Backstage - OOC Forums
General Discussion => General Non-RP EVE Discussion => Topic started by: kalaratiri on 17 May 2014, 17:54
-
Currently 1am, just gonna put links then go to bed before I pass out. Will format into proper posts tomorrow.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4605241#post4605241
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4605307#post4605307
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4605273#post4605273
-
Also, the freighter/JF tweak (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345280). "Yay! You can rig your freighters now! But to make sure this isn't a buff, we're going to nerf all your JFs into the stone age."
Ugh.
I mean, I understand a little bit of adjustment? But what they're proposing right now is terrible. Beyond the straight nerf, employing rigs will apply a penalty to whatever trait you
Re: BR update. Looks good! Definitely liking the second high and the warp speed skill bonus. Similarly, more cargo? I'll take it.
Re: DST update. I'm entertained by these, but I don't think -anything- will make them competitive vs. other options in high sec, and covert cloaks and speed will trump in all other environments. Now, if the DST got interdiction immunity and a not-terrible align time, it might have a place-- but right now, meh. It's getting a lot of gimmicks that won't actually make it viable in a space with a plethora of options.
-
Those DST changes look good. :)
For the rest, especially blockade runners, why did those need to get buffed ? Weren't they already pretty much OP and pervasive already ? Why do they feel they always have to make life easier (jump freighters, then covops cloaks on blockade runners, etc) ? It's rather weird.
-
The changes to the blockade runners aren't really buffs so much as homogenization. Giving all of them the ability to fit 10k cargo (previously limited to the Prorator) and have a second high slot (previously limited to the Prowler and making it the only really desirable one for wormhole space). The warp speed bonus is a nice addition, though, and gives an actual reason to train Transport Ships past 1.
The DST changes are cool. Though I don't like that they're nerfing the basic cargo space to add the fleet hangar. It wouldn't hurt to keep it where it is and add the fleet hangar and other stuff.
-
Ok I see. :)
-
I'm not quite spotting the huge Freighter/JF nerf here. I mean, I've not run the numbers through EFT but I kinda take what Fozzie has written at face value. Granted, you need to open your wallet to get those rigs installed, but I'm not really concerned with lower non-rigged cargo on my Freighter, since I've never ever managed to fill it to more than 50% without clawing wildly at the "please gank me" limit.
And regarding possibly slightly lower (in case of armor JFs) eHP of cargo rigged Jump Freighters - that's quite possibily not a huge deal, especially not if you limit yours to what it's about: Jumping, not making the jita-amarr run.
-
The changes to the blockade runners aren't really buffs so much as homogenization. Giving all of them the ability to fit 10k cargo (previously limited to the Prorator) and have a second high slot (previously limited to the Prowler and making it the only really desirable one for wormhole space). The warp speed bonus is a nice addition, though, and gives an actual reason to train Transport Ships past 1.
The DST changes are cool. Though I don't like that they're nerfing the basic cargo space to add the fleet hangar. It wouldn't hurt to keep it where it is and add the fleet hangar and other stuff.
Incorrect regarding the Prorator being the only BR that can hit 10k. The Viator and Crane can as well, with 2 T1 rigs (like the Prorator) and 2 T2 rigs respectively. The Prowler is the only one that could not fit 10k even with T2 rigs.
It's also not so much homogenization as it is following through with the changes to the T1 haulers - before those changes, most people used Gallente transports because they already had Gallente Industrial 5, which they had because the Iteron MkV was the best T1 hauler, hands-down. Incidentally, this is also the reason that Obelisks were so hugely popular - Gallente Industrial 5 was already trained and it saved time to just pick that flavor of freighter. ;)
Now there's reason to train the other industrials to 5 (and there always was while it remained a requirement for Freighters, to be fair), but there still wasn't much reason to use most of the BRs or DSTs (like the Crane, for example).
