Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 78 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 38 post(s) |
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
410
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:48:00 -
[181] - Quote
Lallante wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote:Sure, because Jump Freighters are what holds empires together. If the troops can't hold the space or the moons because of the "force projection" nerfs then it wont matter if a jump freighter can more easily pick up anything ie trade goods, ships/mods, moongoo, etc. Its both. Unnerffing JFs just means the status quo for logistics is preserved and nullsec industry will never develop. Why bother building in nullsec when you can JF from Jita in safety?
I'm thinking there is already an incentive to build in 0.0 - discounts and lower cost indices as well as not having to haul the ore and pay for fuel to haul the said stuff from highsec. The problem is there's no large reliable market to sell stuff so you have to build one offs which is counterproductive. Making logistics more difficult will not increase demand in 0.0.. Unless i'm missing something nobody will build that much more stuff in 0.0 just because logistics is harder.. |
Etrei Kordisin
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
6
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:48:00 -
[182] - Quote
Dream Five wrote:There's no smooth progressive nerfing of JF range, anywhere under 10 will cut off Stain and Drone regions entirely while leaving (i think) all other regions mostly intact. The map just wasn't designed for sub-10 ly jumps. Such a change would be simply unfair to some of the existing inhabitants.
Also freighters have no resists so keep in mind that they are basically indefensible against even small BC fleets.
It basically will amount to scout, go/no go. Engagements will be even much more so avoided than most engagements in EVE are.
Funnily enough, the map was the same before jump drives. Things were fine. Yes, you'd have to go through space that isn't stain. How terrible! |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
860
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:49:00 -
[183] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Etrei Kordisin wrote:It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time. It's not a question of trust, it's a question of a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. The goals of this change are pretty clear, and we're keen to follow up and ensure that we hit them over time.
your goals are terrible |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
106
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:51:00 -
[184] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. And you call it a sandbox? |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
179
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:51:00 -
[185] - Quote
Then lobbest thou thy Holy Nerf of Greyscale towards thy foe, who being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it. |
Lallante
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
478
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:51:00 -
[186] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:* Pretty sad to see JFs getting 10LY range. Their 5LY range allowed for some meaningful ability to disrupt incoming logistics. 10LY eliminates a lot of possibilities here. - Yes, but that logistics is already in too fragile a place to be able to reliably survive that disruption
Mr Greyscale, I'd love to understand why you think that is a bad thing. Obviously with 5LY range JFs, the current status quo of logistics is untenable (I agree, it simply wouldnt survive), but I think this is a good thing. Is it really good game design that a small handful players in a 3000+ man alliance can easily fuel hundreds of POSs and provide replacement ships for all loses right to the frontline without any meaningful risk?
Wouldnt it be better if logistics was a meaningful consideration both for holding space and for taking it?
I'd like to repeat my earlier suggestion. Fine, let JFs have 10LY but remove the 90% Fatigue reduction from them - this forces players to make meaninful strategic decisions - small 5LY hops with freighters/transports, or occasional 10ly hops with a JF.
As it is, the net result of your proposed changes is no-one will use anything but JFs for null logistics, JFs wont be interdicted mid journey because they will continue the current status quo of going from POS to POS and never gates, and business will continue very much as usual. |
Ripard Teg
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
960
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:51:00 -
[187] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:- The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be.
- It *is*, however, pretty well aligned with where nullsec industry is right now. As we improve the status quo for industry in nullsec, we will want to reevaluate this balance, along with the impact potential changes would have on logistical work for other areas of the game.
Just to be clear: the combination of these two statements seem to say that the JF range change is likely to be a temporary compromise fix while you put phases 2 and 3 of your plan into effect. And that once more of the overall plan is in place, the range of JFs is then likely to be reduced.
Is that more or less accurate with the information you have today? aka Jester, who apparently was once entrusted to Wield The Banhammer to good effect. |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:52:00 -
[188] - Quote
I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:
Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.
We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
8511
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:54:00 -
[189] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Etrei Kordisin wrote:It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time. It's not a question of trust, it's a question of a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. The goals of this change are pretty clear, and we're keen to follow up and ensure that we hit them over time. your goals are terrible
I don't think their goals are terrible, I think they are intensely unrealistic given the approaches they want to use. I still think the most likely outcomes are a worse null than what we have now because they aren't taking some key things into account.
