|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.03 17:41:01 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:JonasML wrote:From the original dev post for Rorquals...."Whether these modes are running or not, the ability to field 5 GÇÿExcavatorGÇÖ Mining Superdrones will make the Rorqual the greatest mining vessel in the history of New Eden." Well that's not only gone out the window, it's slipped off the ledge and fallen to it's splattery death 15 stories below. Take pictures now before the messy fallout get's swept up. After these changes the Rorqual absolutely maintains its title as the greatest mining vessel in the history of New Eden. Nothing else comes close to its mining ability (not to mention all the other things it does).
Really?
so CCP sees nothing wrong with barely triple the yield for something that costs 20+ times as much? All this change does, is make it so the major alliances that already could defend their mining fleets, will continue to be able to afk mine, and it's the little guys that will get screwed out mining. Not to mention, makes HS mining be safe and profitable again. |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.03 17:44:32 -
[2] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:The Rorqual certainly has a significant set of defenses - Just a pity none of it really matters when you look at how easy they are to killKeep nerfing mining drone amount, they wil once again find themselves being a worst option. The problem with referencing zKill losses is that it only shows the ships that die, not the ships that live. I know several people who have had their Roquals dropped unsuccessfully, and I know at least one major Null Alliance has FAXes sitting around on standby (paid for by tips) to respond to drops on ratters and miners, with the result that you basically need a dread-bomb or better to successfully drop a Rorqual in their space.
So because people are prepared, the ship is OP?
Interesting mechanic.. better nerf all titans and Supercarriers, because generally those that field those are prepared thus the ships must be OP.
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.05 02:27:10 -
[3] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Soko99 wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:The Rorqual certainly has a significant set of defenses - Just a pity none of it really matters when you look at how easy they are to killKeep nerfing mining drone amount, they wil once again find themselves being a worst option. The problem with referencing zKill losses is that it only shows the ships that die, not the ships that live. I know several people who have had their Roquals dropped unsuccessfully, and I know at least one major Null Alliance has FAXes sitting around on standby (paid for by tips) to respond to drops on ratters and miners, with the result that you basically need a dread-bomb or better to successfully drop a Rorqual in their space. So because people are prepared, the ship is OP? Interesting mechanic.. better nerf all titans and Supercarriers, because generally those that field those are prepared thus the ships must be OP. No, the Rorqual is OP because of the very visible and obvious effect it's had on the mineral market and the very obviously skewed cost/benefit equation it's created. I was simply responding to the claim that some zKill losses mean that the Rorqual is 'easy to kill'. Also, to respond to your other comment about cost vs reward. Effectiveness has always scaled linearly while cost scales exponentially. For example a fully fitted Dread costs 3-4b, a fully fitted T1 BS costs 3-400m. With HAWs the Dread does between 2 and 4 times the DPS of the Battleship for 10 times the cost.
Interesting how you're comparing a capital ship with weapons intended for sub-caps as far as DPS is concerned. Why not compare the DPS of a BB vs a Dread DPS.. with the proper guns, not the subcap ones? you're DPS increase is way more than 2-4 times. not to mention your EHP. Just compare running anoms to running level 4s. if you really want a proper risk/reward comparison.
Also.. the highly skewed risk/reward ratio is exactly that. You're risking a 13bil ship for a lot more minerals pulled it. But of course, you have to be in low or null, which means you're vulnerable a hell of a lot more, than your HS AFK mining fleets that are in abundance all over new eden. The fact that CCP is stepping in.. is making me realize that they really do not want nullsec/lowsec to be self sufficient. What they want, is for the risk averse HS players to keep getting more and more comfy and jammy..
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 23:39:23 -
[4] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Because Caps using cap guns run on a different scale vs sub-caps for balance reasons. For those same balance reasons those same cap-guns deal massively reduced damage to sub-caps, to the point that you're better off being in a Battleship than trying to shoot a Battleship with cap-guns.
This isn't equivalent to the Rorqual. The equivalent case for a mining ship would be if there was some ore that the Rorqual had a specific bonus to mining. Sub-caps could still mine it, but the Rorqual had special drones oor something that were way more efficient but only against that ore. Since there's nothing like that I'm going to use HAWs for the comparison here because those operate on the same scaling as sub-caps.
If you'd like we could also compare T1 Cruisers to T1 Battleships, where you're looking at roughly double the DPS more or less for something like a 10x cost multiplier.
Even at the 10x cost of the multiplier, you're still way below what the price diff is between a rorq and a hulk especially if you're looking at a viable survivable fit for the expected attacker.
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 00:28:15 -
[5] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: In fairness here we are talking about one of the lower end rocks and the largest cases of those rocks. So not every rock is going to have 60 seconds of travel to it. Also not every drone is going to end up out at that 15km point, some will end up right next to your ship.
That said, as much as I like the idea of ore belts no longer looking like feeble strings of marbles, I think it might be worth buffing the speed on the Excavators just a little to compensate for what is basically intended as a cosmetic change. Bumping the max speed by 25% would leave them still quite slow but reduce the frustration factor a little and make them slightly harder to 'boosh'.
This shows me how little you know of what you're talking about. Ark and Bistot are still the highest value (lowest amounts in belts too) and spod and crokite are the same price. |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 00:32:04 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Coelomate Tian wrote:Can we get CCP confirmation that these changes are intended and going live March 14th? The original post said it was going to be explored but unlikely included in the suite of changes this patch.
If they are intended, would you consider a corresponding increase in drone flight time, or is this a purposeful nerf? The impact on drone mining is expected and we did our internal practical yield testing with the new asteroid sizes to make sure that the resulting m3/hour were something we'd be happy with. On another quick note, we've added an increase to lock ranges for the Covetor and Exhumers. +5km for the Covetor, Skiff, and Mackinaw, and +10km for the Hulk.
So can you confirm how you expect people to use rorqs?
I know you said earlier that you guys made the yield purposefully high to get people to use it. But I really don't know how you guys could have made such a HUGE mistake as to require it to be nerfed by 25% and then another 55% of that. So either, you guys changed your idea of what you want the rorq to be. OR you guys did it as a cash grab for all those that paid for injectors. In either case. I believe it's a shady practice. |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 00:35:24 -
[7] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Soko99 wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote: In fairness here we are talking about one of the lower end rocks and the largest cases of those rocks. So not every rock is going to have 60 seconds of travel to it. Also not every drone is going to end up out at that 15km point, some will end up right next to your ship.
That said, as much as I like the idea of ore belts no longer looking like feeble strings of marbles, I think it might be worth buffing the speed on the Excavators just a little to compensate for what is basically intended as a cosmetic change. Bumping the max speed by 25% would leave them still quite slow but reduce the frustration factor a little and make them slightly harder to 'boosh'.
This shows me how little you know of what you're talking about. Ark and Bistot are still the highest value (lowest amounts in belts too) and spod and crokite are the same price. It depends on refining capabilities. Pretty sure Spoud is best for refining based on output
I'm using compressed as it's the way rorquals mine.. |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
77
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 05:13:21 -
[8] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: Spod is only even with Crokite because there's a Mex shortage and the price of other minerals has dropped. Normally Spod is below the ABCs in value and is likely to return to that value after the Rorqual influx drops off.
Speculation is just that.. so don't present it as fact.
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
79
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 00:44:17 -
[9] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Small correction here, ISK is fine and is actually increasing in value as the ISK supply constricts due to people swapping from Carrier ratting and other ISK printing activities to mining. What's dropping in value is ore and minerals.
So.. then what's the problem with minerals dropping? If it's not decreasing the value of isk, why was it such a big problem that low end minerals are just that. low end and cheap?
Cade Windstalker wrote: Couple points here.
First off, if the sell off continues it's not gonna be even 5b in drones pretty soon.
Second, the larger rocks make it harder to run off with a full flight all at once, and make it more likely that you're going to bump a rock trying to do so, so there's some trade off here. It's not *all* nerf. Plus it gets less worthwhile to run around yoinking drones if they're no longer worth 1.5b each.
