing things like camping, scouting, Multi account mining, Multi account ratting and pvp, Cyno alts list goes on. 3. You can get your rorq to activaly boost for 50,000 DPS, WTF are you smoking , They can Shield boost the same as a Dred which Tech2 fitting is around 7k-9k DPS per second , which your resist should be above 70% resist across the board, that means only 30% of the enemy dps will count towards that shield boosting amount. This boosting amount will last about 10mins with maxed skills and without you fitting Capacity buffers, expand, regens. 4. Without the Rorq your mining amount drops over 60% total yield per hr. With Porpios your mining about 35% less then if your boosted by a Rorq. 5. Most hardcore miners have at least 3-10 accounts mining with dedicated off field boosting. I have no problem with the rorq being a On Grid boosters, but having it stuck for 5 Mins is total bull Crap. Even without the indy core 5min O **** Handle, It very slow to get into warp, your constantly moving it to get closer to rocks, this alone makes it a great target . Giving it 5mins at a time stuck just basically is CCP's way of saying stop the Multi account mining, Time to slow down how much is mined in nul and lowsec. 6. Those that say if you corp or allaince is not big enough to defend a Rorq either dont use it or join one that can protect you. Your either have little exp in eve, or like I said before your that person that wants the easy killmills. CCP This is for you: Rorqual = Easy Killmil now! its that simple.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2772	Posted - 2016.11.25 01:44:57 - [479] - Quote One of my corpmates got tackled in his Rorqual the other day. He was already on comms and stayed calm. Hostiles brought a 40-man Gila gang. They had around 25 Gilas, 8 logistics, 2 HIC's, and the rest tackle. He tanked that gang easily while we formed. We had FAX ready to jump to him inside of a minute, but we did not drop it. He just tanked them. He did not even have to use the PANIC module. We ended up letting him tank them for 25 minutes while we took Machariels by bridge and then five gate jumps to trap the hostile fleet. Then we killed most of them. I think the Rorqual might be a little bit OP. If you don't have friends who can support you, don't Siege your Rorqual. Just fit a Higgs Anchor to it and mine aligned out of Siege. Or just use an Orca. It feels kind of strange: I agreed with every single thing Baki Yuku said. Good posts, man. I always heard you were batshit crazy. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3136	Posted - 2016.11.26 08:19:05 - [480] - Quote Baki Yuku wrote: Not sure if serious but we have fax on standby at all times so if carriers or rorquals get tackled while jewing first thing that goes in is a ton of combat carriers and a few fax.. and if then there is still a need you have all the time in the world to form a subcap fleet. So ya if your alliance can't figure out to have a standing fleet with fax alts on standby maybe they should not use rorquals. And nop Ratting carrier which for our alliance is simply our combat carriers with all the refits and ** is about 5b atleast they life and dont just die before triage loads grid when bombersbar unloads 80 bombers. Which did happen and guess what we didnt loss all. Jewing is fine everyone has to make isk somehow the difference is doing it in non **** ways. If you're really going to try and justify the need for a full capital fleet to be on standby for a mining operation, then just discussing the rorqual itself as the only cost is missing a huge chunk of the picture. By that requirement alone, you've increased the cost to operate this ship by tens of billions. Not to mention the fact that babysitting ratters and miners has proven to be one of the few tasks actually more boring than ratting or mining. Which is a terrible gameplay design in of itself. And no, you don't need a full PLEX-in-cargo refit in order to rat. Just because you require people to fit skill injectors in their tank slots, doesn't mean your solution is even close to being near the norm, or the minimum. I use a slightly modified combat fit for my ratting, and even with all modules and refits in cargo, I've never surpassed 3bn in cost. Especially considering that its extremely easy to avoid getting caught in any ratting ship that isn't sieged. Too bad Excavators can't follow you in warp. Baki Yuku wrote: As for the argument that there are 50k people in eve no not really most of the time its more like 25k... and even then dudes from WH's arent really something you'd fear because they can't cap escalate you while you can unload everything on them at reasonable risk. The real risk is the dudes living around the corner which in our case is goons and they have tried to snagg our multiple times yet never get it because we see them coming exit industry mode and off.. Like having eyes also means having a freaking brain. You know, the point of that argument was to show how ridiculous your statement was. Reducing 50k down to 25k still doesn't make your definition of "the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual" any more reasonable. Unless you can find the 20k people who don't want to get on a cap kill, should the opportunity arise. And I pity the person who takes your "don't worry about wormholes" comment seriously. They regularly hunt and kill capitals. They have regularly been able to shove enough ships through a hole to kill supers and titans. Some groups specifically live in wormholes for this kind of content. Baki Yuku wrote:** The only thing I'd argue for is more base speed on the drones given the price tag and given that they are supposed to be the big brother of the other augmented harvester drones yet they only got 1/3 of their base speed. Otherwise everything else is perfectly fine. I won't argue on the speed. The max vs real is way to dependent on the speed to really make any other choices near as important as placement. However, the rorq is full of annoting little 'features' that have all compiled to make it a sub-par experience. It is quite a ways from perfectly fine.

Gaara's sniper MLG1337420BlazeIt360TitanNoScopeCorporationSWAG Goonswarm Federation 36	Posted - 2016.11.26 16:15:44 - [481] - Quote New rorquals are not possible to use as afk ratting ships, because frigate and cruiser npcs keep focusing on drones no matter the aggro mechanics you use(command links, ecm burst, shield emissions, warp scramblers). CCPLS Make afk Ishtars great again.
Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 64	Posted - 2016.11.26 16:51:57 - [482] - Quote Gaara's sniper wrote: New rorquals are not possible to use as afk ratting ships, because frigate and cruiser npcs keep focusing on drones no matter the aggro mechanics you use(command links, ecm burst, shield emissions, warp scramblers). CCPLS Make afk Ishtars great again. [Rorqual, Rorqual] Dark Blood Capacitor Power Relay Dark Blood Capacitor Power Relay Dark Blood Capacitor Power Relay Syndicate Damage Control CONCORD Capital Shield Extender CONCORD Capital Shield Extender Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Sentient Drone Navigation Computer Sentient Drone Navigation Computer Sentient Drone Navigation Computer Cynosural Field Generator I Industrial Core II Pithum A-Type Medium Remote Shield Booster Pithum A-Type Medium Remote Shield Booster Pithum A-Type Medium Remote Shield Booster Pithum A-Type Medium Remote Shield Booster Pithum A-Type Medium Remote Shield Booster Pulse Activated Nexus Invulnerability Core Capital Drone Mining Augmentor I Capital Drone Mining Augmentor II Capital Drone Mining Augmentor II Hornet II x10 Warrior II x10 Wasp II x5 'Excavator' Mining Drone x5 Vespa II x5 Warden II x10 Valkyrie II x10 Hammerhead II x5 Bouncer II x10 Berserker II x5 Gecko x4 Garde II x10 Curator II x10 Ogre II x5 Praetor II x5 Hobgoblin II x10 Vespa EC-600 x5 1 RR on each drone and you are fine:)
Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 64	Posted - 2016.11.26 17:01:02 - [483] - Quote Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Not sure if serious but we have fax on standby at all times so if carriers or rorquals get tackled while jewing first thing that goes in is a ton of combat carriers and a few fax.. and if then there is still a need you have all the time in the world to form a subcap fleet. So ya if your alliance can't figure out to have a standing fleet with fax alts on standby maybe they should not use rorquals. And nop Ratting carrier which for our alliance is simply our combat carriers with all the refits and ** is about 5b atleast they life and dont just die before triage loads grid when bombersbar unloads 80 bombers. Which did happen and guess what we didnt loss all. Jewing is fine everyone has to make isk somehow the difference is doing it in non **** ways. If you're really going to try and justify the need for a full capital fleet to be on standby for a mining operation, then just discussing the rorqual itself as the only cost is missing a huge chunk of the picture. By that requirement alone, you've increased the cost to operate this ship by tens of billions. Not to mention the fact that babysitting ratters and miners has proven to be one of the few tasks actually more boring than ratting or mining. Which is a terrible gameplay design in of itself. And no, you don't need a full PLEX-in-cargo refit in order to rat. Just because you require people to fit skill injectors in their tank slots, doesn't mean your solution is even close to being near the norm, or the minimum. I use a slightly modified combat fit for my ratting, and even with all modules and refits in cargo, I've never surpassed 3bn in cost. Especially considering that its extremely easy to avoid getting caught in any ratting ship that isn't sieged. Too bad Excavators can't follow you in warp. Baki Yuku wrote: As for the argument that there are 50k people in eve no not really most of the time its more like 25k... and even then dudes from WH's arent really something you'd fear because they can't cap escalate you while you can unload everything on them at reasonable risk. The real risk is the dudes living around the corner which in our case is goons and they have tried to snagg our multiple times yet never get it because we see them coming exit industry mode and off.. Like having eyes also means having a freaking brain. You know, the point of that argument was to show how ridiculous your statement was. Reducing 50k down to 25k still doesn't make your definition of "the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual" any more reasonable. Unless you can find the 20k people who don't want to get on a cap kill, should the opportunity arise. And I pity the person who takes your "don't worry about wormholes" comment seriously. They regularly hunt and kill capitals. They have regularly been able to shove enough ships through a hole to kill supers and titans. Some groups specifically live in wormholes for this kind of content. Baki Yuku wrote:** The only thing I'd argue for is more base speed on the drones given the price tag and given that they are supposed to be the big brother of the other augmented harvester drones yet they only got 1/3 of their base speed. Otherwise everything else is perfectly fine. I won't argue on the speed. The max vs real is way to dependent on the speed to really make any other choices near as important as placement. However, the rorq is full of annoting little 'features' that have all compiled to make it a sub-par experience. It is quite a ways from perfectly fine. Okay listen here if The-Culture a 1k duders alliance can do it and keep our rorquals alive everyone else can do it. Lets not talk about the fact that we got RA+Dreamfleet+Fcore right in jump-range of our rorquals in fountain and Goons 1 mid away. It doesn't get anymore dangerzone then that yet we manage to do it. If your alliance isn't willing to do whats needed to be able to use em do not cry about it. It really is not that hard to reduce the risk to a accaptable level it just requires some effort. With 4 Rorquals it took me a grand total of 4 days to mine the ore needed to build a ragnarok. That kind of "income" should not come easy or risk free.