It's like Super Capitals all over again. You could tell that CCP was thinking "no way these things will ever be a problem, they are so expensive and can only be built in space that is vulnerable". We all know how that thinking turned out.
CCP constantly underestimates what is 'viable' and what isn't despite 11+ years of players demonstrating the extreme lengths they'll go to to gain an in game advantage. |
Anthar Thebess
764
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:54:00 -
[190] - Quote
Do CCP have any plans about shifting regions away from each other a bit? Currently some of the regions mix with each other. Overall this kind of shift could be good for the game as it could create more variety in EVE universe.
Also do CCP plan to create lowsec connections for big nullsec regions like Venal or Stain to ease flow of new players to this regions? Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption Support Needed : Faction Crystal Changes |
|
The Cue
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:54:00 -
[191] - Quote
Lallante wrote:Please could CCP consider dropping the 90% fatigue reduction from Jump Freighters as the tradeoff for this change. Force players to make a meaningful choice - Bridge a freighter or some transports 5LY with 90% fatigue reduction, or Jump a JF 10LY but only get to do it once or twice before fatigue becomes a real issue.
Many times over this. Importantly, this would provide a very significant choice between freighters and JFs. |
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
410
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:55:00 -
[192] - Quote
Etrei Kordisin wrote:Dream Five wrote:There's no smooth progressive nerfing of JF range, anywhere under 10 will cut off Stain and Drone regions entirely while leaving (i think) all other regions mostly intact. The map just wasn't designed for sub-10 ly jumps. Such a change would be simply unfair to some of the existing inhabitants.
Also freighters have no resists so keep in mind that they are basically indefensible against even small BC fleets.
It basically will amount to scout, go/no go. Engagements will be even much more so avoided than most engagements in EVE are.
Funnily enough, the map was the same before jump drives. Things were fine. Yes, you'd have to go through space that isn't stain. How terrible!
I see what you are saying but there's still something to be said about hitting inhabitants of just one or two selected regions with a nerfbat disproportionately. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
108
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:56:00 -
[193] - Quote
CCP Greyscale, could you explain, why do you allow capitals to go through the gates? What is the reasoning behind it? And maybe it would be enough to let them through regional gates only? |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
3368
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:57:00 -
[194] - Quote
Querns wrote:Is trading the drone damage bonus on rorqs for 10LY max range in the interim, before you do a proper balance pass on rorquals, something you all are willing to do?
Happy to discuss it, yes :)
Evelgrivion wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Quoting first post: Quote:The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be. It *is*, however, pretty well aligned with where nullsec industry is right now. As we improve the status quo for industry in nullsec, we will want to reevaluate this balance, along with the impact potential changes would have on logistical work for other areas of the game. Well... where do you want nullsec industry to be?
Somewhere where we feel comfortable nerfing JFs further :P We're not in a position to discuss details right now, but people building a significant percentage of their basic needs on-site without relying on JF chains is likely to figure in the final intention.
Etrei Kordisin wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Etrei Kordisin wrote:It's nice to know that CCP trusts the playerbase to not use the massive loophole that these changes open up, too. Nullsec players are absolutely above the idea of swapping to T1 industrials in order to utilise a starbase bridge network to jump halfway across eve in hardly any time. [quote=Overlord Invictus][quote=CCP Greyscale] Here, let me quote a little snippet of the blog that you might've missed: so basically the line you're towing is we cannot critique the changes because if we do your retort is that there are more changes on the way that may or may not quell your issues, but unfortunately for you, you will not know if theyre going to make life better until you're fully chained down and lubed up (ie fully committed to the full plan)?
No, I'm saying that our opinion on whether or not this constitutes a complete fix is very thoroughly laid out in the blog, and it's not clear how asking me to explain how this change fixes everything is constructive. |
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
949
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:58:00 -
[195] - Quote
So CCP watered down the changes in power projection nerf. I think this is all temporary until they make more changes to nullsec industry and resource availability. Once those things change I see them coming round with the hammer for round 2 of nerfs and rightfully so. A power projection nerf is meaningless unless all things are hit. But for the interim this is a acceptable bargain. @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
205
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:59:00 -
[196] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: Conclusions we have reached through this exercise: [list] The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be. It *is*, however, pretty well aligned with where nullsec industry is right now. As we improve the status quo for industry in nullsec, we will want to reevaluate this balance, along with the impact potential changes would have on logistical work for other areas of the game.