DST changes are great. In the end they get a net increase of cargo space through the fleet hangars. Just because it says "fleet hangar" on it doesn't mean it needs to be used in that fashion - keeping both would be too much of a buff AND it would risk making the Orca obsolete at the same time.
MMJD, not entirely sold on the limitation to BC-sized hulls and DSTs but we'll see.
Agreed on the Freighter changes in general being a bit dumb, though.
-
I'm not quite spotting the huge Freighter/JF nerf here. I mean, I've not run the numbers through EFT but I kinda take what Fozzie has written at face value. Granted, you need to open your wallet to get those rigs installed, but I'm not really concerned with lower non-rigged cargo on my Freighter, since I've never ever managed to fill it to more than 50% without clawing wildly at the "please gank me" limit.
Bolded the important bit: Fozzie's maximum cargo calculations appear to be based on using T2 capital rigs, which currently cost upwards of 700m a piece. While this isn't much compared to the base cost of a JF, it will actually be more expensive than the base cost of a freighter. You now need to pay in the vicinity of 2.1-2.2b to have your freighter's cargo equal what it used to.
And regarding possibly slightly lower (in case of armor JFs) eHP of cargo rigged Jump Freighters - that's quite possibily not a huge deal, especially not if you limit yours to what it's about: Jumping, not making the jita-amarr run.
A poster out of nullsec explained this issue on Reddit, which I will paraphrase here: JFs often have to go into market hubs to get their cargo, because the alternative (just jumping a normal freighter into lowsec) is exceedingly dumb. You could in theory have a normal freighter bring the cargo to a highsec system within jump range of lowsec, move it over to the JF and jump it out... except that because of the geography of stargate connections the "jump out" systems are not always near the "return to highsec" systems, meaning someone would have to either fly the JF all the way back around to the highsec transfer point or have someone else collect the freighter and bring it back. In other words, you can either do many extra jumps or use another account.
Regarding the 'cargo is never full' statement: This might be true of individual players, small corps, and hauling services but it is apparently not true of null or WH logistics. The latter is especially mad, because to them multiple freighter or JF runs is an irreplaceable lifeline.
tl;dr - JFs do need a nerf of some kind. IMO though, this is not it. They would be far better balanced with some kind of a nerf to their ability to make rapid jumps over huge distances once they enter low- or nullsec.
-
Racial ice distribution, racial isotope use for capital ships and POS, would be reasons why jump freighters and freighters often carry full loads for nullsec use.
-
I see what you mean, but I still don't consider it being a huge issue. Fuel costs are a much bigger impact at this point than 5% less cargohold on your JF (with t1 rigs).
-
So why not call the micro, MICRO jump drive a, uh. A Nano Jump Drive? It sounds neat, personally. (Even though a micro * micro would make it pico, but bear with me)
What does everyone think the freighter-cide will do to prices in Empire, and whatnot? I have close to no experience with markets and freighters, so I want to hear some tasty discourse.
-
I should have sold my jumpfreighter before these proposed changes came out...
-
So why not call the micro, MICRO jump drive a, uh. A Nano Jump Drive? It sounds neat, personally. (Even though a micro * micro would make it pico, but bear with me)
What does everyone think the freighter-cide will do to prices in Empire, and whatnot? I have close to no experience with markets and freighters, so I want to hear some tasty discourse.
If the amount of people complaining (rightly or wrongly, it doesn't matter for this speculative piece) also get rid of their freighters in favour of DST/Orca hauling, the volume of general supply will be gated pretty hard. The value of freighters and JF will drop as people flood the market with them and capital rigs will normalise (the non-combat related ones that is) as the freighter pilots remaining suck down the extra cost for durability/cargo size.
Import/Export of raw materials will actually see a beneficial difference, as the Orca/Rorqual/DSTs become major shippers of Compressed Ore, the new means of relocating hard assets and an industrial base. Moving ships will become harder, especially in bulk, promoting centralised industry (which is harmful to labour cost, cutting profit margins). This in turn will benefit distributed industry (remote areas etc), which will operate at far better margins in return for the risk of logistics.
Null is a question I am usually leery of answering as a combination of intelligent ruthlessness at the higher levels and a monkey's with typewriters effect in middle management usually gets a patch day optimal meta sorted out. Leverage of renters (locally produced goods by chance) and industrialisation of the core land owners (strategic, subsidised industry to supplement SRP and speculative future SRP'd doctrines) are two possible strategies. The nerf to JF makes the transport of finished or partially constructed goods sub optimal in terms of fuel (at least until the markets balance out as they always do). However, compressed ore low-ends from hi-sec, supplemented by a greater ABC income from low sec ABCs and local null mining may further stimulate the incentive to import materiel, and build/use assets locally. This is the shakiest part of my speculation, however, as it is equally likely that large entities will leverage their insane income-base and just brute force the fuel markets if they have to - tolerating the JF changes simply because the competition cannot.
Simply put -
Hi-sec: Logistics is even more dangerous than before (fewer freighters on the space lanes, higher margins incentivise moving large volume quickly across space)
Low-Sec: General buff. Freighters die here anyway, Rorquals and Orcas can still operate (within reason). Compresed ore arrays and local ABC's, not to mention the mordus and cloned soldier elements make this space highly dangerous (difficult to police) but finally, rewarding enough to be brought up at a director's meeting without looking like a jack ass (it is still a bitter pill, however).
Null: Buff/Indifferent/Nerf depends on who you are. Large, rich, strategy focused groups with rental space and the ability to canonise industry-leading 'policies' in their rental agreements (and police them) will benefit greatly - they will just normalise their base cash flow to whatever their logistics + SRP + operating costs demand; squeezing renters if they must (renters are getting a very good deal right now, considering the other buffs coming to outposts; using ALL that a rental agreement allows will make you incredibly rich very fast even with casual play). Alliances without these assets or without tat kind of umbrella to fall under (or build themselves) are going to hurt in the short term, but I am confident that markets will normalise based on the lower use of JF as a mass goods transport.
My opinion? This is a heavy handed approach to balancing freighters and JF, which largely nerfs the JF while making the freighter riskier to fly, but able to be optimised. Mixed feelings in general, but I and my corp have had a good run of luck with recent patches so we'll be taking this on the chin and adapting.
-
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4613493#post4613493
Hey everyone. Thanks for the continued feedback.
We're going to remove Attack Battlecruisers from the list of ships that can use this module in the first iteration, since there are some legitimate concerns with how this would interact with ABCs in small gang combat.
-
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4613493#post4613493
Hey everyone. Thanks for the continued feedback.
We're going to remove Attack Battlecruisers from the list of ships that can use this module in the first iteration, since there are some legitimate concerns with how this would interact with ABCs in small gang combat.
Well what in the frak would you use it for then? What other battlecruisers would need it? Nothing else hits out at 100km usefully.
-
The real problem stems from the original battlecruisers' niche being firmly taken by the T2 Commandships and T3 Command Cruiser setups. People are not using Battlecruisers as command ships at all.
The tier 1 Battlecruisers could be "early" command ships, whose firepower and speed is comparable to a cruiser. It should be 'natural' fit for a squadron leader to fly in a cruiser gang. It would have lower investment than a T2 Commandship or T3 Command Cruiser, but naturally lead into them.
The tier 2 Battlecruisers could have a different role entirely. Perhaps an anti-cruiser role in battleship fleets; dunno.
They are trying to find them another niche. MJDing into a ball of Nagas/Typhoons with things lik HAM Drakes will help get HAM Drakes under the Typhoon/Naga guns. I don't think this is the niche they need.
-
Some of the problem I see with battlecruisers is that fully fitted they're not significantly less expensive than a fully fitted HAC/Recon that provide a higher degree of flexibility, mobility, and engagement profile.
Then if you compare them to cruisers + logi then the cruisers have the advantage that they can bring similar amounts of damage to the table and the extra ehp of the BC isn't a massive advantage because you're tanking via the logi reps anyway. That and the cruisers only cost about 25-40mil fully fitted.
Their role right now just seems to be either expensive cruiser or the poor man's battleship to me. Which I suppose is working as intended?
-
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4613493#post4613493
Hey everyone. Thanks for the continued feedback.
We're going to remove Attack Battlecruisers from the list of ships that can use this module in the first iteration, since there are some legitimate concerns with how this would interact with ABCs in small gang combat.
Well what in the frak would you use it for then? What other battlecruisers would need it? Nothing else hits out at 100km usefully.
Probably to kill those aforementioned wanksnipers. And Battleshits that jump away. But eh, we will see.
-
The mini-commandship would be a nice idea.
I'd also think, akin to ABCs, the inherent (T1) strengths of the BCs should lean more toward damage and range instead of EHP/tank, akin to the bonuses/focus of destroyers.
So you get your basic ship lines: Frigates, Cruisers, Battleships(, Capital Ships) and the destroyers/BC in the gaps in between.
-
Freighters and JFs are now getting 3 lows instead of rig slots.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4605252#post4605252
-
Reserving final judgement until the numbers are completely run, but I'm rather happier with this decision compared to the rigs concept. You still have to choose your drawback, but it doesn't cost billions of ISK to make that choice. The people most upset with this revision are probably going to be career gankers.
-
WTF, I wish they would stop changing shit long enough to find out how what they are changing will impact the game.
Also, ABC's can't use MMJDS? What kind of BS is this?!?
-
Also, ABC's can't use MMJDS? What kind of BS is this?!?
The kinda BS that removes the total inability of anything to tackle sniping Tornados ever if they have an MJD fit.
-
Ahahahahahaha, the speculator tears over the freighter change are hilarious.
-
Fozzie troll best troll.
-
That is the point! The tornado was meant for the MJD
T_T
-
Ahahahahahaha, the speculator tears over the freighter change are hilarious.
(http://i.imgur.com/bDhnry5.jpg)
-
About the only real BC doctrine I can come up with due to MMJD 100km range is probably only 250mm Ferox with Spike.
If there was an option to calibrate the jump range down to say 50km it might make things like 720mm nano canes/HML nano Drakes viable and probably quite hilarious if the opposing fleets have no scrams.
Other than that it still just seems like a GTFO button.
-
That is the point! The tornado was meant for the MJD
T_T
I'm just gonna immortalize this in a quote if they ever do allow Tornados to use the mmjd and you inevitably start bitching about how you get instakilled in your wolves at gates without any counter.
-
About the only real BC doctrine I can come up with due to MMJD 100km range is probably only 250mm Ferox with Spike.
If there was an option to calibrate the jump range down to say 50km it might make things like 720mm nano canes/HML nano Drakes viable and probably quite hilarious if the opposing fleets have no scrams.
Other than that it still just seems like a GTFO button.
Or a "DRIVE ME CLOSER, I WANT TO HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD!" button.
But given your canes, you know what makes it 100% more awesome than scripting it to 50k?
Turning around and jumping /through/ them. 8)
-
About the only real BC doctrine I can come up with due to MMJD 100km range is probably only 250mm Ferox with Spike.
If there was an option to calibrate the jump range down to say 50km it might make things like 720mm nano canes/HML nano Drakes viable and probably quite hilarious if the opposing fleets have no scrams.
Other than that it still just seems like a GTFO button.
Or a "DRIVE ME CLOSER, I WANT TO HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD!" button.
But given your canes, you know what makes it 100% more awesome than scripting it to 50k?
Turning around and jumping /through/ them. 8)
That would take a degree of timing, skill, and co-ordination not possible under the influence of alcohol.
Although it does make me wonder if you MMJD a Hurricane into another Hurricane, will that make it a Tempest?