Lastly the Rorqual sell off started well before the rock size changes were decided as going in on this patch, it's mostly the drop in value and people wanting to 'cash out' their investment while they can.
So because they're now less than 5bil for a flight, thus might not be worth stealing, so it's ok to introduce a mechanic that's not counterable and is completely unnecessary? interesting logic.
Your last point. yeah.. values are dropping because people don't want ot be stuck with something they paid 10bil for only to have it turn into 3bil overnight because of a dumb game change mechanic by CCP. A reasonable expectation |
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
79
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 22:49:43 -
[10] - Quote
Coelomate Tian wrote:A reminder for anyone panicked without having tested themselves:
In a colossal nullsec anom, only some rocks are gigantic. Most rocks are still small. This is not a blanket 75% rorqual nerf.
On the largest spod, without drone speed rigs and proper placement, I do believe you'll see yields fall by 75% vs. current values.
But most rocks will be small enough for little yield reduction beyond the advertised 25% excavator nerf. And if you pack on drone speed rigs and park your rorqual intelligently, it won't be as bad.
Spoiler Alert: Optimize your mining fleets by bringing barges to hit the big rocks from the beginning of the anom, use your rorquals on small rocks first.
you mean the 5+ spod rocks that are all 65k+
|
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
79
|
Posted - 2017.03.10 23:02:53 -
[11] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: My comment about the 25% nerf value was simply pointing out that CCP did specifically say that it was a 25% nerf to the optimal yield of the ship, and not what the actual yield would be in practice for each player. I was simply calling out what i felt was an inaccurate criticism.
In case you're not really reading the posts.. We all KNOW what CCP based their 25% nerf on.. what we are pointing out.. that OFF paper, ie. in the real spaceships world, where these changes are actually going to play out.. it's not a 25% nerf. and in fact not even CLOSE to that number.
Nobody cares about the changes on paper. It's the application that's being raged over.
so for you to keep reiterating that it's won't be that bad, without having done any of it yourself .. well.
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
80
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 18:16:21 -
[12] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: So, just estimating here based on the volume of ore in one of these anoms and the relatively low quantity of very large rocks I'm guessing that the ideal mining setup for the larger ore anoms will end up being something like 1-2 Hulks per Rorqual to mine out the Mercoxit and the larger rocks while the Rorqual chews through the smaller ones.
What's your definition of relatively low quantity?
cause there's usually 4-6 60+k spod rocks in a collossal for example. That's a significant number amongst the 15 or so rocks of that kind.. Add in some 70-80k gneiss rocks.. and your looking at 1/4 to 1/5th of the rocks being massive.
|
Soko99
Repercussus Northern Coalition.
80
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 18:29:14 -
[13] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: @Jizzah, don't forget that the actual speed on the Excavators with max skills is around 350, not the base 200, and then you can throw Drone Nav comps on top of that.
You are wrong on this. recommend you go and check on sisi.
I'd tell you what the numbers were, but halfway through my testing I noticed that SiSi was an old port so it didn't have my t2 indy core on the ship.
Still.. managed to do some testings..
took me 25mins to mine 15k of a 30k spod rock post nerf on a 68k rock.. the same 15k took me 35min
that I was able to cut back down to 25mins on the 68k rock (which by then contained 53k) 28 mins on the 30k rock (which was by then contained 15k)
other than the initial 15k test on the 30k rock, I had rat spawns to deal with all of them. but that should be a good indicator anyways since you will have belt rats to deal with.
One of the biggest challenges though, which so far everyone was ignoring is that warping in on the bigger rocks, means way easier to bounce. and the first time I tried to warp in.. i bounced 15k away. Another thing to point out, was that the 5min cycle on the indy core, was 1/3done before my first load of ore was actually onboard. so you're increasing heavy water consumption quite a bit due to the extra travel time.
Another thing to note on the test, was that while on tranq the collossals i've seen have been regular rocks, on sisi the only one I found was all the +10% +5% type of rocks. If that stays the same, and the anom belts in null are changed to the higher value rocks, then I can see this change being close to the 25% nerf that CCP is selling vice the ridiculous numbers we are seeing
|
|
|
|