*sigh* Long-term, I would really favour the stronger nerf to Jump freighters as they kill the need for industry in nullsec and also interaction with entities sitting between Jita and their destination.
However, there is a number of essential ressources that are not available in every part of the galaxy. If long-distance hauling would be much more difficult, this ressource distribution needs to change imo. Things that are vital for T1/T2 industry should be available everywhere - even if some things might be rare in one area and abundant in another to make trade routes viable.
Then it would be impossible to starve an area to death by cutting off through nullsec entry gatecamps and/or extremely long jump routes.
At the moment this affects mainly: - Moon materials - Ice - Datacores
The complete range of Moon materials is needed for any serious T2 production. And one definitely needs all types of Isotopes for industry (some setups are e.g. impossible without Caldari Towers)
I believe seeding a few moons and spawning smaller quantities of different Ice flavours (like Amarr and Minmatar Ice in Caldari space Ice belts) could solve the issue.
Datacores are not THAT much an issue since they are small, but still it would be cool to have at least some source for them in deep Nullsec. Pirate Loyalty shops / R&D agents? Pirate Agents in space? Reasonable quantities in Data/Relic Sites?
Any chance such a change could happen some time in the future as a follow-up? |
DexterShark
The Night Watchmen The Bastion
52
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:59:00 -
[197] - Quote
Where do I sign up for the list of Rorqual Logistics pilots that are falling over themselves to hand in their Drone bonus so that it might be put in line with the JF 10LY range?
Take all the combat / defensive bonuses off it and call it a pure logistics / support platform if that is your concern - because that's what it's purely used for.
The ~Battle Rorqual~ thing is a punchline to a bad joke, rather than an actual real-world use case of the ship.
|
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
randomly named no tax corp v2
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:59:00 -
[198] - Quote
Certainly makes a massive difference for npcnull dwellers. In one jump Stain can be reached from Khanid (Saminer > T-NN only), Outer Ring can be reached from highsec (most usefully Orvolle to the hub station in 4C-B), the south-west corner of Venal can be reached from Lonetrek (although none of the station systems), and Curse/Great Wildlands can be reached without taking a gate. |
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
51
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 19:59:00 -
[199] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:
Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.
We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics.
I'd be happy if they took away the drone bonus and gave the rorq 9ly or 8ly.
I'd be really happy if they embraced the Rorqs tower logistics role and gave some sort of bonus for carrying fuel blocks. |
Yuri Thorpe
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
36
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:00:00 -
[200] - Quote
PRAISE M60 JESUS |
|
Cozmo I
Futuristic Supporters of Musical Extravaganza The Predictables
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:01:00 -
[201] - Quote
_exactly_ what I was hoping for.
tyvm. |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:01:00 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:a significant percentage of their basic needs on-site without relying on JF chains
AKA: rebalancing nullsec ore anomalies |
Yuri Thorpe
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
36
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:01:00 -
[203] - Quote
ADarwinAward Winner wrote:9 LY lets jump freighters cover most of the regional gaps. Don't go all the way to 10. Give me one good reason of why not, can you not fight a hotdrop JF fleet? |
Svetlana Kerensky
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:01:00 -
[204] - Quote
looks lihe the denizens of a very warm place suddenly went ice skating :) |
Yuri Thorpe
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
36
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:03:00 -
[205] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:
Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.
We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics. Not really, most of them sit in a POS their whole life, some people use it over a JF, but no enough to give them 10 and make them lose the drones.
|
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions Stain Confederation
375
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:03:00 -
[206] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be.
CCP Greyscale wrote:Jump freighter max range will be bumped up to 10LY, and they will keep the 90% fatigue-distance reduction. This represents a slight range reduction compared to TQ, so some cynos will need to be repositioned, but otherwise leaves them largely alone. This doesn't make any sense. After all this you are leaving JFs almost completely unchanged.. I did agree that 5LY was perhaps a little to low, but what is the reason for doubling this and leaving them almost completely unchanged?
It really makes no sense given your original statement, and is a massive backward step. Something like 6 to 8 light years max would have been fine, and a 80% fatigue reduction to balance that out.
Also black ops getting bumped to 8...? Do you not realise how lame black ops dropping is already, and you want to make this worse. 5L years is honestly more than enough. Why don't you ask the community then you'd get proper feedback, as no one has been suggesting 8LY is needed for black ops.