Zenon Itinen Strong Arms Inc. Integritas Constans 0	Posted - 2016.11.26 18:18:24 - [484] - Quote Still struggling to find the theoretical 3 k dps this thing supposedly outputs even with all 5 skills , I'm getting about 1500 sieged...
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2775	Posted - 2016.11.26 21:59:23 - [485] - Quote Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Not sure if serious but we have fax on standby at all times so if carriers or rorquals get tackled while jewing first thing that goes in is a ton of combat carriers and a few fax.. and if then there is still a need you have all the time in the world to form a subcap fleet. So ya if your alliance can't figure out to have a standing fleet with fax alts on standby maybe they should not use rorquals. And nop Ratting carrier which for our alliance is simply our combat carriers with all the refits and ** is about 5b atleast they life and dont just die before triage loads grid when bombersbar unloads 80 bombers. Which did happen and guess what we didnt loss all. Jewing is fine everyone has to make isk somehow the difference is doing it in non **** ways. If you're really going to try and justify the need for a full capital fleet to be on standby for a mining operation, then just discussing the rorqual itself as the only cost is missing a huge chunk of the picture. By that requirement alone, you've increased the cost to operate this ship by tens of billions. Not to mention the fact that babysitting ratters and miners has proven to be one of the few tasks actually more boring than ratting or mining. Which is a terrible gameplay design in of itself. And no, you don't need a full PLEX-in-cargo refit in order to rat. Just because you require people to fit skill injectors in their tank slots, doesn't mean your solution is even close to being near the norm, or the minimum. I use a slightly modified combat fit for my ratting, and even with all modules and refits in cargo, I've never surpassed 3bn in cost. Especially considering that its extremely easy to avoid getting caught in any ratting ship that isn't sieged. Too bad Excavators can't follow you in warp. Baki Yuku wrote: As for the argument that there are 50k people in eve no not really most of the time its more like 25k... and even then dudes from WH's arent really something you'd fear because they can't cap escalate you while you can unload everything on them at reasonable risk. The real risk is the dudes living around the corner which in our case is goons and they have tried to snagg our multiple times yet never get it because we see them coming exit industry mode and off.. Like having eyes also means having a freaking brain. You know, the point of that argument was to show how ridiculous your statement was. Reducing 50k down to 25k still doesn't make your definition of "the hostiles that might gun for your rorqual" any more reasonable. Unless you can find the 20k people who don't want to get on a cap kill, should the opportunity arise. And I pity the person who takes your "don't worry about wormholes" comment seriously. They regularly hunt and kill capitals. They have regularly been able to shove enough ships through a hole to kill supers and titans. Some groups specifically live in wormholes for this kind of content. Baki Yuku wrote:** The only thing I'd argue for is more base speed on the drones given the price tag and given that they are supposed to be the big brother of the other augmented harvester drones yet they only got 1/3 of their base speed. Otherwise everything else is perfectly fine. I won't argue on the speed. The max vs real is way to dependent on the speed to really make any other choices near as important as placement. However, the rorq is full of annoting little 'features' that have all compiled to make it a sub-par experience. It is quite a ways from perfectly fine. Just tell people you are running a hotdrop fleet and you have bait out for the hostiles. Then mine away. As long as you have one FAX on standby, you won't lose your bait Rorqual. And if you are at all competent as an alliance you should be able to murder Black Ops fleets and typical gangs. I'm not suggesting using it outside your group's capital superiority range, but anywhere within 6-7 LY if your alliance staging should work. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.27 02:06:57 - [486] - Quote So by your logic if you do not have a large alliance or coalition ready at any min 24/7 to jump in to help you defend your rorq you should just stop mining in a Rorqual? Ok that is common sense not to you use unless you know you can defend it from the Bomber Bar and other many grps roaming looking for that unsuspected easy kill. * 1. No one and I mean no one, no matter what your flying or what you doing should expect there alliance or coalition to form up and get to you in time not to lose your Isk makers. When that Rorq goes into indy Core you might as well tell your rorq and pod goodbye. 2. Not Everyone are part of a 1k allaince, and even if you are, with these changes you must now wait till your alliances high activity times. This means you can not just jump on and start mining, you have to time everything around others play times. 3. A lot of ppl say shut you mouth and just use the Porpis if you can not defend a Rorual. Ok! Whomever says that know nothing and I mean nothing about the industrial side of EVE. You can not mine with a porpoise and expect adequate income like you would with Ratting or anything else in nulsec. 4. Ok so you say! If you want adequate income just start ratting instead of mining! Yup Yup that is exactly what I am doing and more the likely, what other miners are doing. I am going to take all the skills out of my alt miners and buff up my 4 main accounts and drop the other 6. Bam I got my self a baddass Ratting squad. This means I will not be playing as much, and ratting some and pvping alittle more. At least till Quote: Star Citizen comes out. Star Citizen : OOO crap I done said that in eve forums.. Whoops.
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.27 02:18:27 - [487] - Quote Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder.
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony Mordus Angels 869	Posted - 2016.11.27 03:23:42 - [488] - Quote If that last post was supposed to disprove his claim, it's having the opposite effect. Wow! Just .... wow. Even if it were 7 or 8 days; that's still mighty impressive.
Jean-Luc II United Federation of Planets - Star Fleet Division 1	Posted - 2016.11.27 12:05:30 - [489] - Quote Dear CCP (and fellow miners)... OK, I would imagine this is the end of my mining career for at least a while now until I can find a solution. I can finally understand where the term "Bitter Vet" comes from although I am by no means a veteran. I have one Rorqual, 7 Exhumer miners & 1 scout. So 9 accounts to Plex all told. With normal Rorqual boosting (not going into siege) I now only bring in around 150 mill per hour. So... 72 hours of mining to Plex my accounts. While there are some players loving these recent changes, there are a lot of players that aren't in a position where it's at all a good idea to Seige their Rorquals. So CCP, my feedback is that I'm guessing to may loose a lot of customers, myself included. 72 hours mining to Plex my accounts is way too much. I feel that in my position if I do start going into siege I would probably loose more than I would gain being a sitting duck without proper backup.
Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 253	Posted - 2016.11.27 12:38:53 - [490] - Quote https://youtu.be/A1kPRgrHZ3Y The amount you can mine now with one account is insane. The Roqual in this video makes more ice then 3 fully boosted skiffs.(i calculated it). Including the possibility to compress the ice, he outruns my orca+freighter+3 skiff. 1 Account makes more ice then 5? That is illogical. Please reduce that or give the orca and the porpoise a buff in mining. Maybe a doubble bandwith, so they can use 2 ice drones. "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen." (Ein Single) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind." (Einer, dem es egal ist)

Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 91	Posted - 2016.11.27 15:20:38 - [491] - Quote Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. Whilst I too am somewhat skeptical at the amounts I am hearing..... It is sadly obvious that you have no idea at all what the mineral value of a Titan is - and I buy minerals... Let alone that the mineral value of a Titan has dropped some 12,000 million isk in just the last week - which is testament to how much more mining is now being done Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.27 20:40:03 - [492] - Quote Marcus Tedric ? Are you insane are just plain void of Eve industry? I know exactly what it take to build all ships in the game, to the exact mineral count but to give such in depth count just to prove it would take way more time then 4 days for 4 Rorqs to mine a titan would be just to nit picky But I understand if it just to hard to understand round about numbers just to prove a round about idea. 12,000m Isk? LMAO, its not even worth mentioning in a post when it comes to a large scale ship. If your trying to say 12m units of minerals then that is just insane and I say prove it. You buy minerals...ok welll I am pure indy, I actually mine the minerals it takes to build the largest ships in the game with 12 accounts. Brokk Witgenstein? I was not trying to disprove a persons claim to disprove" the Rorq is not a powerful beast" , shoot it was a powerful beast even while setting in a pos giving everyone 60% more mining yield. yet you are mining with 4 Rorq - 5 - 6 - 7 -8 ect in the same belt or different belts whatever. That is at least 5B isk per rorq that he will lose unless he is part of the few large grps that could help protect it and yes I understand that many rorq's would not need much protecting but If those Rorqs are not part of say PL, its only a matter of time before a grp like PL drop in such a large grp of BLOPS to wipe all them off the field but yes that is apart of eve, if you cant afford to lose it then don't use it. Jean-Luc II : I hear you, you are not alone. A lot of the hard core indy players that had 6-15 accounts mining will now either switch to ratting, highsec mission running, ect.... with 2-4 accounts just counting the days till they end the rorq 5min your dead mode or till something better comes along. Most ppl in eve will not understand the joy of mining and building and playing so many chara's and yes without any outside programs helping control them all. those days are done for so its only natural to say all good things come to a end we just adjust and move on to big and better games. Just Another future change: Moon Goo: Tell you the truth I can not wait till they make Moo mining a active process that will kill all the rich coalition leaders passive income. Yes i understand most coalitions use a lot of that isk to pay for wars and such, but a very large part of that profit from moon goo goes into leaders pockets which makes it worth controlling and leading such large grps, but when you take that income out it will be just like the rorq changes taking that passive boosting income out of the game.
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 91	Posted - 2016.11.27 21:09:24 - [493] - Quote Cptcarter wrote: ................ You buy minerals...ok welll I am pure indy, I actually mine the minerals it takes to build the largest ships in the game with 12 accounts. ................... "Pure Indy" - only, I suspect, as much 'Industrial' as EVE refers to a 'Hauler/Cargo Ship' - just like 'repairing things with a magic wand' is not 'Logistics'. I suspect you mine and build. If you bought and sold, then you may well value your efforts differently. I assure you that the price of the average Titan has come down some 12,000 million (12b to those who are mathematically challenged) isk in just over the last week. The build cost has also reduced by over 2,000 million too. Given I'm approaching wanting one - then I'll be trying hard to buy at the low end of the market and before prices begin to rise again. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc. 321	Posted - 2016.11.27 23:53:36 - [494] - Quote theres a levi on market in maila thats pretty cheap atm. its perfectly possible to build an avatar for 50b atm
Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 64	Posted - 2016.11.28 06:46:14 - [495] - Quote Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3136	Posted - 2016.11.28 16:00:00 - [496] - Quote Baki Yuku wrote: Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro. I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are. But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go. "You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing" Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2777	Posted - 2016.11.28 21:12:09 - [497] - Quote Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro. I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are. But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go. "You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing" Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price. I don't understand your comment about him needing another 50b to go. If you have minerals in the right proportions, it only takes around 54B worth of minerals to build an Avatar (assuming proper system upgrades and etc.). CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Cptcarter Industrial Player Killers Army of New Eden 0	Posted - 2016.11.28 21:28:29 - [498] - Quote I think we got away from the real frustrating side of the new indy changes. Most ppl realize that CCP know most all indy players with multi accounts do not pay real money for there account from the non-liquad isk we can accumulate within a month. Change affects Pro and Cons: 1. Rorqs on the field = More kill-mils for PPL that look for content from new faces coming in to eve to WH grps and so on. 2. These changes will affect the total yield of minerals mined per account for those that can not use the rorq anymore do to risk being greater then the reward for using it. Before you choping at the bit at number 2 ( it is greatly rewarding if you have enough support to protect your rorq, or in an area of space relatively slow on roaming grps and campers but for a **** ton of other miners it means the reward does not out weight the risk. 3. I love the Rorq being out in the belts boost and mining but the being dead for 5mins at a time is totally unnecessary even with a Freeze option. that is why most ppl do not rat in Dreds due to the siege mode, if it did not need siege then hell yeh a ton of dred would be ratting it up. So forcing a rorq which is just like a dred plus or minus a couple attributes is just plain short sighted on CCP's part. Either it is short sided or CCP is doing this on purpose to shrink the multi mining account players. 4. These changes also affect the Indy Pups, the guys that only have one account and like to mine, Switching to a porpise for boost will mean these miners will rather rat then mine in order to have isk rolling in. I hate turning down so many ppl that I used to boost for because of the space we live in is to dangerous and the booster must be active 24/7, if I go for break, afk that hurts them the most. 5. The Capital mining drones having the Elite Drone AI x 50 as part of the materials to build is just lacking in thought to who decided this. Correct me if I am wrong but Drone NPC space has the best Bounty's because they do not drop loot beside elite drone AI's ? and now you are giving them a 15m isk per drone AI on top of that? I mean damn make it to where they drop in say the combat site you scan done, data site and relic site of all drone space. Dont just have small grps able to monopolize on this. Yes Yes I know once the demand goes down the prices will drop but you are looking at months from now so that means guys who do not have 5B to spend on capital drones that are easily killed will be stuck with sub pare mining drones making the reward of mining with a rorq not greater then the risk. 6. I hate saying this but I will, I love mining, building ships for so many ppl, it helps with my stress and PTSD, and to escape real life for a little bit. But since these changes it is apparent that I am feeling more and more inclined to look else where to other games and future games coming out. I get on and pvp more then I used to, Rat more then I every had and I am constantly wishing mining would be able to sustain most of my accounts. these changes force me to look into extracting all my alt skills and throwing those on the market and keeping just a couple accounts to pvp and rat to pass the time till another game comes around that catches my eye like EVE did. I know they will never change the rorq's indy core cause this is what CCP wants from now on so like one corp in the game is appropriately named " Just Let It happen " lol
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3136	Posted - 2016.11.29 01:43:02 - [499] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro. I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are. But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go. "You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing" Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price. I don't understand your comment about him needing another 50b to go. If you have minerals in the right proportions, it only takes around 54B worth of minerals to build an Avatar (assuming proper system upgrades and etc.). Based on his statement before, the requirement/necessity to have FAXes and carriers on standby, he has just ecplipsed that initial cost. I'd venture to geuss that before the rorq and 'support ships' were bought, he had enough to build the Titan in the first place. Definitely enough to build a supercarrier or two. Which is the main point I'm trying to make: regardless of who can or how it can be done, the requirements he described are extremely high, especially to use as a minimum standard. I'm not fooled into thinking that what he suggests is actually what's needed (I'm certain that most rorq pilots operate without it, to an unknown degree of success), I'm just pointing out some of the big holes in his initial argument earlier.
Cade Windstalker 613	Posted - 2016.11.29 04:35:54 - [500] - Quote I'd just like to point out that, for the month of November, the combat efficiency of the Rorqual actually went up despite loss value being up 400% over October. That's because kill value is up something like 1000% over the average and total kills are up over 1000% as well, so while Rorquals are certainly dying more now they're fighting back a lot more too. If anyone's willing to put in the work it'd be really interesting to do some data mining and figure out how many of those kills represent failed serious gank attempts (as opposed to idiots, testing, and battle-rorquals) but it's certainly more than zero as several posts in this thread have attested. If anyone wants a good laugh flip through the kills and look for singles as opposed to the PL guy who is apparently taking his Rorqual on fleet ops. There's at least one poorly fit Carrier that got baited on a Rorqual and then killed and some other funny ones besides, it's pretty hilarious

Baki Yuku Higher Than Everest The-Culture 66	Posted - 2016.11.29 10:05:01 - [501] - Quote Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro. I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are. But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go. "You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing" Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price. Mine another 12b yesterday so ya its fine:) as far as other cost go ya job install cost and cost for the building cits you got that right but at least I won't have any cost in regards to BPC's because I own all the bpos:) But you gotta remember that the setup cost gets broken down across multiple builds not just one. Setup cost 5,8b for the Raitaru with T2 rigs and 100b for Sotiyo BPO (well not really since I also sell bpc's now so... doesnt really count as cost) 25b build cost for the Sotiyo 23b for the Rig. So thats an extra 58,8b setup cost. Which if spread across 10 builds is 5,88b extra cost per build.
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 194	Posted - 2016.11.29 23:23:02 - [502] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: If you don't have friends who can support you, don't Siege your Rorqual. Just fit a Higgs Anchor to it and mine aligned out of Siege. Or just use an Orca. 5 Excavators, unsieged, mine 4,787 m3 per minute 5 T2 drones with T2 Core mine 4,000 m3 per minute 2 MLU Hulk with unsieged burst mines 3,121 m3 per minute 2 MLU Hulk with T2 Core burst mines 4,081 m3 per minute 3MLU Hulk with unsieged burst mines 3,401 m3 per minute 3MLU Hulk with T2 Core burst mines 4,447 m3 per minute Something something cheap fit platinum insurance bunch of barges, you get the idea
Vald Tegor Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team 194	Posted - 2016.11.29 23:38:27 - [503] - Quote Zenon Itinen wrote: Still struggling to find the theoretical 3 k dps this thing supposedly outputs even with all 5 skills , I'm getting about 1500 sieged... With T2 core, 4 of the best officer drone amps, and a set of Augmented Ogres will give you 1636. The only way you are getting anywhere near 2000 dps, is by adding 7 faction smartbombs to the fit for a total of 1986 DPS. The EP-705 implant will push you to 2005. Because we all know locking yourself in place to use smartbombs on your own heavy drones is the thing to do.
Ascenity Ciggy Butt Brains. The Methodical Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.11.30 04:44:40 - [504] - Quote Please God makes this able to dock in the azbel at least, and introduce a skill to reduce cycle time and fuel cost of the industrial core to make this less of a dangerous asset to use. (fuel reduction to make it same cost of fuel over time as now but in smaller cycles. that would make the rorqual less dead... But make it more worth using with more training.
Ascenity Ciggy Butt Brains. The Methodical Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.11.30 04:50:06 - [505] - Quote Baki Yuku wrote: Rowells wrote: Baki Yuku wrote: Cptcarter wrote: Ok so for that person that said they mined a Titan in 4 days with 4 rorquals..Prove it. I say your full of **! Titan cost about 100B isk, but it takes a little over that in minerals cost to build but for the sake of math we will just say 80B to be nice to your rorqs. Roruals make 250m Isk per Hr that is very high considering drone speeds, how close rorual are to rocks, breaks, sleep ect.... 80,000,000,000B / 250,000,000m/hr = 320Hr/4 rorq = 80 hrs 4 days x 24Hrs = 96 hrs 96Hr-80hr = 16Hrs of Free time in 4 days to sleep, eat , ** and I a hoping you have some life to have a woman to F%$K. that means you sleep only 4hrs a day, and speed 24/7 playing eve and never stop mining and Remeber I was giving very high prices for ore price intake and very low cost for titan build. You do the math, titan builder. http://i.imgur.com/JvO1KzN.png There you go btw you do not need to mine 100b you just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing:) its not that hard bro. I geuss we can trust your screenshots for as they are. But you still haven't even covered any of your initial costs. You've got another 50b to go. "You just need to mine 54b of minerals you need to build the damn thing" Come on now, you've built a super before. You know better than to try and use mineral costs to judge the final price. Mine another 12b yesterday so ya its fine:) as far as other cost go ya job install cost and cost for the building cits you got that right but at least I won't have any cost in regards to BPC's because I own all the bpos:) But you gotta remember that the setup cost gets broken down across multiple builds not just one. Setup cost 5,8b for the Raitaru with T2 rigs and 100b for Sotiyo BPO (well not really since I also sell bpc's now so... doesnt really count as cost) 25b build cost for the Sotiyo 23b for the Rig. So thats an extra 58,8b setup cost. Which if spread across 10 builds is 5,88b extra cost per build. So when testing this out I mine 27500 m3 per excavator cycle @ roughly 300m per hour per rorqual, 300m x 4 x 96 = 115200000000, so I'm assuming he was talking about 4days worth of full time mining, it is entirely possible, and bare in mind that the build cost of building one in ore is mote like 70b.
Cade Windstalker 614	Posted - 2016.11.30 17:25:46 - [506] - Quote Ascenity wrote: Please God makes this able to dock in the azbel at least, and introduce a skill to reduce cycle time and fuel cost of the industrial core to make this less of a dangerous asset to use. (fuel reduction to make it same cost of fuel over time as now but in smaller cycles. that would make the rorqual less dead... But make it more worth using with more training. There's a reason siege-type modules don't have a cycle time reduction. That's a fixed risk that you take, and you mitigate it in other ways and then take it or leave it.
Scath Bererund SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore 31	Posted - 2016.12.04 13:45:36 - [507] - Quote Ok. After playing arounf with these for a while they need a few tweeks. Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS and even light a cyno. Perhaps the PANIC should disable cynos and force disconect from all drones. Right now PANIC isnt so much a "oh crap" last chance. Its more like a 7 min god mode button
Dark Lord Trump Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 257	Posted - 2016.12.04 13:49:22 - [508] - Quote Scath Bererund wrote: Ok. After playing arounf with these for a while they need a few tweeks. Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS and even light a cyno. Perhaps the PANIC should disable cynos and force disconect from all drones. Right now PANIC isnt so much a "oh crap" last chance. Its more like a 7 min god mode button The former is wrong, and they're looking at the latter. I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 53	Posted - 2016.12.04 15:22:19 - [509] - Quote Scath Bererund wrote: Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS Wrong, the drone damage is reduced to 0 in PANIC mode This being said, the problem with PANIC is it creates a huge cap between alliances with so many titans to protect their Rorquals, and alliances with no such incontestable force, in terms of Rorqual usability. Just check out latest mining stats in Delve. We really enjoy killing defenseless Rorquals. But just for your information, CCP just gave titan superpowers a huge advantage over smaller alliances to build even more titans.
Cade Windstalker 623	Posted - 2016.12.04 22:24:50 - [510] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Scath Bererund wrote: Everything is perfect apart from PANIC. In panic the ship can still output full DPS Wrong, the drone damage is reduced to 0 in PANIC mode This being said, the problem with PANIC is it creates a huge gap between alliances with so many titans to protect their Rorquals, and alliances with no such incontestable force, in terms of Rorqual usability. Just check out latest mining stats in Delve. We really enjoy killing defenseless Rorquals. But just for your information, CCP just gave titan superpowers a huge advantage over smaller alliances to build even more titans. Solution? Cheaper, system wide mobile cyno inhibs with significantly less anchoring time. Any decent sized Alliance (say, 100 people active most days of the week in primary TZ) should be able to muster at least a small force to defend their Rorquals, even if that just means warping in with suicide ECM to break locks and get ships off grid when the PANIC drops. Anything CCP can give you on the Rorqual that will let a little joe-blow 20 man Alliance defend a Rorqual against, say, Bomber's Bar is just going to let the bigger alliances defend a larger percentage of mining hot drops and spend less jump fuel to do it. And a cheap system-wide Cyno Jammer is a pretty terrible idea. There is no reason ever not to put these in basically every system you control, and probably most of the ones you don't, unless they're ridiculously fragile. If they are then they won't be really effective, and if they aren't then they'll be OP for the cost. You could up the cost, but you said "cheaper" which implies fairly low price point. Also something like a cheap and readily available cyno jammer is basically just a wet blanket on content generation. I get that some people like smaller fights and smaller corps or alliances, but if you're going to self-select into that play style then you need to realize it comes with some in-built restrictions on what you can do and participate in.

ISD Max Trix ISD Community Communications Liaisons 591	Posted - 2016.12.05 02:00:56 - [511] - Quote Removed post for linking kill mails and racism. ISD Max Trix Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department *I do not respond to Evemails.*
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 57	Posted - 2016.12.07 13:38:10 - [512] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: Any decent sized Alliance (say, 100 people active most days of the week in primary TZ) should be able to muster at least a small force to defend their Rorquals, even if that just means warping in with suicide ECM to break locks and get ships off grid when the PANIC drops. Anything CCP can give you on the Rorqual that will let a little joe-blow 20 man Alliance defend a Rorqual against, say, Bomber's Bar is just going to let the bigger alliances defend a larger percentage of mining hot drops and spend less jump fuel to do it. And a cheap system-wide Cyno Jammer is a pretty terrible idea. There is no reason ever not to put these in basically every system you control, and probably most of the ones you don't, unless they're ridiculously fragile. If they are then they won't be really effective, and if they aren't then they'll be OP for the cost. You could up the cost, but you said "cheaper" which implies fairly low price point. Also something like a cheap and readily available cyno jammer is basically just a wet blanket on content generation. I get that some people like smaller fights and smaller corps or alliances, but if you're going to self-select into that play style then you need to realize it comes with some in-built restrictions on what you can do and participate in. You don't get the gist of the problem my post states. The problem is not the small alliance. Their Rorquals get caught, they PANIC, they form a response fleet, clash happens between the attacker and the defender. Whoever wins wins. Content generated. Everything works perfectly. New Rorquals awesome. When it is the big alliance (Goons, PL, NC etc.), you catch the Rorqual, it PANICs (or even does not PANIC), lights a cyno, 50 titans and 100 supers drop on you. There is no force in Eve that can contest such a defender fleet. And if such a force moves toward your space, you will notice from miles away, so you will just dock your Rorquals. So these people do not lose Rorquals. In the end they are able to bring 30-40 Rorquals in the same belt with no fucks given. (Interestingly PL dreadbombed such Goon response fleet the other day, inflicting heavy losses (killing 2 titans etc) on Goons while losing their own dreads. This is a good counter example to what I am saying but it happens every 3 years, so it is not that relevant as well)) So the problem is the major powerbloc alliances can use the Rorqual in almost complete freedom while the smaller alliances can't. So bigger alliances treat Rorquals as hulk fleets on belts, not hesitating on putting 30 Rorquals in indy core same belt, while the smaller alliance only maybe uses one if at all to boost its mining ships. So the system favors major powerbloc, and it builds even more titans with its immense mining capacity, to the extent that nobody will ever be able to contest these groups unless they fight among each other. I've been thinking over the cyno inhib solution for a long time and perhaps should not have stated it here without a proper consideration. The general problem in Eve is the N+1 logic. The game becomes meaningless when the only thing one can do to break a force is bringing a bigger fleet. CCP actively fights against that, e.g. Fozzie sov is supposed to be such a development to combat N+1. N+1 is best experienced when the force you are dealing with is a Titan/Super fleet. Because if it is the ultimate decider, then the alliance with the biggest fleet will always win. This is not an interesting mechanic. Ideally one factor that should enable smaller forces beating bigger forces (at least with respect to the objective) by agility and mobility. So there are multiple objectives in a Sov fight, or some PvE ships to be killed in a major power bloc space, then there should be some options for the smaller fleet which utilizes mobility and agility very well. Now this is not what we experience when we go whaling in these spaces. Apparently the Titan/Supercap becomes the most mobile force projection to do an objective in there, be it killing an astrahus or defending your Rorqual. Just have a bunch ready at a pos in jump range, and you have instant protection for your entire space. We tried to wear Goon titans' fatique out by doing multiple drops and even that didn't work. This is plain broken. All they have to do is allocate some alt accounts to def their entire space and do approximate %100 safe PvE in nullsec. Now one solution I have been pondering is giving attacker fleets means to block cynoes in systems, so that the defender fleet cannot move its capitals that easily. Currently it is completely up to the defender (holder of the sov) to block a system to cynoes or not. But if the attacker has some options, then the defender actually needs some mobile, non-capital force to kill the attacker's cyno inhibitors to be able to bring in their Titans. I believe this would be an interesting change in both PvE ship defending issues, sov contesting/defending issues and general nullsec shenanigans. And it would absolutely be a factor to diminish the N+1 mechanic. The challenge here is coming up with such a cyno inhibitor module that is also not exploitable. Say if 100 of these modules are dropped, good luck to a capital force to break that many on a timely manner. But here is my proposal on such a module: Mobile System Cyno Jammer - Seen on overview (so the mobile force that wants to remove them can easily warp to them) - The cargo volume is a little above to an Astrahus (so normal ships can't carry them, you at least need a blockade runner) - Works only in sov null space - 1 minute anchoring time, doesn't block existing cynoes (the attacker fleet has to kill them) - Not a lot of tank. Say 10k ehp when anchoring and 50k ehp when anchored I am sure with enough brainstorm CCP can come up with a balanced module.
Cade Windstalker 623	Posted - 2016.12.07 14:29:46 - [513] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: You don't get the gist of the problem my post states. The problem is not the small alliance. Their Rorquals get caught, they PANIC, they form a response fleet, clash happens between the attacker and the defender. Whoever wins wins. Content generated. Everything works perfectly. New Rorquals awesome. When it is the big alliance (Goons, PL, NC etc.), you catch the Rorqual, it PANICs (or even does not PANIC), lights a cyno, 50 titans and 100 supers drop on you. There is no force in Eve that can contest such a defender fleet. And if such a force moves toward your space, you will notice from miles away, so you will just dock your Rorquals. So these people do not lose Rorquals. In the end they are able to bring 30-40 Rorquals in the same belt with no fucks given. (Interestingly PL dreadbombed such Goon response fleet the other day, inflicting heavy losses (killing 2 titans etc) on Goons while losing their own dreads. This is a good counter example to what I am saying but it happens every 3 years, so it is not that relevant as well)) So the problem is the major powerbloc alliances can use the Rorqual in almost complete freedom while the smaller alliances can't. So bigger alliances treat Rorquals as hulk fleets on belts, not hesitating on putting 30 Rorquals in indy core same belt, while the smaller alliance only maybe uses one if at all to boost its mining ships. So the system favors major powerbloc, and it builds even more titans with its immense mining capacity, to the extent that nobody will ever be able to contest these groups unless they fight among each other. So what? Manpower and organization OP, other lack of news at 11. That's the way the game works, if you put in the effort to have that many people and big ships then you get these sorts of advantages, where the only thing that's going to seriously contest you is another big power. As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances. Olmeca Gold wrote: I've been thinking over the cyno inhib solution for a long time and perhaps should not have stated it here without a proper consideration. The general problem in Eve is the N+1 logic. The game becomes meaningless when the only thing one can do to break a force is bringing a bigger fleet. CCP actively fights against that, e.g. Fozzie sov is supposed to be such a development to combat N+1. N+1 is best experienced when the force you are dealing with is a Titan/Super fleet. Because if it is the ultimate decider, then the alliance with the biggest fleet will always win. This is not an interesting mechanic. Ideally one factor that should enable smaller forces beating bigger forces (at least with respect to the objective) by agility and mobility. So there are multiple objectives in a Sov fight, or some PvE ships to be killed in a major power bloc space, then there should be some options for the smaller fleet which utilizes mobility and agility very well. Now this is not what we experience when we go whaling in these spaces. Apparently the Titan/Supercap becomes the most mobile force projection to do an objective in there, be it killing an astrahus or defending your Rorqual. Just have a bunch ready at a pos in jump range, and you have instant protection for your entire space. We tried to wear Goon titans' fatique out by doing multiple drops and even that didn't work. This is plain broken. All they have to do is allocate some alt accounts to def their entire space and do approximate %100 safe PvE in nullsec. It's not actually true that the bigger fleet always wins, it just provides an advantage. Larger fleets still lose when they're lower quality, or when the FC is bad. What you're not going to see is a massive fleet getting regularly beaten by a much smaller force. That would require such colossal incompetence on the part of the FC of the large fleet that anyone responsible for such a loss would be punted out of their alliance instantly. As for the inhib idea, that won't eliminate the home team advantage that these alliances enjoy, they'll just shift from one central staging area to anchoring their own cyno inhibs in every system and just parking a few supers everywhere they have assets that need defending. End result, a little more logistics effort for these large groups and suddenly their systems are far more secure. Since they control the inhibs they can de-anchor them or shut them off if needed to move things around but attackers will need to come shoot the inhibs to attack, which in an active region of space will be noticed fairly quickly especially since they'd need to move in a reasonably substantial squad to take out 50k EHP quickly, probably across multiple systems. There's a major reason cyno inhibitors are a fairly restricted device, they're massively powerful, and a mobile system-wide version would be ridiculously OP, to the point that I don't think it's balance-able as a core concept.
Frostys Virpio Yet another corpdot. 3005	Posted - 2016.12.07 14:46:59 - [514] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: SNIP Large group of player used teamwork. It's super effective!!!
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 57	Posted - 2016.12.07 15:38:45 - [515] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: So what? Manpower and organization OP, other lack of news at 11. That's the way the game works, if you put in the effort to have that many people and big ships then you get these sorts of advantages, where the only thing that's going to seriously contest you is another big power. Oh, not the `organization ` argument again :). Its not the teamwork and organization what gets rewarded here. All it takes to completely make all your space immune to attacks for a major powerbloc is to have few supercap alts and few extra clients ready at a pos, per carrier/Rorqual ratter. These alts sit idle in their pos for hours until someone is caught, then drop and F1 to get their smartbomb kills and cyno back. There is no teamwork here. If 60 ratters spread across Delve has 60 super/titan alts thats enough for %99 immunity. If anything groups that hunt PL/Goon Rorquals have way better teamwork and organization to be able to infiltrate that space in the first place. The problem here is actually that groups high average SP and lots of assets gets exponentially rewarded, and the more they have these assets the exponentially faster they can build them, especially with Rorqual changes. If you think that's how this game works, then I would say it doesn't have to be, and it shouldn't be. If we are going to have 10 years more of PL NC Goons without anybody else being able to contest and be relevant, that's not an Eve as fun and interesting as it could have been. If you disagree with me on this it would take another forum topic to argue upon. I can make a quick analogy from FW. There is a reason why FW mechanics are made so the winning side shifts every so often. CCP could have easily made such a structure which Amarr kept winning for straight 5 years. Same people winning all the time is not that fun. Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances. The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward. Cade Windstalker wrote: It's not actually true that the bigger fleet always wins, it just provides an advantage. It is close to be completely true for supercapital forces, which is the entire point of focus here. Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the inhib idea, that won't eliminate the home team advantage that these alliances enjoy, they'll just shift from one central staging area to anchoring their own cyno inhibs in every system and just parking a few supers everywhere they have assets that need defending. End result, a little more logistics effort for these large groups and suddenly their systems are far more secure. Since they control the inhibs they can de-anchor them or shut them off if needed to move things around but attackers will need to come shoot the inhibs to attack, which in an active region of space will be noticed fairly quickly especially since they'd need to move in a reasonably substantial squad to take out 50k EHP quickly, probably across multiple systems. That's the thing. If you get some experience in this kind of stuff you will realize one or two supers are easily contestable for a group that can infiltrate into your space without being noticed (e.g. groups using wormholes, blops groups, independent capital hotdroppers), and even major power blocs do not have as much supers to cover each of their systems with an uncontstable force (e.g. 5 combat titans 20 supers each system). So spreading their capital force is exactly what I would wish to promote. This latter parts of your posts, about system cyno jam mechanics and comments about how infiltrating forces have to take gates etc., makes me doubt whether you have any knowledge at all on these issues. Alliances already have system-wide jammers as POS modules, and they can activate or deactivate them at will. So mobile jammers do not change their system control capabilities. Its pretty much the same. What it changes that it gives the attacker side some system control capability as well. Furthermore, contrary to what you are saying, an attacking force will often be immune to these jammers, since they are either using covert cynoes, or wormholes, and rarely gates. You can't stop a blops fleet or a ragerolling wormhole group with cyno jams. So with all due respect it is pretty obvious from your posts that you have never been at that side. Cade Windstalker wrote: There's a major reason cyno inhibitors are a fairly restricted device, they're massively powerful, and a mobile system-wide version would be ridiculously OP, to the point that I don't think it's balance-able as a core concept. I agree with your concerns of OP here. But I think one can overcome the challenges to make a balanced cyno inhib. Especially volume restrictions would help a lot for people to not deploy 100 of these at the same time. There could also be system-wide restrictions, such as not being able drop more than 1 of these at the same time in the same system etc.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 57	Posted - 2016.12.07 15:39:47 - [516] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: SNIP Large group of player used teamwork. It's super effective!!! You meant skill points and Titans* Because that's exactly what this game should reward right? How much SP and how many titans you have? Its like the more titans and SP you have, the faster you should accumulate more SP and titans right?
jack1974 Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 157	Posted - 2016.12.07 16:28:09 - [517] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances. The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward. Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill. Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait..... So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive.
Cade Windstalker 623	Posted - 2016.12.07 17:00:24 - [518] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: Oh, not the `organization ` argument again :). ... -SNIP- If you think that's how this game works, then I would say it doesn't have to be, and it shouldn't be. If we are going to have 10 years more of PL NC Goons without anybody else being able to contest and be relevant, that's not an Eve as fun and interesting as it could have been. If you disagree with me on this it would take another forum topic to argue upon. I can make a quick analogy from FW. There is a reason why FW mechanics are made so the winning side shifts every so often. CCP could have easily made such a structure which Amarr kept winning for straight 5 years. Same people winning all the time is not that fun. If you want to contest the major powers than go nation build. It's not even like NC/PL/Goons have been the major powers for 10 years. 8 years ago the biggest power in the game was Band of Brothers and Goons were this kinda up and coming upstart power. Now 8 years on BoB is nowhere to be seen (and neither are half the other big Alliances from 8 years ago, Atlas Alliance anyone?) and Goons just got kicked out of their space. The reason FW has more dynamic power blocks is because it's smaller scale and easier for someone to break into. That's also why you rarely hear about major FWar upsets but there were articles about Goons losing on mainstream news sites that don't focus on games. I'd also like to point out that you just said that "all it takes" to keep a Rorqual safe is like 30-40 times the value of the Rorqual in assets sitting around doing nothing. Not listed: all the stuff it takes to keep those few Supers from getting dunked if someone drops them when they respond. So yes, I would say it takes a lot of planning and organization to keep a major Alliance running. There's a reason the jump fatigue changes were careful not to aggravate the Logistics people because those guys are two steps from insanity on a good day. Olmeca Gold wrote: The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward. Again, they aren't entitled to any real or perceived safety, they got it by having enough stuff, time, and organization to deter or beat people who come to make things dangerous for them. If you don't like it, and feel it's OP, then go build your own big alliance and kick their door in. It's happened before and it'll happen before, but it won't be fast and it won't be done by whining on the forums about how you can't reliably kill Rorquals with 200 bil in assets playing bodyguard. Olmeca Gold wrote: It is close to be completely true for supercapital forces, which is the entire point of focus here. Again, because people aren't idiots with their ships. Numbers are an advantage, if you want to win a fight you need to make sure that you have as many advantages as possible. This is not going to change without turning Eve battles into weirdly restricted fights like WoW battlegrounds or Arenas. People with a clear super cap advantage can and have lost fights when they were stupid and got countered, like your dread-bombing referenced above. Olmeca Gold wrote: That's the thing. If you get some experience in this kind of stuff you will realize one or two supers are easily contestable for a group that can infiltrate into your space without being noticed (e.g. groups using wormholes, blops groups, independent capital hotdroppers), and even major power blocs do not have as much supers to cover each of their systems with an uncontstable force (e.g. 5 combat titans 20 supers each system). So spreading their capital force is exactly what I would wish to promote. -SNIP- They don't need to cover every system, they just need to cover the ones the Rorquals are in for that day, and with their own cyno-jammers up in each system they can ensure that they have local force superiority. Also you just contradicted your own point about this being a case of "a few alts" just sitting AFK on standby. Cyno-Jammers aren't easilly scattered around to every system at present, what you're proposing would be an extremely cheap way to do what now takes an expensive module, upkeep, and an IHUB. I seem to recall there also being other restrictions that make it impractical to just spam Cyno Jammers around in every system, but I may be somewhat out of date there. Wormholes and gates aren't going to be bringing many if any supers through, or enough sub caps to deal with even a small cap support fleet. Also nowhere did I say the OP-ness was restricted to your attack-fleet case, I just said they'd spam them everywhere and turn them into another defender's advantage. There's a reason Cyno-Jammers are a defender's advantage thing and required Sov to use. Overall I'm just not seeing this as a convincing argument, you're basically complaining that large organizations (that take a ton of work to keep going) provide too many advantages for the effort required.
Frostys Virpio Yet another corpdot. 3006	Posted - 2016.12.07 18:10:48 - [519] - Quote jack1974 wrote: Olmeca Gold wrote: Cade Windstalker wrote: As for the idea that dread-bombs don't happen very often, yes because big alliances tend to be very risk averse with their high value assets, it's part of how they became and have stayed big alliances. The reason you don't hear about big alliances taking major losses on a regular basis is because the groups that do very quickly stop being big alliances. The reason why dreadbombs do not occur frequently is irrelevant. The fact is they do not, and this enables groups like Goons/PL to have %100 safe null PvE. No one is entitled to %100 safe null PvE, even the most organized groups. Null is supposed to be a place where you are taking a risk for a worthy reward. Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill. Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait..... So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive. The cowards exist because the game enable this cowardliness. This fact, while we can't really change it, is always present. People are usually much more aggressive and do more bone headed move when it's all meaningless. Calling the players coward is essentially being mad because human being are well, human being. Why don't they always dread bomb? Well because every dread bomb set them back a lot and they'd rather stay where they are than have to climb back up. HTFU is only really hardcore on the forum. In game, it's protect what you have with all possible mean unless the possession of it is irrelevant to you.
Cade Windstalker 623	Posted - 2016.12.07 18:48:14 - [520] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: The cowards exist because the game enable this cowardliness. This fact, while we can't really change it, is always present. People are usually much more aggressive and do more bone headed move when it's all meaningless. Calling the players coward is essentially being mad because human being are well, human being. Why don't they always dread bomb? Well because every dread bomb set them back a lot and they'd rather stay where they are than have to climb back up. HTFU is only really hardcore on the forum. In game, it's protect what you have with all possible mean unless the possession of it is irrelevant to you. I wouldn't even say the game enables 'cowardliness' it's that the game has to offer choices in order to be a game, and one of those choices has to be to not fight in order for the game to be a sandbox. Otherwise we may as well replace the game with a lobby queue and the Alliance Tournament arena.

Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 58	Posted - 2016.12.07 19:23:03 - [521] - Quote jack1974 wrote: Most people don't dread bomb because they themselves are risk adverse. People are too tied to killboard statistics so they never get to experience sacrifice for the bigger picture. People will consider losing a 1 million ISK ship to kill a 6 million ISK ship but not consider ,in mondays case, sacrificing 100 bill to kill 600 bill. Null-sec alliances are very vulnerable to traps because they tend to expect conventional escalation from another major block. However if I was to drop a battleship on a gate within staging range I wouldn't think twice if it were bait..... So I agree in the sense that people are cowards which enables null entities to thrive. I would have loved to dreadbomb null entities if I had the means to do it. I just hate the idea of free riskless PvE anywhere in nullsec. But the SP/ISK/commitment investment threshold to this kind of operation is so high. It is also a minus sum game. You will kill more titans etc., but you will lose billions in suiciding dreads as well. That's why you are not seeing people doing them all over. Blaming people with cowardice is an easy and simplistic answer but it is not informative. People are just doing risk reward assessment. All in all, being able to disturb major powerblocs' PvE activity should be more accessible than having that many dread pilots and isk to throw away.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 58	Posted - 2016.12.07 19:51:47 - [522] - Quote Cade Windstalker wrote: If you want to contest the major powers than go nation build. It's not even like NC/PL/Goons have been the major powers for 10 years. The game was new back then. Asset and SP gap was bridgeable by effort and community management know-how was not this developed. Right now major powerblocs have accumulated so much power in these areas there is just no room for a newly rising entity. All of Eve came together and failed to destroy Goons last time. They just were able to migrate them. They will be even more irremovable next time. Cade Windstalker wrote: I'd also like to point out that you just said that "all it takes" to keep a Rorqual safe is like 30-40 times the value of the Rorqual in assets sitting around doing nothing. Not listed: all the stuff it takes to keep those few Supers from getting dunked if someone drops them when they respond. So yes, I would say it takes a lot of planning and organization to keep a major Alliance running. There's a reason the jump fatigue changes were careful not to aggravate the Logistics people because those guys are two steps from insanity on a good day. I didn't make any claims on easiness of alliance management. so don't put words into my mouth. I made claims on easiness of defending your Rorquals. These two things, believe or not, are separate things. Bottom line is nobody is entitled to %99 safe Rorquals in nullsec and CCP should change the game to make this goal true. Meanwhile your capabilities of alliance management gets rewarded many areas in Eve. Fame, members, sov, fun, etc. You don't need a further %99 safety for your Rorquals. Cade Windstalker wrote: Again, they aren't entitled to any real or perceived safety, they got it by having enough stuff, time, and organization to deter or beat people who come to make things dangerous for them. If you don't like it, and feel it's OP, then go build your own big alliance and kick their door in. It's happened before and it'll happen before, but it won't be fast and it won't be done by whining on the forums about how you can't reliably kill Rorquals with 200 bil in assets playing bodyguard. Addressed these issues above. But I want to stress again: %99 SAFE RORQUALS IN NULL SHOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE FOR ANY ENTITY AT ANY LEVEL OF ORGANIZATION in this game. If the only way for me to kill your Rorquals is build my own super nation then when I come for them you will dock and migrate back to lowsec, wait for me to deploy somewhere else and then migrate back to null again. This is not an interesting cycle of events. Cade Windstalker wrote: They don't need to cover every system, they just need to cover the ones the Rorquals are in for that day, and with their own cyno-jammers up in each system they can ensure that they have local force superiority. Also you just contradicted your own point about this being a case of "a few alts" just sitting AFK on standby. Cyno-Jammers aren't easilly scattered around to every system at present, what you're proposing would be an extremely cheap way to do what now takes an expensive module, upkeep, and an IHUB. I seem to recall there also being other restrictions that make it impractical to just spam Cyno Jammers around in every system, but I may be somewhat out of date there. Ever checked Delve map with NPC kills stat? There are ratting carriers and Rorquals at over 80 systems in there. So yeah if Goons need to divide their supercapital counterdropping force to 80 to cover their entire space then each unit is pretty contestable with a blops group, or a wormhole group. Wormholes, covert cynoes and gates are exactly the travel methods that the fleets which kills Rorquals in this game use to travel. Not cynoes. People do not use capitals to kill other people's Rorquals, neither titan bridges (generally, or statistically). And if you ever go to some regions in this game you will see spamming cyno inhibitors each system is the exact thing some people are doing. Your case which you think is a hypothetical is real in some places, like deep dead end farming pockets in Period Basis. That doesn't stop anyone from attacking them and killing their Rorquals. Because attackers do not mainly rely on cynoes. Cade Windstalker wrote: Overall I'm just not seeing this as a convincing argument, you're basically complaining that large organizations (that take a ton of work to keep going) provide too many advantages for the effort required. I am in no position to complain. I am in neither a large or a small alliance. I FC NPSI hotdrop fleets and have been enjoying killing Rorquals a lot and we have been having a blast since Ascension. Whether null sov blocks will remain that way or there will be other groups emerging changes nothing for me. I will be harassing them with my fleets whoever they are. That's what I enjoy in the game. It just breaks my heart someone in this game that some people are PvE'ing in null with 0 worry at all of warping off when someone neutral comes into their system, or no worry at all sieging 30 Rorquals in same belt, while others work their ass off to keep one single Rorqual they use for boosts from dying, when all they lack is skill points, capital alts and supercapital ships (and not organization, teamwork or dedication like you claim). With hulk mining you at least have the same risk of getting blapped, no matter which alliance you are in. With Rorqual mining you are just immune to PvE ship loss in a major powerbloc.
Cade Windstalker 623	Posted - 2016.12.07 21:45:32 - [523] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: The game was new back then. Asset and SP gap was bridgeable by effort and community management know-how was not this developed. Right now major powerblocs have accumulated so much power in these areas there is just no room for a newly rising entity. All of Eve came together and failed to destroy Goons last time. They just were able to migrate them. They will be even more irremovable next time. This is just flatly false. Back then having 2 Titans allowed you to basically wipe a grid and building one was a concerted effort for an entire Alliance. The first Titan kill was a huge deal because it took so much to pull off, now you can kill one with a few dozen people if it's solo. These days if you want a Titan fleet you just need enough ISK, enough time, and a bit of cleverness to get it all together and staged. You won't have one of the big players knocking on your door if there's even a whiff of you building or owning Titans or Supers like in the old days. Olmeca Gold wrote: I didn't make any claims on easiness of alliance management. so don't put words into my mouth. I made claims on easiness of defending your Rorquals. These two things, believe or not, are separate things. Bottom line is nobody is entitled to %99 safe Rorquals in nullsec and CCP should change the game to make this goal true. Meanwhile your capabilities of alliance management gets rewarded many areas in Eve. Fame, members, sov, fun, etc. You don't need a further %99 safety for your Rorquals. They're not separate, one thing makes the other possible, the same way that someone carrier ratting out in heavily defended space is, at least in theory, very safe. The safety comes from the organization that keeps the large alliance running, maintains pickets and intel on incoming drops, and all those other things that actually come into all the claims you've made here. This isn't even vague nebulous 20 steps removed stuff, the main reason for large alliance failure is organization and leadership failure, not lack of resources. It's not even like that 99% is real safety, it's "I don't have enough people to threaten their defenses, CCP pls nerf". If you had more people to bring against them you'd be fine, but there will always be someone with more to defend with so someone will always complain. Olmeca Gold wrote: Addressed these issues above. But I want to stress again: %99 SAFE RORQUALS IN NULL SHOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE FOR ANY ENTITY AT ANY LEVEL OF ORGANIZATION in this game. If the only way for me to kill your Rorquals is build my own super nation then when I come for them you will dock and migrate back to lowsec, wait for me to deploy somewhere else and then migrate back to null again. This is not an interesting cycle of events. Which I would like to stress, isn't a real thing. The Rorquals are only safe because of player effort, and are vulnerable to a comparable level of counter-effort. What you want is Rorquals with tons of backup available to be vulnerable to a small fleet of bombers. If it becomes impossible to bring a relief fleet to a Rorqual then the PANIC module becomes worthless. If a large org can't do it then a small one certainly can't, and we're back to "lawl, who would fly one of those loot pinatas!?!" which guarantees 100% safety, because you can't shoot docked ships. Olmeca Gold wrote: Ever checked Delve map with NPC kills stat? There are ratting carriers and Rorquals at over 80 systems in there. So yeah if Goons need to divide their supercapital counterdropping force to 80 to cover their entire space then each unit is pretty contestable with a blops group, or a wormhole group. Wormholes, covert cynoes and gates are exactly the travel methods that the fleets which kills Rorquals in this game use to travel. Not cynoes. People do not use capitals to kill other people's Rorquals, neither titan bridges (generally, or statistically). And if you ever go to some regions in this game you will see spamming cyno inhibitors each system is the exact thing some people are doing. Your case which you think is a hypothetical is real in some places, like deep dead end farming pockets in Period Basis. That doesn't stop anyone from attacking them and killing their Rorquals. Because attackers do not mainly rely on cynoes. Nowhere in here did I ever say you were relying on Cynos, I said your portable system jammer idea was bad because of what it would do to that balance, or for fights where people want to counter-drop capitals because a Rorqual fight (or some other fight) escalated (which is a viable path when your gank get cap dropped and still want the kill). Olmeca Gold wrote: I-SNIP- It just breaks my heart someone in this game that some people are PvE'ing in null with 0 worry at all of warping off when someone neutral comes into their system, or no worry at all sieging 30 Rorquals in same belt, while others work their ass off to keep one single Rorqual they use for boosts from dying, when all they lack is skill points, capital alts and supercapital ships (and not organization, teamwork or dedication like you claim). With hulk mining you at least have the same risk of getting blapped, no matter which alliance you are in. With Rorqual mining you are just immune to PvE ship loss in a major powerbloc. Except the reason any person lacks those things is a lack of organization and people. If you build a good Alliance you can find good high SP pilots, or if you have the ISK you can buy them on the forums. Titans are easy, the infrastructure and organization that keeps Titans alive is the hard bit these days, and that's what large Alliances have over small ones. That's what lets a large group respond to tricks like your group dropping several points at once. Groups who are bad at that lose entire Carrier fleets to a single dread and a bunch of WHlers T3s and Cruisers.
Olmeca Gold Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc. 58	Posted - 2016.12.08 01:31:14 - [524] - Quote I am past the limits of the time I would like to allocate discussing this stuff with you, but thanks for taking my posts seriously and stating your opinion. I hope somewhere in CCP reads these and they help them to form their own opinion. A general notion where I will just keep disagreeing with you is that just because players can spend (alleged) a lot of effort to achieve a status (%99 safety in null) it doesn't mean that status should automatically be available to them with no questions asked, especially if it breaks the game. This is where most of our disagreements is coming from, and why I don't take people's "but the organization", or "build your own empire" objections as valid.
Cade Windstalker 624	Posted - 2016.12.08 04:11:40 - [525] - Quote Olmeca Gold wrote: I am past the limits of the time I would like to allocate discussing this stuff with you, but thanks for taking my posts seriously and stating your opinion. I hope somewhere in CCP reads these and they help them to form their own opinion. A general notion where I will just keep disagreeing with you is that just because players can spend (alleged) a lot of effort to achieve a status (%99 safety in null) it doesn't mean that status should automatically be available to them with no questions asked, especially if it breaks the game. This is where most of our disagreements are coming from, and why I don't take people's "but the organization", or "build your own empire" objections as valid. That's more or less where I disagree as well. I know enough of what it takes to keep a large org running (I was part of Eve Uni for a long time, and I have friends in or formerly in pretty much every large Alliance in the game in every area of the game) that I don't treat any of this as automatic. I've also seen large and supposedly untouchable alliances disintegrate from a hard sneeze because no one noticed that all their leadership and organization had disappeared. If you aren't familiar with it I highly recommend looking up the fall of Atlas Alliance, they were at one point considered absolutely untouchable, and then they got invaded, lost like one fight they probably shouldn't have, and suddenly everyone was evacuating. Then on top of that their leadership started ****-slinging and a ton of members lost a lot of stuff, including Supers both in the field and in build, back when Supers and Titans were major major assets. This wasn't even a case of no activity, they had people (though not as many as they might have wanted), they had Supers, they had resources, and they had more or less everything except leadership and organization, and that cost them their space in one of the most complete losses in Eve history. Putting in all the time and effort required to secure space, keep it protected, and keep people around and invested in protecting it, is a ton of work, and absolutely no point in the process is automatic IMO. Even if a group has all of that, has active players, good leadership, and good logistics and infrastructure you'll still find holes and lapses if you poke long enough and in the right ways. You can poke around until you get lucky, bait Supers in one direction down a pipe while the rest of the fleet hits the mining op at the other end, and generally try to out-smart your enemies. Heck, if they're relying on the mining fleet for the cyno then an on-grid jammer could be enough to let you get the kill, especially if you wait a minute after they call for help so they take longer to get a secondary cyno in place. Basically my take on the whole "organization OP" deal is that that's kind of the point of Eve. If there was a way to drop these ships in a fairly guaranteed or hard to counter manner then no one would use them almost ever. I also maintain that anything that requires people to sit around bored in order to protect something else is probably a bad system, which has always been the issue with mining ops and why I'm a fan of the PANIC button.
zelklen Team-UBER 12	Posted - 2016.12.08 20:58:42 - [526] - Quote Coelomate wrote: Perhaps consider removing the drone mining bonus from the industrial core, and then compensate by further increasing the command bonus it provides. The optimal setup isn't going to be rorq + fleet, it's going to be a gigantic fleet of rorqs The Rorqual can and should be the best mining ship in the game. But only when it is using its core, and even then, only at most 1.9 times better than the second best mining ship. At 6 times better than already being the best, it seems like the "fleet" would be better off watching gates while the Rorq mines by itself.
Ronin Gabe Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2017.02.13 07:05:16 - [527] - Quote I realize that I'm coming in to this thread quite late, since all of these rorq changes have now occured. I've read this thread almost all the way through, and there's one thing that wasn't touched upon: The rorq DYING, no matter what changes are made. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, pies an alliance/corp off more, than people losing shineys and messing up said alliances/corps boards. People get bounced and blacklisted for that. Making the rorq unable to provide a service from within a POS (risking it in a belt) is just setting up the owners of them for failure. Your superboxers and elite groups will benefit, but your average foot soldier corp member is going to seriously balk at risking these on field, for the repercussions he/she is sure to experience as a result of losing it. Only real benefit I see here is for the capital builders who will benefit from the increased replacement orders. Hard enough to be successful in null/worm, why create an additional difficulty for the small indy guy/gal just trying to do their bit? The SECOND that rorq is lost, they are going to be on everyone's shlist. Meanwhile, CCP has done a** nothing to make this game less of a huge time drain, you know....for people who want to come in and enjoy it, without making a virtual 60hr/week career out of it. My advice? Quit the game and stop enriching CCP. They don't LISTEN to you anyway. Customer service is for suckers, let alone taking their desires and concerns into account. They are the same kind of beta-cucks that write the Walking Dead episodes. Just out in la-la land... /rant off
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 3091	Posted - 2017.02.13 14:39:15 - [528] - Quote Ronin Gabe wrote: I realize that I'm coming in to this thread quite late, since all of these rorq changes have now occured. I've read this thread almost all the way through, and there's one thing that wasn't touched upon: The rorq DYING, no matter what changes are made. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, pies an alliance/corp off more, than people losing shineys and messing up said alliances/corps boards. People get bounced and blacklisted for that. Making the rorq unable to provide a service from within a POS (risking it in a belt) is just setting up the owners of them for failure. Your superboxers and elite groups will benefit, but your average foot soldier corp member is going to seriously balk at risking these on field, for the repercussions he/she is sure to experience as a result of losing it. Only real benefit I see here is for the capital builders who will benefit from the increased replacement orders. Hard enough to be successful in null/worm, why create an additional difficulty for the small indy guy/gal just trying to do their bit? The SECOND that rorq is lost, they are going to be on everyone's shlist. Meanwhile, CCP has done a** nothing to make this game less of a huge time drain, you know....for people who want to come in and enjoy it, without making a virtual 60hr/week career out of it. My advice? Quit the game and stop enriching CCP. They don't LISTEN to you anyway. Customer service is for suckers, let alone taking their desires and concerns into account. They are the same kind of beta-cucks that write the Walking Dead episodes. Just out in la-la land... /rant off If your alliance/corp blacklist you because of your billboard, you need a better corp/alliance.
Cade Windstalker 774	Posted - 2017.02.13 15:14:50 - [529] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Ronin Gabe wrote: I realize that I'm coming in to this thread quite late, since all of these rorq changes have now occured. I've read this thread almost all the way through, and there's one thing that wasn't touched upon: The rorq DYING, no matter what changes are made. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, pies an alliance/corp off more, than people losing shineys and messing up said alliances/corps boards. People get bounced and blacklisted for that. Making the rorq unable to provide a service from within a POS (risking it in a belt) is just setting up the owners of them for failure. Your superboxers and elite groups will benefit, but your average foot soldier corp member is going to seriously balk at risking these on field, for the repercussions he/she is sure to experience as a result of losing it. Only real benefit I see here is for the capital builders who will benefit from the increased replacement orders. Hard enough to be successful in null/worm, why create an additional difficulty for the small indy guy/gal just trying to do their bit? The SECOND that rorq is lost, they are going to be on everyone's shlist. /rant off If your alliance/corp blacklist you because of your billboard, you need a better corp/alliance. Seconding this. If your Alliance is hard over enough about killboard stats that they boot someone for a Rorqual loss, especially when the drones won't even show up on there, then there's something wrong with that Alliance and it's not for CCP to fix it. If they're that worried then they can either protect their miners aggressively, put them in another corp/alliance to buffer their killboard against red marks, or do without having any kind of industry in their space (which seems like a losing proposition IMO). The reason no one in this thread addressed the Rorqual dying is because that was a large part of the point of the miner and boosting changes, that Rorquals and other ships that never actually got used would come out of their POS shields and see use, abuse, and unscheduled rapid disassembly. If you don't think the risk justifies the rewards then no one is forcing you to use a Rorqual. Part of Eve is risk vs reward and deciding what risks you're willing to take. If you're not willing to field a Rorqual then nothing is forcing you to. If you want to make lots of ISK there are plenty of ways to do that, look up a guide or think on it for a bit. If you want a game that you can just casually pick up and put down without worrying about losing ships then I think Eve may not be the game for you...
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition 3146	Posted - 2017.02.14 21:33:31 - [530] - Quote Ok, I've been able to use the Rorqual quite a bit more and I shall list my opinions and impressions below. Cargo/Bays: - increase in ore hold is nice - increase in the fleet hangar was definitely welcome, however I stil believe that we should allow fleet members to access the ore hold. Fleet hangar is currently a bottleneck that serves no real purpose other than unnecessary complexity and click-fatigue. Once you get beyond a small squad of 4-5 people it becomes a game of queues as the rorq pilot plays ore shuffle online. - Collectig ore remotely, this has kind of been an odd scenario that probably falls under a QoL change. Utilizing jet cans to collect ore from across the belt definitely gets the job done, but it's limitations can sometimes be annoying especially as fleet size increases. I would much prefer a kind of ship-to-ship system that allows ore to be transferred directly. Even if it still requires input and reactions from both sides, it does save a little trouble and would also allow pilots to utilize compression services without needing to keep odd lists or needing to always be in access range. - changes to the ship hangar (namely the barge size) is a decent change, however I can't really comment on how much impact it really has. Mining: - obviously being the king of yield has been a very nice plus, but I still hold on to worries that it will slowly push regular barges into les relevance over time. - I do, however, dislike how utterly dependent drones are on speed in the overall equation. Even if it costs more theoretical yield I do believe giving excavators a higher base speed or an MWD would make using the Rorqual easier overall. This also ties into another idea regarding siege, which I will discuss later. - one other issue I've seen is that outside of ore anomalies, it can be extremely difficult to use the drones on normal asteroids. It's just comparison of asteroid size and drone yield which leaves an extremely large amount of mining potential wasted. Of course it's easy to just stay in the anomalies, but this seriously hampers any use outside of sov-null and wormholes. Drones (Excavators/Combat): - the drone dps is honestly very dissapointing. Iirc the initial devblog quoted 2000dps, which seemed pretty reasonable, however I have not yet found a fit (even using rediculous fits and gimmicks) that could actually reach that number. In reality the dps is significantly lower. - the excavator HP is really nice, even if my attention has been drawn elsewhere for the moment, I not have to worry about my drones getting sniped. The shield RR bonus also helps in this avenue and has saved my drones in quite a few close calls. - the excavator size can be somewhat annoying, but I understand the purpose it serves. However it does leave some room for abuse on the combat side (huge amount of replacement drones), which is worrisome. Boosts: - boosts are very nice. - the above comment aside, I am still very against the need to siege for max boosting. We can keep tweaking the values and benefits, but by itself I think the difference needs to be scaled down. Particularly so that an unseiged rorq isn't just a slight improvement over an orca. I honestly believe that the two should simply be separated and balanced from there. - the range is phenomenal. I can be on the opposite side of the belt and still provide for my fleet members. Haven't yet found a belt so big where I have had to consider positioning as an issue. And considering the bonus that applies to the survey scanner, I'm not sure what to do with 400km+ scan range. Tank: - aside from capital rats, I haven't had much of a chance to use it in a high-pressure combat scenario. Looking at the theoretical numbers, I can see and understand some desire to scale that back a bit. - PANIC, haven't needed to use it so far. Aside from non-mining abuses, I can't really comment on it much. Industrial Core: - thing is a fuel hog if there ever was one. - while not entirely an issue, the lack of mobility can be a bit of a PITA, especially considering how slow the drones are. I've found I need to keep an MWD fit in an attempt to minimize the impact of distance that the drones are prone to. While I wouldn't call for it to be totally removed, I really would like to see the rorq maintain some modicum of on-grid mobility so that it can act similar to how barges currently move as they mine (should they need to). It's a constant cycle of sieging and unseiging, coasting into position, and generally trying to rush movements between sieges. General Usage: - I'm starting to think more and more that compression should also be disconnected from siege. It's a quick, one-time action that requires a 5 minute siege. It's simply quicker and cheaper to use an astrahus to do the same thing.which brings me to another point... - while the increase in overall power and general "being a capital" has made it necessary to keep the Rorqual out of astras and other structures, unless access to hangars inside the structures is soon made possible, getting ore into or out of the smaller structures is a real PITA. Needing multiple characters, extra haulers, or even using cans is just way to complex and annoying. And all of those options still remaining cheaper than just upgrading to a fort or sotiyo really puts an enourmous bill on such a simple task, with no real drawback against some other options that currently work. - the jump range increase is a welcome return to its use in logistics of all kinds. And that's pretty much all I have for now. Overall it's got plenty of great additions and changes, however I do believe some areas didn't change enough or were overzealous in their improvements.

Daide Vondrichnov SnaiLs aNd FroGs WE FORM V0LTA 55	Posted - 2017.02.26 18:21:58 - [531] - Quote Rowells wrote: - the drone dps is honestly very dissapointing. Iirc the initial devblog quoted 2000dps, which seemed pretty reasonable, however I have not yet found a fit (even using rediculous fits and gimmicks) that could actually reach that number. In reality the dps is significantly lower. Atm, Rorquals are what BO class dream to be, they can do pretty much everything better (but the dps) so giving them a DPS buff would make them more OP than they already are.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: [one 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.