Also, seems with the fatigue reduction to jump bridge networks when using haulers will mean that actually not much has changed much at all on the logistics side. That is very disappointing as they were going to be interesting changes. |
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
1128
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:03:00 -
[207] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote: Did you like my joke?
no CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
3368
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:04:00 -
[208] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:a) it's not immediately obvious that this will be particularly viable in practice, and b) if it is, we'll just nerf it. And you call it a sandbox?
Yes. I don't understand how that relates to the text you quoted?
Lallante wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:* Pretty sad to see JFs getting 10LY range. Their 5LY range allowed for some meaningful ability to disrupt incoming logistics. 10LY eliminates a lot of possibilities here. - Yes, but that logistics is already in too fragile a place to be able to reliably survive that disruption Mr Greyscale, I'd love to understand why you think that is a bad thing. Obviously with 5LY range JFs, the current status quo of logistics is untenable (I agree, it simply wouldnt survive), but I think this is a good thing. Is it really good game design that a small handful players in a 3000+ man alliance can easily fuel hundreds of POSs and provide replacement ships for all loses right to the frontline without any meaningful risk? Alliances held space before JFs existed. And in fact, the logistical needs were vastly greater in those days (hello 60 moon outpost systems). It was possible, and people did it. Why is this unnerf needed, what are you afraid will happen if you dont do it? Wouldnt it be better if logistics was a meaningful consideration both for holding space and for taking it? I'd like to repeat my earlier suggestion. Fine, let JFs have 10LY but remove the 90% Fatigue reduction from them - this forces players to make meaninful strategic decisions - small 5LY hops with freighters/transports, or occasional 10ly hops with a JF. As it is, the net result of your proposed changes is no-one will use anything but JFs for null logistics, JFs wont be interdicted mid journey because they will continue the current status quo of going from POS to POS and never gates, and business will continue very much as usual.
We would like nullsec to transition to a new status quo over time in as orderly a manner as possible, and maintaining as much of its current population as possible (or increasing it, obviously), while still actually achieving the new status quo. We're of the opinion that if we push the 5LY range through now, we'll lose a lot of nullsec players while they try to reach a new equilibrium, and it's possible that it would significantly reduce the carrying capacity of nullsec overall, which is not an outcome we'd be happy with.
Ripard Teg wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:- The ease of nullsec logistics permitted by jump freighters and, to a lesser extent, jump bridge networks is not aligned with where we would like nullsec industry to be.
- It *is*, however, pretty well aligned with where nullsec industry is right now. As we improve the status quo for industry in nullsec, we will want to reevaluate this balance, along with the impact potential changes would have on logistical work for other areas of the game.
Just to be clear: the combination of these two statements seem to say that the JF range change is likely to be a temporary compromise fix while you put phases 2 and 3 of your plan into effect. And that once more of the overall plan is in place, the range of JFs is then likely to be reduced. Is that more or less accurate with the information you have today?
That's broadly in alignment with our current position, yes. We would like to reach a point where JF power can be significantly curtailed without causing massive problems, at which point we would be minded to do so.
Skia Aumer wrote:CCP Greyscale, could you explain, why do you allow capitals to go through the gates? What is the reasoning behind it? And maybe it would be enough to let them through regional gates only?
Because we don't want to lock them in systems while their cooldown is ticking down; because not doing so plays havoc with capital accessibility of some areas of space; and because we'd much rather have capitals stuck in gate bubbles than docked up and unused. |
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
755
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:05:00 -
[209] - Quote
Yroc Jannseen wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:I'm reiterating this again in hopes that Greyscale reads it:
Please- remove drone bonus on Rorqs, if that's a concern for you, and give them the 10ly jump range.
We are all still waiting for a change for Rorqs, but that could be another several updates out. In the mean time, Rorqs are one of the most commonly used ships for logistics, and the 5ly nerf to them is just as bad as it is to JFs. It's not a matter of projecting our power, it's a matter of not committing suicide by trying to do day-to-day logistics. I'd be happy if they took away the drone bonus and gave the rorq 9ly or 8ly. I'd be really happy if they embraced the Rorqs tower logistics role and gave some sort of bonus for carrying fuel blocks.
The rorqual needs a total overhaul, not a patch job. Yaay!!!! |
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
132
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 20:05:00 -
[210] - Quote
Battle Rorquals... I didn't even know such a thing existed... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 78 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |