Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1937
|
Posted - 2012.05.17 21:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Industry & Mining - When the shooting is done, someone has to re-build everything. The mechanics, UI and content for this area of the game all need a look at.
Some people like mining. Should we let them pay for therapy with PLEX? Seriously, mining and industry need work, and I know players have some ideas for what they would like to see done. Lets hear them. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
John Munkeen
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.17 22:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Exhumers don't need any change as they are great the way they are, But maybe a new Exhumer ship that is like the Hulk or Mac (different look is a must)
New Exhumer idea *No yield bonus *Lower Cargo then the hulks! *Higher hit points *More mid/low slots Why would I suggest a new ship is that the industry needs a mining ship that can defend its self, But to have the extra defence the new ship needs to remove the bonus to yield and cargo holds to add more armour plates and room for defence mods. This will mean a miner can pick from two types of ships, one for high yield mining but no way to have a good tank and have more risk mining, the other would be low yield mining but will be able to have a good tank and defend his ship.
In doing this the Gankers will need a buff to balance thing a bit more.
Second idea
the new pilots of eve need to understand that high sec space dose not mean safe space and should have a new player mission to explain this in more detail so they don't get a shock the first time they get ganked in high sec! |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1410
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 00:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
My ideas on industry series on my blog: http://mararinn.blogspot.com/search/label/industry
Seleene has seen a lot of these already. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
433
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 08:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
John Munkeen wrote:
In doing this the Gankers will need a buff to balance thing a bit more.
And to think you want to be taken serious. Gankers have more than enough options to gank. If there were to be a new mining ship with no yield bonus but for that more defence then why not just use a Rokh.
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
258
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 08:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:And to think you want to be taken serious. Gankers have more than enough options to gank. If there were to be a new mining ship with no yield bonus but for that more defence then why not just use a Rokh.
The combination of high laser yields and tiny cargohold not at all suited for ore makes Rokh mining an exercise in pure misery.
That said I don't think an all-tank Exhumer would be of any value to anyone outside of a small few. Look how many people are even flying untanked/poorly tanked Hulks at all during Hulkageddon and you realize one thing - yield trumps all else. You could make an Exhumer that could tank a dread fleet and it'd still never get used if its yield was less than that of a Hulk with zero tank. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
434
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 09:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:
The combination of high laser yields and tiny cargohold not at all suited for ore makes Rokh mining an exercise in pure misery.
That said I don't think an all-tank Exhumer would be of any value to anyone outside of a small few. Look how many people are even flying untanked/poorly tanked Hulks at all during Hulkageddon and you realize one thing - yield trumps all else. You could make an Exhumer that could tank a dread fleet and it'd still never get used if its yield was less than that of a Hulk with zero tank.
Balance wise it's just far easier to set up a gank ship than a mining ship.
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
258
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 10:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:Balance wise it's just far easier to set up a gank ship than a mining ship.
The only mining ship that requires even a moment's thought is the Hulk, and even then it's pretty much down to compromising yield/cargo for tank. The fact that most people will constantly choose the former (thus making the ganker's job unbelievably easy) and then crying about it later isn't a balance thing, it's a "too many Hulk pilots are dumber than mud" thing. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
434
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 10:13:00 -
[8] - Quote
Easy to say this since PvP fits are always set up for the best result, yet if a mining ship like the Hulk fits for it it's toast.
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
259
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 10:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:Easy to say this since PvP fits are always set up for the best result, yet if a mining ship like the Hulk fits for it it's toast.
Actually, they're remarkably similar if you think about it. The Catalyst goes full gank since Concord will destroy it regardless of tank, so it can afford to go 100% damage and ignore all else. It does this at the cost of being ridiculously fragile and literally useless outside of its role. A Hulk fit for 100% mining (yield/cargo) is the same principle, with the difference being the less-than-intelligent Hulk pilots are doing it in an environment where it can easily come back to haunt them, and they're doing it in a ship that's 300x as expensive as a Catalyst. That's purely their own fault, doubly so since the highly increased risk is due to an event literally called "Hulkageddon", which is happening for the fifth time.
What it comes down to at the end of the day is a problem of attitude - miners (the kind that bleat about gankers and Hulkageddon, anyway) want guarantees in a game that's entire hook is that there are none. They want to be able to do Their Favorite Thing in 100% safety, and any alternative, be it flying a cheaper ship, tanking their expensive one at the cost of their yield, putting more thought into picking systems aren't ever going to be considered since none of them is a 100% guarantee of safety. Needless to say, that's a problematic attitude, and one that shouldn't be considered when it comes to balance issues. |
Aleena Doran
Squaddies
25
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 11:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
CSM and CCP to review need to T2 BPOs in current game. Many discussions on it in the past by miscellaneous pilots, but CSM & CCP position unclear.
Noting that CCP have recently reduced mission income, incursion income, and are about to change datacore production, most likely making T2 invention more expensive, it seems a little odd that T2 BPOs are still out there passively making isk for the established elite who have them.
If CCP feels they have a valuable role in the game perhaps CCP might balance them, such as by limiting material quality such that they are comparable with invented BPCs, particularly where BPO holders dominate the market (eg T2 mining crystals). |
|
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
132
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 12:03:00 -
[11] - Quote
It would be good if you could get CCP to clarify their long term plans for T2 production, and the rationale behind their plans.
"We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec." - CCP Soundwave https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1230077#post1230077
|
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
109
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 12:54:00 -
[12] - Quote
PI needs a couple of days of love from the developers to gives something to keep us busy for a full year and solve a couple of annoying problems:
I posted this idea for new simple skills that can gives us something new to train: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=798741#post798741
About the annoying problems, I have 3:
When we open the planet it always focus the command center, allows to choose another structure to focus because most of the times our mining stuff is in the other side of the planet. Or for a fee allow us to move the command center.
When a product is not routed, please show a warning message when exiting planet mode
Setting up a planet is now the most boring and time consuming thing in PI, please automate some things like:
If I set up and extractor product and start a job, automatically search for the near storage/launch pad and create a route from the extractor to that structure.
If I set up a basic factory and select a BPO, automatically find the product it needs from the near storage/launch pad and set up a route automatically and them make another route with the product I'm producing to the storage/launch pad I get the raw material from
If I set an advanced factory and select a BPO, automatically find the products it needs from the near storages/launch pads and set up a route automatically and them make another route with the product I'm producing to the near storage/launch.
If for some reason a person do not want automatic routing just make it an option like the one to see other people structures that a person can disconnect at will. I bet that this 3 rules will avoid lot of clicking for 95% of all people that needs to set up a planet. Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
VaL Iscariot
The Concilium Enterprises Spectrum Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 14:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote: Amazing ideas
Guy above me just rambled off everything I hate about PI and how to fix it.
Also, just beef up mining barges to have heavier tanks and bigger structures. You and even roleplay it off because of preasure from the insurance company on ORE to reinforce their ships against attack. |
Angel Lust
Vikinghall
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 15:17:00 -
[14] - Quote
A lot of gankers posting in here i see .... Well.... you know.. two step.. nothing good will come from this thread. Ask the silent majority instead
Or.. do mining wessels more gank proof. Maby its time for a new ( bs size) mining ship ? |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
260
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 15:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
Angel Lust wrote:Ask the silent majority instead ]
Right, the "silent majority". Maybe the "silent majority" could step up and explain exactly WHY tanking a Hulk is some impossible feat? Or perhaps they'd like to go big and tell the class why they should be invincible while mining "just because"? |
engjin
The Konvergent League
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 16:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Not sure where else to put this but...
Players in NPC Corps do not share the same risk as others when it comes to industry (market) as they do not have to deal with War Dec's. NPC Corps should tax their members on all market transactions like they do for NPC Kills/ Mission rewards. During war players in real corps have increased risk in moving trade goods or incur higher cost in courier expenses. Additionally persons wanting to keep an alt out of a corporation to avoid eventual war dec's should be likewise penalized for the same behavior. If someone doesn't want to be War Dec'd then they should have to pay to opt out just like NPC mission runners currently do. |
Quade Warren
Urban Mining Corp Rising Phoenix Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 16:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
I do have some questions about production.
T2 BPO's. I think that statement encapsulates just about everything. It makes no sense for me to invent a T2 BPC with the risks involved and the inability to do _something_ to get out of the -4, -4 bind. It makes much more sense for me to buy a T2 BPC created off the T2 BPO's which would have better ME than I could possibly get with invention. In the long run, I personally think it's cheaper if you at least think of the saving time by circumventing the invention process, which is hard to guarantee on the more valuable items, iirc.
What are the CSM's thoughts on this?
Some examples, if all materials required were purchased off market. This is severely boiled down, but I am just painting a picture:
Invented Void M: -4, -4 (ME, PE)
Crystalline Carbonide - 24K Fullerides - 972000 R.A.M. Ammunition Tech - 36k
Trit - 39,480 Pyer - 74 Morphite - 5.5k Megacyte - 26.8k Zydrine - 90k Mex - 600
Total Min Cost: About 162-163K Total Cost: About 1.2 mil per batch
Rough cost is about 1194.454 isk per unit if I were to invent it myself. This does not factor in the cost of invention, just production once invention has been completed.
BPC from BPO Void M: 20, 20 (ME, PE)
Crystalline Carbonide - 16.1K Fullerides - 652050 R.A.M. Ammunition Tech - 36k
Trit - 26.5k Pyer - 50 Morphite - 3.6k Mega - 18k Zyd - 60k Mex - 380 Total Min Cost: 108k Total Cost: 812150
Rough cost is about 812.15 per unit if I were to purchase a BPC with 20 ME/PE. This does not factor in the cost of purchasing the BPC.
Since I rarely get the opportunity to purchase any T2 Hybrid ammo below 1K, I am assuming that the T2 producers that own BPO's are just banking, which I'm sure is more than stating the obvious. That is fine, let them bank... but I have absolutely no way to compete with them. They will ALWAYS have this edge because I cannot, iirc, get any better ME/PE than -4/-4 from invention. It'll always be easier for me to purchase BPC's because of any additional loss I have to accrue just to get the invented T2 BPC. Purchasing researched BPC's also just sends isk to their pockets, anyway, so this monopoly is total.
I remember seeing a Void L BPO in contracts along with some other rare BPC or BPO. Started at 36 billion... and I have to admit, I personally thought it would be worth the price if I had the isk.
Not worried about the guys that have done well in industry, I'm just annoyed that there is no way for me to work hard enough to compete with them. |
Myxx
Blacklight Incorporated Broken Chains Alliance
523
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 17:08:00 -
[18] - Quote
the only buff exhumers and other mining barges needs are a buff that incentivise players working together. perhaps a bonus to remote rep amount recieved rather than a local tank buff.
there is currently a huge gap that exists between the viability of certain haulers and where the need for a freighter starts. For example, there is no question beyond any shadow of a doubt that the iteron 5, with proper rigs, skills and mods is beyond all else the best t1 industrial hauler in the game, pre-freighters. There is simply no reason to use a badger or any other industrial if you're not going to skill into a freighter. |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
80
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 18:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
BPCs make no sense. Licensed production runs? Gimme a break. Either I know how to build something or I do not. Get rid of them as part of a revamping of the way production and invention work as a whole.
Find a way to bring industrial pilots (both miners and manufacturers) out to null and lowsec. This should be a top priority. Empire building should consist of something more than just farming rats for bounties and shooting at other players. You should actually have to, you know, build stuff. As it stands, pretty much everything is imported from highsec and this is a problem because industrialists should be able to enjoy the heart of EVE just as much as leet PvPers. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
371
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 19:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mechael wrote:BPCs make no sense. Lic.ensed production runs? Gimme a break. Either I know how to build something or I do not.
You do not; however, with a BPC, you plug it into a factory and the production line does the knowing for you.
Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
140
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 20:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
So for the really new players who make all their money off of level 1 2 and 3 missions, who aren't pimped out enough to get into incursions.......
We might want to lower the material costs of T1 frigates, destroyers, and cruisers. Nothing that would really effect an established player. But just enough that a noob grinding level 2 missions can get his first tristian or vexor.
Doubling ship prices by kicking out the supply of minerals from drone poo and reprocessing is a moderate annoyance to established players. But it can be a game destroying kick in the head to newer players (who might be more likely to unsub)
If you don't believe me, go roll up a new alt on one of your two other character slots. Don't give it any cash at all. And try to make enough money to buy your very first cruiser. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
371
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 21:17:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mining is tremendously boring, simplistic, and un-interactive: fix that with new types of mining that encourage players to actually stay at their keyboards while they mine, and even co-operate with other players to perform different roles within more complex (and rewarding) mining operations.
"Target rock, press F1, do something else for half an hour" really doesn't cut it as a key feature of a sophisticated modern MMO. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Seleene
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1584
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 21:28:00 -
[23] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Mining is tremendously boring, simplistic, and un-interactive: fix that with new types of mining that encourage players to actually stay at their keyboards while they mine, and even co-operate with other players to perform different roles within more complex (and rewarding) mining operations.
"Target rock, press F1, do something else for half an hour" really doesn't cut it as a key feature of a sophisticated modern MMO.
While I think that the current mechanic should be left in (as much as is feasible) for people that find it ~relaxing~, the rest of what you say is pretty much exactly how I feel about it. CSM 7 Chairman My Blog - Where I say stuff Follow Seleene on Twitter! |
Max Neumann
Neumann Heavy Indutries
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 21:42:00 -
[24] - Quote
I would love to see a version of the Orca without the ship maintenance bay/ fitting service and trade that space fore a bigger cargo hold and ore bay. I don't suggest expanding the corp bay as i understand some would hate that. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
371
|
Posted - 2012.05.18 21:44:00 -
[25] - Quote
Seleene wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Mining is tremendously boring, simplistic, and un-interactive: fix that with new types of mining that encourage players to actually stay at their keyboards while they mine, and even co-operate with other players to perform different roles within more complex (and rewarding) mining operations.
"Target rock, press F1, do something else for half an hour" really doesn't cut it as a key feature of a sophisticated modern MMO. While I think that the current mechanic should be left in (as much as is feasible) for people that find it ~relaxing~, the rest of what you say is pretty much exactly how I feel about it. Yeah, I meant new types of mining as well as the 'boring' kind - much like belt ratting still existed after the introduction of anomolies, if people really want to carry on with classic belt mining it shouldn't be taken away. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
281
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 00:07:00 -
[26] - Quote
Thank you for your attention to this topic during the CSM meeting. As someone that thoroughly enjoys industry and mining in game and someone who is incredibly frustrated with the lack of attention to this area for some time, IGÇÖm happy to provide some input. I hope this helps with improving the industry part of the game.
IGÇÖve basically organized this topic into the following sections:
Mining Ships UI (including PI) T2 Production
Mining
High sec vs. Low/Null Sec The basic issue I see with mining that I find is that there is little incentive for someone to move to null sec to mine over high sec. In short, for increased risk in high sec, you should get increased rewards. However, what instead happens is a huge pita to mine in null over high sec and the rewards do not really scale. While the change to drone poo was welcomed, there are still fundamental issues with mining in null sec. Consider the following list of pros and cons:
High sec mining Pros GÇô Rats can be tanked with light drones that fit into any mining barge; you can obtain perfect refining in every region and have access to 50% refining capability; given current mineral prices; you can earn 32 million isk per hour with a maxxed hulk; no need to tank your hulk for rats as they do not do enough damage to really matter if you are paying attention and allows max yield; hauling minerals you mined to station is easy and can sell quickly; can mine relatively afk for long periods of time. Cons GÇô hulkageddon and random gankers; no high end ore access
Null sec mining Pros GÇô high end ores, rorqual boosts and compression Cons GÇô Depending on system, the availability of high end ores varies or requires an upgrade that then requires consistent mining to maintain the ore level; lack of ore consistency GÇô several belts have random ore types and do not include some at all. For example, I have no access to Kernite, Plagiclose, or Pyroxeres in natural belts, which are all sources of mexallon; rats require a tanked hulk (reducing yield) or an extra ship to tank/kill them; Reds in system; lack of decent base refining requires better skills and more training; ore tax on refineries that can be eliminated in high sec; shipping ore to a refining station can be several jumps requiring either compression or a freighter trip(!); markets are not as robust to sell raw ore quickly.
In short, why move to nullsec to mine? So I can mine a little Arkonor from the hidden belts to make a little more iskGǪexcept after 10% tax, lower yield on my hulk due to tanking, and the absolute pain in the butt to move ore and sell it? There isnGÇÖt a way to get people out of high-sec (forget about low sec) to mine.
Possible Solutions: 1 GÇô Increase the number of asteroids in natural belts, include all variants for that faction and put drone regions in their own type of space that includes some sort of way to get all ores if need be. This isnGÇÖt going to be a heavy lift nor would it be unbalancing. 2 GÇô Increase the amount of ore in hidden belts so that large corps do not have to fight over who gets the ABCM and who doesnGÇÖt. There is no incentive to leave high sec without access to the ABCM ores. 3 GÇô Look at station refine rates and taxes to bring them to some sort of parity with high-sec or allow players to reduce the level of skill to get perfect refining. Perhaps look at paying station taxes with isk instead of ore GÇô the issue isnGÇÖt being taxed, the issue is not having minerals to build ships with (yes I realize the corp that owns the station gets this). 4 GÇô see ship suggestions below. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
281
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 00:07:00 -
[27] - Quote
Ships
Rorqual GÇô why is it that to get bonuses by the biggest and best mining support ship in the game, we need to use it in siege mode to get said bonuses? An orca provides 5% bonus by doing nothing yet to get any bonus from the Rorqual you need to burn heavy water and put it in siege. Given that this ship costs 2billion isk, thatGÇÖs kind of a kick in the face when you think about it. Suggest changing the bonus to 5% for all gang links when not in siege mode and 10% when in siege. This gets you orca bonuses without needing to buy an orca or go into siege. Finally, can we put minerals in the ore hanger? Pretty please?
Hulk GÇô As said above, there is no need to tank a hulk in high sec (outside of hulkageddon, which probably still wonGÇÖt matter overall depending on the number of gankers). In 0.0 you need to sacrifice your yield for additional tank to solo mine (yeah, I know itGÇÖs a MMO but sometimes you want to just mine and no one is on) either requiring a big tank or an alt. Both alternatives are not helpful to getting new players to null sec.
Solution is either to give the Hulk more mid/low slots or make a new mining ship. Upgrading the hulk wonGÇÖt solve the problem because another low slot just allows another MLU for high-sec ships to have fun with.
Making a new mining ship is a possibility (which I know people hate but hear me out). The ship would have say, 4 strips, increased power grid, increased cpu and allow for tank+ max yield. Think several mids, 3 rig slots, and say 3 lows. Limit the ship to low/null sec and add limited jump drive capability (ie on the range of a black ops). Make it a capital mining ship that requires Capital mining ships and Exhumers 5 to use. On bonuses, perhaps allow the same as the hulk. This addresses several issues, 1 GÇô increased yield in null sec for building ships to blow up, 2 GÇô increased risk but increased reward (see mining above), 3 - better incentive to go to null sec and give a goal for new players that want to go with capital mining (you canGÇÖt really mine in a rorq), 4 GÇô allows high sec to do the same thing itGÇÖs doing now, 5 GÇô training time requirement makes it not a ship that just anyone will want to get GÇôitGÇÖs the mining ship to have.
Covetor GÇô Please for the love of all that is good and true, can you remove the Astrogeology 5 requirement to fly this ship??? Right now for new players, the progression is mine in a frigGǪmove to an Osprey or ScytheGǪyay Retriever!...wait, WTF? I have to train how long to fly the next one and then after that itGÇÖs just a few hours to fly a hulk? LAME! Seriously, really a simple change that makes mining much more bearable for new players and doesnGÇÖt require everyone to basically train for a hulk to use GÇô please do it!
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
281
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 00:10:00 -
[28] - Quote
UI
The industry UI is horrible. You know this. In short, 90% of what people have a problem with is the click fest that is industry (I address PI below). So what do we do about it? First off, IGÇÖve made the following suggestions several times and only once, after hounding a dev, did I get a reply. These should be *simple* changes.
- Show number of manufacturing and invention/research jobs available in the blueprints tab of science & industry - i.e. Change Max Manufacturing Jobs 10 to Remaining Manufacturing Jobs 4/10 (showing 4 jobs left)
- Right click for any blueprint, only show options that are available for that type. Right now you show all options. For example only show:
T1 Copy - Manufacture and Invent T2 Copy - Manufacture T1 BPO - Manufacture, Copy, Material Research, Time Research T2 BPO - Manufacture, Copy, Material Research, Time Research T3 BPC - Manufacture Relic (not a BP but same issue) - Reverse Engineering Manufacturing - Add an option to manufacturing for T2 BPC's to 'Manufacture All' that automatically populates the Runs button with the max runs for the BPC. I.e. 10 for most items
- Inventing- Click Flow, changes in bold: Right click, choose invent. CCP change - Highlight Pick Installation (Selecting OK doesn't make any sense here), double click select installation, CCP change - Highlight OK Button. CCP change - Highlight Accept Quote button
- Manufacturing - Click Flow, changes in bold: Right click, choose manufacturing. CCP change - Highlight Pick Installation, double click select installation, CCP change - highlight OK Button.
Here are some ideas that might not be as easy:
- Select multiple T1 Copies and right click to GÇ£Invent AllGÇ¥
- Change the UI to use the lowest time industry slot. Right now you list all 20 GÇô I donGÇÖt care. I just want the one that says GÇ£ReadyGÇ¥ or the one with the lowest que time. Why even show the others? Sure itGÇÖs nice to know but maybe just display them in the accept box and automatically select the lowest time for me. Again, remove some clicks!
- Allow remote manufacturing, invention, research for items in POS modules. ItGÇÖs great to have a 50% bonus on invention but hell, not when I have to go back and forth to the POS all day! You added POSs due to the massive over queing, let us use them!
- Reactions at a POS GÇô I simply would not wish this on my worst enemy. The UI for using silos and reactions is horrible. Simply horrible. Unless youGÇÖve made some updates recently, all I remember is that it is near impossible to tell what is going on (when itGÇÖs reacting), what is linked to what, or what time you have left to the next cycle. This is such an integral part to T2 and T3 production that it really deserves some attention. Just showing in the UI what the reactors are doing currently, adding a cycle time, and showing what each part is linked to for silo setups would be a huge improvement.
Planetary Interaction
First off, IGÇÖd like to say thanks for the work on this. I really enjoy PI and others do too. ItGÇÖs a great concept and the effect on null space is just awesome imo.
OK, hereGÇÖs the biggest issue GÇô the clickingGǪthe neverGǪendingGǪclicking. Why do I have to click every single factory to do a schematic, then route itGǪthen go to the place where the raw mats are stored, then click EACH one into the factoryGǪ? Ugh!
Solutions GÇô Allow selecting several factoryGÇÖs at once, (alt click? GÇô control click makes links, which is awesome btw) and then select the schematic or GÇÿCreate routeGÇÖ then the final location. Same with inputs. Something to make this faster and less painful. Another option might be to do auto linking perhaps with a setting in the command center or something.
Other ideas:
- Allow us to move extractors. Nothing more frustrating than having to destroy something you are just going to build again because you want to extract something else, then go through the head setup and all that again. Is it really going to kill the game to let us do this without burning isk?
- Let us color code factories. I would love it to see on my production planet with 24 p2/p3 factories what groups I have set up and whereGǪoh, purple is SuperconductorsGǪand yellow is biocells, right.
- Let us name our planets in the Industry UI. Right now I donGÇÖt have a clue what I have on Planet IVGǪletting me name it to say GÇ£P4 productionGÇ¥ would be great. If you think this is petty GÇô think about those that do PI with 5+ characters.
- Double the size/half the cpu/pg cost of the storage facility GÇô thanks for the recent update but itGÇÖs still pretty useless over a Launchpad. PI is an isk sink when it comes to taxes to import/export all day long. Allowing storage on the planet that is really storage would be a great way to reduce the imports and exports from multiple planets. If I want to make P2 and P3 on the same planet, let us. WeGÇÖll get taxed anyway. Again, think PI with 5+ characters.
- Add more skills GÇô PI is really, really easy to max out. Unforgiven StormGÇÖs post in this thread with a link to his other post has some really great ideas. Simple changes, please add. IGÇÖd love to be able to use a skill to increase the range of my extractors or lessen the cost of pg/cpu for things likeGǪhey! Storage facilities! ;)
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
281
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 00:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
T2 Production
I for one did a bunch of T2 in empire. Made a ton of isk. Even made a program to make more isk from T2. So I have some experience in this area and I feel there are several places for improvement.
First GÇô Please explain this: "We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec." - CCP Soundwave https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1230077#post1230077
What does he mean? I could read this several ways. One way would be that they want to move ALL T2 production to low and zero-sec. That is going to kill the market. Simply KILL it. There are so many moving parts to T2 production that breaking up market hubs will do nothing but make it harder to do and much more expensive. You said it in this thread GÇô someone has to build the ships. Moving it all to null/low isnGÇÖt going to make that happen. You might want it to happen but the reality of the game is that industry people like doing what they do and honestly, they might not even want to go to null sec.
Another way to read that is that you want to ALLOW T2 to be MUCH (emphasis mine) easier in null and low sec. On that I totally agree. One thing I hate right now is that I canGÇÖt do invention in null sec with the ease I could in high sec. Wait, noGǪ.canGÇÖt really do it at *all* in null sec. You have to ship out data cores to inventGǪok, not huge but ok. Then you have to get moon mats. Well some say, thatGÇÖs where they come from silly! Have you ever reacted anything? Oh dear god itGÇÖs horrible (see above) and to make an item that takes one T2 component, you need several reactions just to one! For example, T2 scourge missiles (hugely popular item) require a graviton pulse generator, which takes 3 advanced materials. Those 3 are made with 8 intermediate materials. Those 8 require GÇô 2 to 3 additional base moon materials each. So you can potentially be looking at about 20 different items you need to moon mine for just to make one item. Now look at making manticores. Yeah, itGÇÖs a pain. This is why Jita is so important to T2 production and why something needs to be done for null sec T2 production. Honestly, IGÇÖm not sure what. Hell, maybe just throw in some NPC delivery/courier service for T2 components only and call it good.
But in the end, T2 production in null/low sec = good thing, just donGÇÖt kill empire doing it.
Second issue with T2, yeahGǪIGÇÖm going to say it, T2 BPOs. I pretty much donGÇÖt have a huge issue with them but they are an issue. They exist and getting rid of them now doesnGÇÖt make any sense - I get it. Also, the number of items made with these BPOs are in markets that donGÇÖt really have too much demand (command ships for instance). But itGÇÖs when comparing them to invention that the inequality comes in. QQ noob you say? Well ok, but on the 21st you are moving datacores to the FW store all because you have a concern about this passive income stream. How does this not apply to T2 BPOs? Perhaps you havenGÇÖt experienced the pain of invention but the difference between those that have and those that do not is not insignificant. Case in point, the negative ME/PE on invented items really doesnGÇÖt make much sense. For instance, a Hulk BPC, 1 run costs about 17mil to invent. So yeah, a T2 BPO holder is making out on that. But compare a -4 ME copy to a 0 ME BPO and you are looking at ~50mil profit difference. ThatGÇÖs with no research at all. Say the owner spends the time to get the BPO to 5. Now itGÇÖs ~60mil (Over that itGÇÖs diminishing returns). Add to that and you are looking at over 75mil in profit. So thatGÇÖs really the issue here.
Solution: Add a formula that increases the ME/PE of the invented blueprint based on the ME/PE of the BPC. Scrapyard Bob suggested the following formula: T2 ME = Sqrt(T1 ME) GÇô 5. So with a ME 100 BPC: Sqrt(ME 100) = 10, subtract 5 and you'd end up with a T2 BPC of ME 5. This is one idea, but I think itGÇÖs on the right track. This way the research matters for invention (right now it does not really outside of the T1 item if needed) and the T2 BPOGÇÖs can stay in game, still have the advantages they enjoy now (no datacores, no invention, clicky clicky maky isky) but the gap between those that own T2 BPOs and inventors wonGÇÖt be as large.
T1 Copies GÇô This is a huge bottleneck for T2 production. We donGÇÖt have access to enough copy slots in empire and this almost requires people to use POSs and adds its own problems. I guess increasing slots just allows more people to que with alts (guilty!) but something needs to be done. The GÇ£research POSGÇ¥ really only exists to do research. That seems like an awful waste of time and effort.
R.A.M. use GÇô Right now the R.A.M. items are just illogicalGǪseriously, defying logic. You want to make 10 T2 items, you need 10 R.A.M.s. But hey, they only take 5% damage per run, shouldnGÇÖt I just need 1? Nope, you need 10 and youGÇÖll like it! I just donGÇÖt get it. Imagine someone trying to do production at a POS that needs tons of these (and canGÇÖt repair them). Say you need 100 but only damage 10? How does that make any sense?
Solutions: One solution is to dump them all together. Problem solved. Yes, they have some sort of emersion/storyline factor but honestly, IGÇÖm not sure they will be missed. Another solution is to allow them to stack based on damage needed. Example above, if it takes 5% damage each run and you want to run 20 runs, then you need 1 R.A.M.
ThatGÇÖs all I have for now. Yes, all. IGÇÖm sure I have more, but I hope that gives you some insight into the industry world from someone who does a lot of it. Thanks for reading! Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1422
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 02:30:00 -
[30] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Yeah, I meant new interesting types of mining as well as the 'boring' kind - much like belt ratting still existed after the introduction of anomalies, if people really want to carry on with classic belt mining it shouldn't be taken away.
Have a look at my Mining is Boring post, see if there's anything there of interest - particularly the idea of progressive enhancement + graceful degradation. |
|
Skorpynekomimi
195
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 03:58:00 -
[31] - Quote
- Give an incentive to mine at the keyboard, beyond 'I might get ganked'. - More disincentives to suicide ganking; it's cheap cowardly pvp. - Continue to remove bots. I like the new mineral prices. - Add a 'units sold in the last X units of time' function in the market, so it's easier to find what to make. |
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour
106
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 06:41:00 -
[32] - Quote
advanced mass production/ advanced laboratory operation, change to +2 slots per skill level, so you end up with 16 max. Because 11 is an awkward number.
Industry inside a corporation needs corporate roles looked at.
someone who only needs to be able to manufacture some ammunition, shouldn't need to have the corporate roles, POS roles and access that allow them to drunkenly/maliciously/accidentally screw up some far more important things involving assembly arrays and corporate hangar contents.
"boss, i got drunk and accidentally cancelled a supercap job when i was trying to deliver 10000 rounds of EMP S. sorry :(" should be preventable.
Even something like industry divisions, would go a long way to help with this.
Mining ships, if any more defences are required, then, they should have more hull hp, a lot more, at the penalty of not being able to fit hull reps. Concept of difficult to destroy completely, but expensive to repair if damaged. |
Revolution Rising
Gentlemen of Better Ilk
325
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 06:57:00 -
[33] - Quote
Frankly there are PLENTY of ideas up on these forums already.
- Put t2 minerals into 0.0 - as a balance feature as well as allowing mining corps obvious game progression, CONSIDER putting high end minerals in low-sec.
- Fix Spodzilla in the grav sites in 0.0. If a PVP player goes to make some money
1) he doesn't need a scan probe launcher to find a site he just hits his scan button. By comparison miners need to scan down a grav site. 2) He can complete the site ON HIS OWN IN MINUTES. By comparison it takes a group of 10 guys at least a day minimum to mine the site out and most of that is WASTED EFFORT because of spodzilla in the belt - no belt will respawn until the old one is gone. As a result people cherry pick and it makes the entire situation useless for others who wish to mine as a social or money making venture because they then have to mine spodumain for 3 days.
- Fix Industrial queueing for research, invention and production. There has to be a better way than logging on once every 2 hours to change jobs.
- Put some in-game tools in place to allow mining corps to PAY THEIR MINERS AUTOMATICALLY - If I want to buy trit from my miners at -10% jita price, I should be able to set those prices and accept ore AUTOMATICALLY. We should not be spending HOURS dealing with contracts and working out each contract and seeing if it's accurate or not. Throw the ore into a specified hangar, pay the miner from a specified wallet. Deal done. Why is this so hard?
- Consider putting corp contracts and mining payouts in place in your new modular POS's - some people don't HAVE stations to do this in - they have a POS and a Rorqual.
- Give us a ******* break - and i'm dead serious in this point. You don't give a ******* thought to what happens to industry every time you make a change to the game. POS Fuel prices have almost doubled since PI came in, t3 BC's ganking in empire without any HP buffs to transports or freighters. Some peoples' lives in-game are made a living hell every time you do this ****.
CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Lord Zim
658
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 08:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
Revolution Rising wrote:thereby increasing the income gap between people that have and have not got t2 bpo's.
[...]
T2 BPO's - Seriously, you guys are full of so much **** on this issue. You know, it's never good to envy someone for no good reason. |
Anshu Zephyran
Children of Armok Ushra'Khan
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 08:25:00 -
[35] - Quote
I posted my ideas on my blog, so I'll just summarize here and assume that people who want the details can click the link.
- Merge Mining Barge and ORE Industrial skills. Mining barges are industrial ships made by ORE, right?
- Make hull repair modules not-worthless. In fact, make them a bit better than armor reps, since you'll be in hull by the time you turn them on.
- Redo the size (in m3) of Strips and mining crystals to something sane and consistent.
- Introduce new modules, new drones, and new anchorable structures to give players more tools and options
- Make the mining barges less ****, and make them all useful. The Procurer can be the fast and nimble one that mines quickly; the Covetor the big, tough, slow one that can park in a belt and not move; and the Retriever can be the middling one, slower than the Procurer but not as tough as the Covetor.
|
Nevigrofnu Mrots
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 09:16:00 -
[36] - Quote
Anshu Zephyran wrote:
Merge Mining Barge and ORE Industrial skills. Mining barges are industrial ships made by ORE, right?
this makes 100% sense, but maybe is better on the balance ships topic |
Tarkelan
ARES Unlimited
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 10:05:00 -
[37] - Quote
The ores in lowsec need a change to make them more profitable. So maybe adjust the mineral mix of lowsec ores might be a solution.
Remove T2 BPOs. They are just to powerful and keep in mind that CCP made some really bad moves when they were introduced.
Keep track of the changes to the acquire datacores and adjust the system if needed.
The production and science related UIs could use some love to lower the amounts of clicks to get something runing. |
Lord Zim
659
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 10:06:00 -
[38] - Quote
Tarkelan wrote:Remove T2 BPOs. They are just to powerful and keep in mind that CCP made some really bad moves when they were introduced. Says who? |
Tarkelan
ARES Unlimited
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 10:28:00 -
[39] - Quote
It's related to a T20 years ago and a certain lottery. So CCP was involved long, long ago.
BPOs can be researched to use less recources and time. The invention system can do similar things with specific items which are far more expensive than the inital research on a BPO in the long run.
So remove the T2 BPOs or skip invention and sell the T2 BPOs by NPC to everyone who wants them. Could be a nice ISK sink. |
Lord Zim
659
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 10:32:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tarkelan wrote:It's related to a T20 years ago and a certain lottery. So CCP was involved long, long ago.
BPOs can be researched to use less recources and time. The invention system can do similar things with specific items which are far more expensive than the inital research on a BPO in the long run.
So remove the T2 BPOs or skip invention and sell the T2 BPOs by NPC to everyone who wants them. Could be a nice ISK sink. So you're pulling the T20 card to get something removed from the game when it's been shown repeatedly that what you gain in material usage in most markets, inventors gain in production speed, which means that in most markets the price limiting factor isn't the BPO owners, but the people inventing and producing off of BPCs. |
|
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
87
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 12:39:00 -
[41] - Quote
T2 BPOs Could they not just have a list of BPCs that have BPO equivalents, and simply make those ME/PE 0? So if you invent a BPC which has a T2 BPO out there, it's 0/0 instead of -4/-4 automatically. That still gives the owner of the BPOs which researched them an advantage, but not so large of one that there can't be some play. Industrials It would be nice for a mid-sized freighter. Something in the 100-200k m3 range. Would be useful for WHs, instead of needing fleets of itty5s. It would be more of the bread and butter haulers, without the need of the bonuses that an Orca or a jump freighter provides. POS/Corp Roles I know they say they've got plans for an overhaul, but it's really a critical issue that's been delayed too long. In my opinion, it's enough of an issue to be a major feature in the winter expansion.
|
Lord Zim
659
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 12:49:00 -
[42] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote:T2 BPOs Could they not just have a list of BPCs that have BPO equivalents, and simply make those ME/PE 0? So if you invent a BPC which has a T2 BPO out there, it's 0/0 instead of -4/-4 automatically. That still gives the owner of the BPOs which researched them an advantage, but not so large of one that there can't be some play. People producing from T2 BPOs can't compete with the quantity of people producing from BPCs. |
Aleena Doran
Squaddies
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 13:07:00 -
[43] - Quote
"People producing from T2 BPOs can't compete with the quantity of people producing from BPCs"
Unfortunately the above statement is just not true.
As an example do a search in contracts for veldspar T2 mining crystal BPCs. You will see many BPCs with stats something like Runs=10 Material=-4 Productivity=-4. You will also see some with stats like Runs=100 Material=90 Productivity = 100 ... guess which BPC was produced by invention and which from a BPO. The market is saturated by BPO owners and you loose isk attempting to produce T2 mining crystals by invention. I know - I tried. |
Lord Zim
659
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 13:11:00 -
[44] - Quote
So that's the only market T2 BPO owners can compete with people who manufacture from BPCs? Mining crystals? |
Eidric
Shadows of HyperSpace Wormholes Holders
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 15:24:00 -
[45] - Quote
Here is my proposal\research on mining, I've decided to put in in separate thread since it is fairly large. |
Traidir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 16:50:00 -
[46] - Quote
Fun is crafting a positive outcomes through a sequence of critical decisions. In mining, the positive outcome is "you get ore" or "you get lotsa ore". Currently the "critical decisions" are all made before you go mining (how to fit your ship, where to mine, what to mine). During the actual mining, unless there is interference from others, there are no critical decisions (i.e. press f1, done), which is exactly why the "mining" isn't fun. Thus, to make the mining itself "fun", we need to add "critical decisions" to the mining process.
So what could these choices be? The key is to come up with activities that reward active thinking:
- Calibrating mining lasers to improve yield
- Targeted sweet spots on asteroids (nuggets of high yield ore?)
- Breaking asteroids apart in a special sequence in order to access deep veins of more valuable ore without destroying it
- Non-npc hazards to be defended against or avoided, such as dust, collisions, and radiation
- Cooperative gameplay, where two or more players must coordinate efforts to achieve an outcome
Here's a couple of possible examples embodying some of these ideas: Alice and Bob fly into an asteroid field. They both target the same asteroid and activate special scanners to analyze the rock's composition. At this point a new "Analysis" window opens for them both, similar to the Planetary Interaction view. Together, Alice and Bob use a (depth limited, resolution limited) 3D heat map of the asteroid to plan how to slice up the asteroid for maximum yield. Like cutting diamonds, each stroke of the mining lasers must be carefully placed to avoid destroying up the "nuggets" of high yield ore. For this, accurate scanning skills are critical, as are precision mining laser skills. Alice is a skilled scanner and marks positions for the lasers to cut, while Bob is a surgeon with the mining laser who makes each cut with good accuracy. Together they recover 70% of the nuggets undamaged. For their time and effort, they receive what is effectively "compressed ore", meaning players skilled at this type of mining can pull in a much more valuable load with the same cargo space. If they had taken more time and been slightly more cautious with their cuts, they could have gotten an 80% yield, but, in this field, there's plenty of rocks to be had and it was more cost effective to move quickly.
Later, they encounter a tricky asteroid with pockets of explosive material within. Concerned that an accidental explosion from a stray cut might might set off a chain reaction, destroying the asteroid, they call in their friend Charlie, who specializes in using tractor beams to manipulate sections of rock. After he warps in, Charlie simply locks onto the same asteroid and activates his own special scanner. With Charlie's tractor beams directed toward the dangerous areas, they proceed with the extraction. A scanning error causes a beam to slice through an explosive section, fortunately Charlie's tractor beam aperture is large enough to encompass the explosion, redirecting the debris away from the reset of the asteroid, minimizing the damage.
In this scenario, paired tractor beams might also be able to "pull" the rocks apart as an alternative to mining lasers. While somewhat "instanced" by the use of an "Analysis Window", other parties can still participate in the mini-sandbox by bringing in their own scanners. Indeed, they could even "compete" or "grief" by making their own cuts. |
Reinheart Novan
Invictus Mortalitus Paradox Initiative
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 18:27:00 -
[47] - Quote
The current mining mechanic is perfectly ok as far as I'm concerned. I mine ATK for a an hour ot two weeknights and several hours on the weekends.
I use that time to go through my spreadsheets to determine the margins for what to produce, manage my production lines and the rest of those activities we need to do. I am scanning to maximise my yeilds and cherry picking the roids for the production I am doing plenty enough to feel engaged as it is.These ideas that I want to be clicking constantly to enjoy myself couldn't be further from the truth. If I'm having a night I feel the need for that sort of thing I'll do plexes or missions.
On datacores, if the issue was passive income, why not just have made them put out RP on missions only. No amount of putting stuff into FW stores is going to make me go into FW so instead I'll have to buy them and see how that affects the bottom line/marks ups.
Personally I find PVP boring, you spend ages getting a ship ready then wander around for hours looking for fights and get killed in minutes. While it's great people do enjoy that, I do not. I would suggest that I am not alone. Any changes should support the sandbox and let us decide what activities we wish to do not force us into any particular space (that is not null, lo or highsec) or particular activities. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
376
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 18:45:00 -
[48] - Quote
Reinheart Novan wrote:The current mining mechanic is perfectly ok as far as I'm concerned. I mine ATK for a an hour ot two weeknights and several hours on the weekends.
I use that time to go through my spreadsheets to determine the margins for what to produce, manage my production lines and the rest of those activities we need to do. I am scanning to maximise my yeilds and cherry picking the roids for the production I am doing plenty enough to feel engaged as it is.These ideas that I want to be clicking constantly to enjoy myself couldn't be further from the truth. If I'm having a night I feel the need for that sort of thing I'll do plexes or missions.
The fact that you are concentrating on spreadsheets and a bunch of other things at the same time as cycling your mining lasers, because the activity is so passive that you have to dedicate minimal attention to it, isn't exactly helping your argument.
Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Lord Zim
662
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 18:51:00 -
[49] - Quote
Reinheart Novan wrote:Personally I find PVP boring, you spend ages getting a ship ready then wander around for hours looking for fights and get killed in minutes. While it's great people do enjoy that, I do not. I would suggest that I am not alone. Any changes should support the sandbox and let us decide what activities we wish to do not force us into any particular space (that is not null, lo or highsec) or particular activities. How about you make an alliance with people who will do this "fighting" for you, if you find it so boring? |
Avila Cracko
363
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 19:47:00 -
[50] - Quote
Ill leave this here:
Mining changes with anti-botting measures:
Quote:- make belts so that you must scan them... (botts can't do scanning very well, and it will be more involving)... (maybe add some more statics on scans too so that you must have brain to see its only statics) - static belts have only very small roids for new players... (strips dont have use if it) - when you left scanned belt, after cca 5 minutes belt is gone... you must scan again... (so that botters cant scan all belts in the morning and have botts mining them all day long) - make fleeting with other players and making real ops more rewarding then solo mining (maybe make orca/rorq boost better) - botts dont fleet - Boost rats, give them scram and EW (make them smarter) - botts have more problems with defending themself then real people, and it would be more involving.
And, what you said, scanned belts need to be bigger then grav sites. Maybe, make grav sites so stay like they are, with better ores, but harder to scan down then ordinary belts. (belts must not be too easy to scan - you must use probes (probing is now in noobs career missions so even noobs know how to probe things)) truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. |
|
Lord Zim
662
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 20:00:00 -
[51] - Quote
Avila Cracko wrote:- make belts so that you must scan them... (botts can't do scanning very well, and it will be more involving)... (maybe add some more statics on scans too so that you must have brain to see its only statics) My, my, aren't you cute and naive? |
Reinheart Novan
Invictus Mortalitus Paradox Initiative
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 20:42:00 -
[52] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Reinheart Novan wrote:Personally I find PVP boring, you spend ages getting a ship ready then wander around for hours looking for fights and get killed in minutes. While it's great people do enjoy that, I do not. I would suggest that I am not alone. Any changes should support the sandbox and let us decide what activities we wish to do not force us into any particular space (that is not null, lo or highsec) or particular activities. How about you make an alliance with people who will do this "fighting" for you, if you find it so boring?
Our Corp and alliance has plenty of people that do that, for which I am grateful, as I'm sure they are for what the Industrial members do. That's the great thing with Eve that each can do what they enjoy the most without being shoehorned into having to toddle off and do the things they do want to do. I'm merely reinforcing that aspect needs to be retained in whatever we changes and updates go through.
On that I feel the new ally changes coming through will be great for the small highsec industry corps as again it supports those aspects. |
Reinheart Novan
Invictus Mortalitus Paradox Initiative
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.19 20:52:00 -
[53] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Reinheart Novan wrote:The current mining mechanic is perfectly ok as far as I'm concerned. I mine ATK for a an hour ot two weeknights and several hours on the weekends.
I use that time to go through my spreadsheets to determine the margins for what to produce, manage my production lines and the rest of those activities we need to do. I am scanning to maximise my yeilds and cherry picking the roids for the production I am doing plenty enough to feel engaged as it is.These ideas that I want to be clicking constantly to enjoy myself couldn't be further from the truth. If I'm having a night I feel the need for that sort of thing I'll do plexes or missions. The fact that you are concentrating on spreadsheets and a bunch of other things at the same time as cycling your mining lasers, because the activity is so passive that you have to dedicate minimal attention to it, isn't exactly helping your argument.
My argument is, I feel there is nothing wrong with the make up of mining. Making sure I'm not running my lasers for a full cycle when that roid only has 5% of a cycles worth of ore left, that I'm mining the minerals I need the most for my production lines and that those production lines are running the right things is keyed in with that acitivity.
After all the CSM has asked here for feedback. I have provided mine. I'm sure they'll look at all the posts and push what is the consensus. At least now I have put my tuppence in made my contribution. |
Revolution Rising
Gentlemen of Better Ilk
325
|
Posted - 2012.05.20 11:25:00 -
[54] - Quote
Yeah I have zero issue with the mining mechanic itself, it allows for people to socialise and do other things while they mine - like build queues, invention and planning - mining shouldn't NEED to be a "busy" exercise. In fact many people like it currently BECAUSE it's not busy and they can do it and relax while they do it.
CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
380
|
Posted - 2012.05.20 22:37:00 -
[55] - Quote
Revolution Rising wrote:Yeah I have zero issue with the mining mechanic itself, it allows for people to socialise and do other things while they mine - like build queues, invention and planning - mining shouldn't NEED to be a "busy" exercise. In fact many people like it currently BECAUSE it's not busy and they can do it and relax while they do it. Like I (and Seleene) said earlier, new interactive and co-operative forms of mining should be bought in alongside the existing (passive, boring) version.
Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Stigman Zuwadza
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 04:46:00 -
[56] - Quote
A few suggestions that I would personally find helpful:
GÇó Show Invention Times. GÇó Providing information regarding Possible Invention Outcomes. GÇó Data Sheets: Change Their Volume.
Fly safe. o7 CCP: Cloak Hunters --- CSM: Cautiously positive. CSM Summit Dec 2011 - Minutes (see page 22). |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
460
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 05:37:00 -
[57] - Quote
Tarkelan wrote:
Remove T2 BPOs. They are just to powerful and keep in mind that CCP made some really bad moves when they were introduced.
.
Don't try to talk with the big boys by sounding like a whiney little kid.
Anyone who still believes that T2 BPO's are just too powerfull has no idea of invention / industry and shouldn't even attempt to bulge into a discussion about topics they clearly aren't cut out for.
|
Aleena Doran
Squaddies
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 12:43:00 -
[58] - Quote
"Don't try to talk with the big boys by sounding like a whiney little kid."
Dude, you're not helping your case. While it could be argued that EVE was never meant to be fair, and that the possession of T2 BPOs by the 'big boys' is perfectly consistent with that, EVE does suffer from a perception that gameplay and resources are dominated by established players ('big boys'?). The reality of this perception is detrimental to new player recruitment and retention.
A reasoned argument on why T2 BPOs ought to be retained would be more enlightening. |
Lord Zim
681
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 13:40:00 -
[59] - Quote
Aleena Doran wrote:A reasoned argument on why T2 BPOs ought to be retained would be more enlightening. T2 BPOs can, in most markets, be outperformed in volume by inventers. There's no point in fiddling with them just because "some people" can't see past their own jealousy. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
460
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 13:46:00 -
[60] - Quote
Aleena Doran wrote:
A reasoned argument on why T2 BPOs ought to be retained would be more enlightening.
I wish I could see it all like you do. Sadly enough I can't put my head up my arse that far. Because if you actually would have done some research and seen the rest of my comment you already saw my arguementation.
Anyone who believes that having a T2 BPO makes you out perform a serious inventor / builder is more than just diluded. If you really want to outperform a serious inventor/builder you need to have more than just 1 or 2 T2BPO's of the same item.
|
|
Tessla Coil
Pirannha Corp
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 16:28:00 -
[61] - Quote
+ eleventy million.
I want to know precisely what the null sec zealots are planning on doing. Of course, it is pointless to discuss anything in the csm threads, since the vast majority of the members are bought and paid for by said null sec zealots.
The high sec players in the game have one recourse: speak with your wallets. The csm speaks for anyone but high sec. |
Zhihatsu
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 16:42:00 -
[62] - Quote
Tessla Coil wrote:+ eleventy million. I want to know precisely what the null sec zealots are planning on doing. Of course, it is pointless to discuss anything in the csm threads, since the vast majority of the members are bought and paid for by said null sec zealots. The high sec players in the game have one recourse: speak with your wallets. The csm speaks for anyone but high sec.
I like your spunk. Tell me more about how most of the CSM delegates are bought and sold like slaves. Number of calories in a cubic lightyear of ham http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=number+of+calories+in+a+cubic+lightyear+of+ham |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
961
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 18:41:00 -
[63] - Quote
Plan is to introduce "T2 Production Arrays" that function like CSAAs in that they're sec-space exclusive, but not limited by sov and can be built in lowsec as well. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
961
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 18:42:00 -
[64] - Quote
Not really but that would be awesome. What would also be awesome is capital strip miners for rorquals that only work on low-end ore. Then miners/manufacturers would have an incentive to move to low/null and rorquals would have an element of risk to flying them |
Torneach
Emrys Enterprises
149
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 21:21:00 -
[65] - Quote
Players should be able to manufacture meta 1-4 items as well as faction/officer modules.
In fact, one could go so far as to say player manufacturing should be the only source of produced modules, and that destroyed mission and belt rats should just drop the components for these meta 1-4 items.
There should be a network of cooperation between combat and industry pilots - a combat pilot shouldn't be able to 'gun manufacture', and a pure industry pilot shouldn't have access to the materials for more advanced modules without fighting some sort of rat for the components. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
386
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 21:39:00 -
[66] - Quote
Torneach wrote:Players should be able to manufacture meta 1-4 items as well as faction/officer modules.
In fact, one could go so far as to say player manufacturing should be the only source of produced modules, and that destroyed mission and belt rats should just drop the components for these meta 1-4 items.
I've suggested it before, and it would be awesome - remove the whole idea of intact modules dropping from dead ships, and switch everything to a salvage-type system where you sift through the smashed up wreckage for raw components, which then have to be combined with a meta-0 item to produce the meta 1-4 item.
Put manufacturing truly back at the heart of the market. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Gevlin
Universal Might DSM FOUNDATION
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 22:50:00 -
[67] - Quote
I would like to see a retooling of T1 Ships Mining Barges all to be Tier 3 Ships Tech 1 Ships. 3 Classes - The Tank/ Utility support barge The Multi Target Low yield Drone Barge The Focused High Yield Glass Ship.
Can the t1 Ships be rebalanced Making the Procurer Retriever and the Covetor be on the same tier. Tier 4 or 3
Procurer: Procurer be focus on Tank and be able to use A strip miner and drones for mining and defence - to be able to be mine in the harshest of situations. Will have a bonus to Combat or Logistic Drones, Has a large drone bay but limited band with. Able to provide Replacement drones to Retrievers, or Logistic support to Covetors. USE: Type 1: This would be the hardened supporter of mining ops. Probably have one of these in every Group. TYPE 2: Used in missions that required a mining barge to be apart of the mission: Collecting a Major Rock or Ice Item, Providing Limited Logistic and Combat drone support to PVE gangs PVP Ships Ie Incursion Mining missions, High Suicide Gank areas, Be able to tank the most dangerous of belt with ease
Stats: Tank Medium Resists, Fair amount of Mid Slots, CPU and Power grid to build a tank as strong as a Battle Cruiser.
Retriever; Retriever to focus on Drone Mining (Hardened, Boosted, and numerous mining Drones) with support Mining lasers (Not Strip Miners, strip miner can be used but at a penalty) Minters focus on Mining several Small asteroids at once. (A mini Mining carrier) (Bandwith of 50 but able to use drones base 5 but also 1 per level of ship)(Drone bay 100m3) USE: TYPE 1:This would be the efficiency multiplier for a group or used by the mostly afk miner as they can select 10 targets and mine each of them slowly at the same time, Not having to worry about switching targets often or being hit by a stray shot. TYPE 2: It can also work in with other mining ships, finishing off the asteroids that would not give a full cycle to the Procurer or Covetor, and send drones out to mine a distant asteroid away from the rest. TYPE 3: It can work solo in Ie Areas where the belts are only contain small asteroids ie newly respawned belts in empire
Covetor: Covetor to Focus on Strip Miner mining pulling out the max ore per hour ratio between all the T1 ships. Is the Most Fragile. Yet it is able to sit in just 1 spot and mine the entire belt. You can mine like nuts but the tank is limited (ie current tank) A Destroyer can easily take you out. You make sure you have Military or Logistic support so when rats or suicide gankers come you might make it out alive. On the other hand you can mine the max ore as long as you watch you roids with a scanner so you don't loose time as the amount mined only takes up a portion of you mining cyele. You will mark Astriods for the Retriever to finish for you, as you don't have a drone bay to use mining drones. You rely on the Procerer to tank the belt for you, or a military ship, and rely on the logitics of the Procuerer drones, or (Military ship) to harden your tank, On the other hand those ship rely on you to bring in the Big bucks.
Procurer Stats Tanks Fair amount of Mid Slots, CPU and Power grid to build a tank as strong as a Battle Cruiser. 5% bonus to shield resists per level of Mining Barge Hold Small GÇô 2K Size Battle Cruiser similar to that of Covetor, Mining Laser Yield GÇô 1 Strip Miner at 3% per level of Mining barge bonus to yield Drones GÇô 10% Bonus to Repair of logistic drones and 10 %Bonus to Combat Drones. Drone Bay 150 m3, Drone Bandwith 50m3
Retriever stats: Standard resists Tank can be the strength of a Cruiser enough CPU and Power Grid to support it. Hold 4K Size Battle Cruiser Similar to that of a covetor. Mining Laser Yield GÇô Either 2x Mining Lasers at 200% capacity or Strip Miners at 50% Capacity. Mining drones 10% Bonus to yield and Hit points Per level of mining Barge and 1 Extra drone to be used per level. Drones GÇô Drone Bay 50m3, Drone Bandwidth 50m3
Covetor stats Destroyer Tank limited CPU and Grid to only allow Max Mining with minimal tank Hold 4k Size Battle Cruiser Similar to that of an old covetor Mining Lazer Yield 3x Strip miners with a 7.5% bonus per level which is equivalent to a current covetor mining with lasers and mining drones at max level. Drones GÇô None 1 Mid slot for Rock scanner Benefits Just point and Click at roid. Watch scanner to avoid wasted cycles. Watch local for Suicide gankers, No need to wait for travel time for Drones
The Goons are Coming, The Goons are Coming Jita the April 28, Hulk a geddon April 29 for a month. The Best Tears are the Geifer's Tears. just hope the new crime watch system is in place by then.... oh the chaos will rain!!! |
Gevlin
Universal Might DSM FOUNDATION
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 23:03:00 -
[68] - Quote
Tessla Coil wrote:+ eleventy million. I want to know precisely what the null sec zealots are planning on doing. Of course, it is pointless to discuss anything in the csm threads, since the vast majority of the members are bought and paid for by said null sec zealots. The high sec players in the game have one recourse: speak with your wallets. The csm speaks for anyone but high sec.
Have you played in Null sec? Alll null sec player have played in null sec and have alts in high sec. Do you have alts in Null sec.
it seems I have a man saying his side of the story is better with out ever reading or understanding the other side's story.
Risk vs reward is the underlying theme. So we should allow all production to be exclusive to high sec and keep high sec safe. Sorry that sounds like someone who want to keep hitting the I win button. If you want to produce and play in a safe haven, that should cost and that cost is Oppotutinity. T2 Production is slowly moving out of High sec with the Reward of Data cores moving to low sec though faction warfare and null sec though exploration rewards. This is a great Step.
I am looking forward to Ring mining which was suggested for winter with the rare moon ore in Null sec.
The Goons are Coming, The Goons are Coming Jita the April 28, Hulk a geddon April 29 for a month. The Best Tears are the Geifer's Tears. just hope the new crime watch system is in place by then.... oh the chaos will rain!!! |
Gevlin
Universal Might DSM FOUNDATION
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 23:12:00 -
[69] - Quote
I am also waiting/hoping for the feature of custom goods and local markets as apart of establishments which never appeared.
This will allow me to sell to selected individuals Advertise my specific unique Cargo Expander or ship hull that may have a few unique quirks that I have discovered how to make. --> I would like to see an experiment system that would produce a BPO of my unique item so only after countless attempted tried and Billions spent I finally tweak the unique item. I would also have lots of failed BPO to trash for most of my isk spent. But this would be one hell of a isk sink though BPO Breeding.....
The Goons are Coming, The Goons are Coming Jita the April 28, Hulk a geddon April 29 for a month. The Best Tears are the Geifer's Tears. just hope the new crime watch system is in place by then.... oh the chaos will rain!!! |
Gevlin
Universal Might DSM FOUNDATION
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 23:17:00 -
[70] - Quote
I would love to see a carrier low slot that made an ore hold then have the introduction of Fighter Sized Mining Drones.
There is nothing like mining in a capital ship. There was nothing like mining in a Super Carrier, and there was nothing more exciting than catching a Mining Super Carrier at a belt.(sadly Supers can no loner use Mining drones)
Please bring this in so that we can be stupid and show off our epien by mining in these capitals and super capitals, please.
I guarentee that these pair of ore module and Mining Fighter Drones will cost the lives of hundreds of super carriers. The Goons are Coming, The Goons are Coming Jita the April 28, Hulk a geddon April 29 for a month. The Best Tears are the Geifer's Tears. just hope the new crime watch system is in place by then.... oh the chaos will rain!!! |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1431
|
Posted - 2012.05.21 23:18:00 -
[71] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:Risk vs reward is the underlying theme. So we should allow all production to be exclusive to high sec and keep high sec safe. Sorry that sounds like someone who want to keep hitting the I win button. If you want to produce and play in a safe haven, that should cost and that cost is Oppotutinity. T2 Production is slowly moving out of High sec with the Reward of Data cores moving to low sec though faction warfare and null sec though exploration rewards. This is a great Step.
I am looking forward to Ring mining which was suggested for winter with the rare moon ore in Null sec.
"Risk vs Reward" trope? Check! "Argumentum ad absurdum" Strawman? Check!
Your argument is basically that you want your part of the game boosted at the cost of other parts of the game. You have no concept of balance. The arguments put forward by CCP Soundwave were that he doesn't like passive income, yet nothing was done about RP accrual GÇö cutting something in half isn't the same as changing it to something else. The players who invested SP in the skills required to harvest data cores are being shafted while people who do nothing but shoot each other are now going to be the primary source of science & industry materials: this is no different to "mining with guns" and directly impacts on the people who had trained into T2 production. CCP Soundwave has already shown that he has no idea of the impact this will have on people already invested in T2 production (he questioned who would be impacted by "research with guns").
The argument was to "move T2 production more to low sec" but the R&D agents haven't moved. The argument was that "I don't like passive income", but the RP accrual mechanism hasn't been modified. CCP Soundwave claims that moving data core production to "research with guns" won't disenfranchise anybody. CCP Soundwave is, essentially, speaking from his arse.
At Fanfest there was even a presentation where they stated that there was too much focus on the "blowing things up" and not enough focus on the harvesting and building side of the game. The very next thing CCP Soundwave announced was moving data cores from science & industry focussed to "blowing things up" focussed.
EVE Online is not just about flying in space: it is about manufacturing, marketing, scamming, lying, cheating, stealing, capitalism, economics, politics and the exploration of what it means to be human. In short: it is a science fiction virtual reality.
We need to stop CCP Soundwave before he succeeds in turning EVE Online into Galaga Online.
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Intrepid Crossing
292
|
Posted - 2012.05.22 02:17:00 -
[72] - Quote
I'm in null sec and would love to see T2 production be viable there. Right now it's a logistical nightmare and 1000000x's easier to do in high sec.
With that said, I don't think removing market hubs from the picture for T2 is a good idea by any stretch. There is a whole hell of a lot more to do with T2 than datacores. While listening to the CSM townhall the other day, they all said they would like to see low sec as mini-hubs for industry. I'm sure this is linked to FW changes but I don't see it. What I see is that people *might* sell their lp's for datacores...*if* they are worth it in Jita or another hub. Besides that, what's the point of doing invention in low sec if you can't get the advanced moon materials or ore volumes? People will still do it in highsec because it makes the most sense for the market and for industrialists.
I don't see how they can make people go to null unless they revamp large parts of the system - ie drastically changing moon mining. If that happens, then maybe but right now I don't see it but I would love to hear what they mean when they say "moving to null sec". Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zetura Omo
The Association High Tech Hill Billie
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.22 21:35:00 -
[73] - Quote
Industrial Mining Equipment addition!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=105040&find=unread
This is my thread about an upgrade to the Giant Secure Can that is usuable for those times when the Orca is not available for unloading or whatever for mining operations that need some more volume storage until the Orca returns.
|
Revolution Rising
Gentlemen of Better Ilk
327
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 05:52:00 -
[74] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Revolution Rising wrote:Yeah I have zero issue with the mining mechanic itself, it allows for people to socialise and do other things while they mine - like build queues, invention and planning - mining shouldn't NEED to be a "busy" exercise. In fact many people like it currently BECAUSE it's not busy and they can do it and relax while they do it. Like I (and Seleene) said earlier, new interactive and co-operative forms of mining should be bought in alongside the existing (passive, boring) version.
Yeah it would be cool to see a mining bonus based on an easy to do, hard to master interactive system.
CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Brisco County
The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 09:26:00 -
[75] - Quote
Tessla Coil wrote:+ eleventy million. I want to know precisely what the null sec zealots are planning on doing. Of course, it is pointless to discuss anything in the csm threads, since the vast majority of the members are bought and paid for by said null sec zealots. The high sec players in the game have one recourse: speak with your wallets. The csm speaks for anyone but high sec.
"We want to move T2 production more towards LOW and zero-sec."
What, do you not have access to low-sec? |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
388
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 21:20:00 -
[76] - Quote
Some keywords for new types of mining:
Fracking Whole Asteroid Recovery Plutoids Oort Cloud Composition Probing Drilling Platforms
Feel free to suggest more. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
T2BPO Producer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 08:03:00 -
[77] - Quote
Disclaimer: The provided values are from april and are indications only, not precise and influenced by our activity and how fast we are with putting ships back in. They are provided from our sheets and applications to provide us with an indication how weGÇÖre doing. In no way is this a complaint in what IGÇÖm doing or I wouldnGÇÖt be doing this. The values for may are more grim, but as we still have a week to go, I used april. IGÇÖm also posting with an alt to make wardeccing us slightly harder, you know what to look for at least :) On another note, it seems invention got a nice boost/fix: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112471
Are t2 bpo really passive income or bad for the market?
Monthly production cycles. We think they aren't worth it. You would need about 3 months of cost in production chain. 1 month in ships in production, 1 month in materials for component production. And then you have another month in ships you just finished. In our case that would tie up 240b, which we'd rather use to buy another bpo. Markup ranges from 14% to 169%. With an average of 56%. This is just taking into account sale price-material cost. There's the brokers fee and sales taxes and 6b per months in plex. In april we sold 120b worth of t2 ships, which cost us roughly 77b resulting in 43b profit. Per month we need 80 jobs for components, restarted every week. And this is on a pos for the time bonus so we need to move the materials from 1 component assembly array to the other. ThereGÇÖs also some planning needed to calculate how much we need to produce that week, buying materials and move them to production system. And then we need another 35 jobs for the ships themselves. And then some more for t1 ships and R.A.M.s. All this production then needs to be shipped to jita. This means 13,966,250 m3 or 15 freighters per month. And prices need to be updated every day to get everything sold as soon as possible which sometimes isn't possible. In the past we didn't produce from some bpos because we'd be oversaturating the market or because we don't make profit at all from the bpo. Buying a bpo also entails quite some risk because future changes can make an expensive bpo worthless. Other way around can happen too. But with a t2 bpo you can't just switch. Bpo's cost now 7 to 10 years of profit to earn that back. So for all this work in april we earned <37b, not just for installing 35 jobs. And that's after buying all those t2 bpo's, which would now cost at least 84 months *37b profit =3108b. This means a ROI of less than 1.2% per month.
If weGÇÖd be doing this is 0.0 with a fully upgraded station with 60% production speed bonus, multiply values by 2.5. The majority of the finished products need to go to empire as you canGÇÖt sell everything in 0.0. This would require 111 JF jumps, say, 15 min per 2 jumps meaning 14 hours per month which doesnGÇÖt include checking if itGÇÖs safe to jump. I canGÇÖt be bothered to calculate the fuel cost for that or losses to due to JF being killed.
Summary! This means for 37b profit you need: - 3108b isk for buying t2 Bpos + 60-90b for a weekly the production chain - ~130 24/7 production slots - 15 Freighter runs per month - Daily market updating - Time to create and maintain production (planning) spreadsheets and sales monitoring website. - Our corporation was founded 9 years ago.
OT: I would like to see a GÇ£Deliver and reinstallGÇ¥ button, a lot less clicking needed when reinstalling the comp jobs or making copies. |
Serina Tsukaya
Lonetrek Trade and Industries Test Friends Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:17:00 -
[78] - Quote
Aren't most of the skills required to obtain research agents also required to create the items themselves? It would also be natural to shift t2 more into low/null, as that's where the goo comes from. It'll also increase incentive to move out to these regions and encourage more people to partake in the activities that occur in those areas. |
None ofthe Above
186
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 22:47:00 -
[79] - Quote
John Munkeen wrote:Exhumers don't need any change as they are great the way they are, But maybe a new Exhumer ship that is like the Hulk or Mac (different look is a must)
New Exhumer idea *No yield bonus *Lower Cargo then the hulks! *Higher hit points *More mid/low slots Why would I suggest a new ship is that the industry needs a mining ship that can defend its self, But to have the extra defence the new ship needs to remove the bonus to yield and cargo holds to add more armour plates and room for defence mods. This will mean a miner can pick from two types of ships, one for high yield mining but no way to have a good tank and have more risk mining, the other would be low yield mining but will be able to have a good tank and defend his ship.
In doing this the Gankers will need a buff to balance thing a bit more.
Second idea
the new pilots of eve need to understand that high sec space dose not mean safe space and should have a new player mission to explain this in more detail so they don't get a shock the first time they get ganked in high sec!
I completely disagree. I don't think your new ship idea is needed, just some rebalancing of the existing barges, which are a little broken.
I think powergrid and perhaps CPU should be revisited. Ridiculously tight. Wouldn't mind a mid or low or two in addition.
Training times for the mining ships are not well spaced out. Drop the Procurer requirements substantially (remove some of the Mining Barge prereqs and put them on the Retriever and Covetor). Make it the pay off for the Industry tutorial perhaps. Gap between the Retriever and Covetor could be dropped (Mining Barge IV), and the gap between the Covetor and Hulk increased. (Reducing the Covetor's Mining Barge requirement to IV would probably do this fine, leave Hulk at V.)
I also look forward to whatever solutions are put in place for ring mining. Sounds interesting.
Second whoever brought up more grav sites. Would welcome additional grav sites that contain normal empire ores and are easier to scan. Giving miners better options than the well known belts is great.
Perhaps scannable ice belts (Comets?)
|
Brisco County
The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:36:00 -
[80] - Quote
You know that if you give them a new mining barge with more lows, these muppets would just put another MLU in it and then continue bleeding all over the forums about how unfair Eve is.
50% of the hulk's HP are in the hull, but I've never once seen a killmail with a damage control. |
|
Merritoff
Zod's Minions
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:43:00 -
[81] - Quote
Mining: here I think a lot of players are mistaken about any buff to the exhumer class. By inherant nature Eve players are adaptive and any increase would be a temporary respite. Because raising the bar (ergo more Eligible Hit Points) would result in a ante up in the combat ship/s which would be used against exhumers. Miners require education, starting with the understanding that regardless of activity - this is a combat game. If I really had to change a facet of the Exhumer - it would be changing the Standard Active Shield certificate over to the Improved Passive Shield certificate in Recommended.
Two-Step, there has been a some discussion about changing the requirement of fleet boosting. This also impacts mining for vessels like the Orca and Rorqual. Basically the sides are for and against Off-Grid effective fleet boosts. Firstly, what is your own view in this issue and have CCP said anything to the CSM in regard of this?
If I was looking to the future. I would like a mobile refinary ship, scaled in the same tree as the Noctis.
And a Field Command styled exhumer. Unbonused strips x 3 with a utility slot and make the cargohold smaller. I'll exchange cargo space for a dedicated crystal pocket (why not, so many other ships - not just combat - get access a ute-slot). Fitting concession for a single ganglink, option to fit proto/improved cloak, tractor, RR. (think creative) A mining Foreman.
Manufactoring: so Eve has setting saving for overview and ship fits. But for Blueprint handling I need for each event to repeat manually every step. Knowing that I am going to put 10 catalyst BPO upto ME10.
1. Could I select all 10 to do in one go? 2. Could I default the Corp POS 3. Could I pre-save which destination? The ME amount, the hanger etc etc etc?
Oh, and here is an interesting request. Can the users of public slots be made public? I should be able to see who my competition is. |
None ofthe Above
186
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:33:00 -
[82] - Quote
Brisco County wrote:You know that if you give them a new mining barge with more lows, these muppets would just put another MLU in it and then continue bleeding all over the forums about how unfair Eve is.
50% of the hulk's HP are in the hull, but I've never once seen a killmail with a damage control.
Let me widen your horizons:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13451616
Was in the top 10 on the hulkageddon killboards:
http://hulkageddon.goonswarm.com/
I grant you its fairly rare. That's part of why I am not advocating a boost to the base EHP of the Hulk. Just the ability to fit a decent tank without too much difficulty. If people still can't manage to put a DCU II on it or a MSE II, well then no change; their hulks would remain as tissue paper around an aluminum can.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
981
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:35:00 -
[83] - Quote
300m on hulk, 300k on t1 tanking modules
lol |
None ofthe Above
186
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:48:00 -
[84] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:300m on hulk, 300k on t1 tanking modules
lol
Almost all Hulk tank fits are lol-worthy, because the PG of the Hulk is the same as that of the Procurer.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Hulk http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Procurer
There isn't even compensation for the increased number of high slots. What idiot over at ORE put a frigate powergrid into ALL of the barges and exhumers?
You either have to have a lame t1 tank, or a sort of lame tank on a blinged out loot pinata.
|
Jabba Fat
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 03:28:00 -
[85] - Quote
My 2 cents on Mining
Issue #1 Asteroids can be found in every belt that will yield ore. The Roid-Fairy has been hard at work and labelled every roid for us so picking the most profitable to mine is easy. This is one big problem. There is no need to do any prospecting / surveying to find ore in the EvE universe. Compare this to moon mining, at least you need to survey the moon and figure out what is available, then make a decision if itGÇÖs worth the effort or not. Compare this to Planetary Interaction, in this case you even need good skills to get a good reading on material location, then plan your structures accordingly.
Fix #1 A complete redesign of how roids are located in the universe is needed. How this is done is probably best left to the developers that need to take into account space-constraints and server-efficiency. But imagine roid belts that actually stretched all the way around a plant or a sun. Then each belt was divided into 1 to 360 sectors you could warp to. Roid belts donGÇÖt appear as a 40km half arc close to plantGǪ do they?? So in short, increase the amount of roids by many folds. Remove all roid labels, every roids in the universe should be named GÇÿAsteroidGÇÖ or something similar colourful. Make majority of roids worthless. Make use of the skills already in place. The higher Astrogeology skill the more accurate scan results. Maybe even introduce a ship specific to the task or new modules. There are many opportunities for new skills, ships and modules here.
Result #1 This will accomplish many things. Firstly, people need to survey roids in order to find profitable ones. I believe this will be a nice change compared mind-numbing way mining is now. The more thorough the upfront work the better the ore yield. This in turn makes botting somewhat more difficult as they canGÇÖt blindly warp to a roid and get valuable ore. If only 1 in 20 roids actually has valuable ore this should hopefully put a dent in the botters pockets.
Issue #2 Yield in roids are the same in the entire universe. Take Veldspar as an example, a batch (333 units) will refine to 1000 Tritanium. It does not matter if the ore was mined in High Sec or Null Sec, the end result is the same. This is a big issue as the reward vs risk doesnGÇÖt scale. Yes, yes, yesGǪ.. I know what youGÇÖre thinking. There is high end ore in Null Sec, why not mine the high end valuable ore? This is true of you are just mining for profit, but what if you are mining to manufacture. You still need the low end minerals for manufacturing and you need lots of it. Why should the yield be the same when the risk is not?
Fix #2 Introduce a yield % to ore and let the yield increase as the Sec gets lower. Lets use Veldspar as an example again, a batch (333 units) refines to 1000 Tritanium. 333 units of Veldspar has a volume of 33.3m3, 1000 units of Tritanium has a volume if 10m3, so the Veldspar ore yields is 30%. Mercoxit has a yield of 0.053%, this means you need to mine 10,000m3 in order to get 5.3m3 of Morphite. Kernite has multiple minerals when refined and the yield is as follows, Tritanium 0.804%, Mexallon 1.61%, Isogen 0.804%
Result #2 This will ensure there are a difference between High, Low and Null Sec when it comes to mining and profit. There are some correlation between risk and reward. It is also an incentive for High Sec miners to try Low / Null Sec as the rewards there are greater.
|
Brisco County
The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 03:30:00 -
[86] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:Brisco County wrote:You know that if you give them a new mining barge with more lows, these muppets would just put another MLU in it and then continue bleeding all over the forums about how unfair Eve is.
50% of the hulk's HP are in the hull, but I've never once seen a killmail with a damage control. Let me widen your horizons: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13451616Was in the top 10 on the hulkageddon killboards: http://hulkageddon.goonswarm.com/I grant you its fairly rare. That's part of why I am not advocating a boost to the base EHP of the Hulk. Just the ability to fit a decent tank without too much difficulty. If people still can't manage to put a DCU II on it or a MSE II, well then no change; their hulks would remain as tissue paper around an aluminum can.
Well, there's one. My horizons are ~broadened~. |
Flamespar
Woof Club
367
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:16:00 -
[87] - Quote
It would be good to hear where things are at in regards to the ring mining (and the graphics update) I can post on a forum, therefore I represent everyone. |
Revolution Rising
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
329
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:54:00 -
[88] - Quote
Flamespar wrote:It would be good to hear where things are at in regards to the ring mining (and the graphics update)
Totally Agree here.
CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Serpentine Logic
Sons Of Alexander AL3XAND3R.
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 23:22:00 -
[89] - Quote
The skill tree for mining and industry is IMO too shallow.
I concur with those who propose a capital mining ship, both for the boost to non-highsec mining, and the increased progression available to mining characters.
I also suggest that manufacturing prerequisite skills be rationalised the same way piloting skills are. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3986
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 07:04:00 -
[90] - Quote
The basic problem with mining is that the actual act of mining is incredibly dull. When it becomes something that draws attention to the screen rather than repels it, a lot of problems with mining go away.
To make mining actually some kind of fun, you need to make it a mental challenge. In fact you need to make it actual gameplay, and historically, CCP have been very bad at gameplay.
Still, what if the actual act of mining where completely different to how it is now? Consider this possibility:
Each asteroid is represented as a 3-dimensional object, with veins of ore ruunning through it in a semi-random, non repeating way (ie: unpredictably). The concentration of ore varies from, say, 10-33% of the rock by volume. There are two way you can mine such an asteroid.
The first is the simplest: to lock onto the rock, activate your mining laser and let it chew through the entire rock, as we do at present. This will eventually extract all the ore in the asteroid in the time it takes your ML to pulverize the entire thing*.
The second is more complex but more efficient: you use an asteroid scanner* to see those veins of ore, and you target your MLs on the asteroid to chew through to get the good stuff. The angle and focus with which you target your MLs determines how efficiently you can do this (ie: how much ore you can get while mining out as little "dead rock" as possible.
On some rocks, this will be a fairly simple puzzle; on others, it will be very tricky to get optimum yield. Thus we can reward actual player intelligence and skill, whilst still leaving the possibility of making some ISK being semi-AFK and studying for exams or whatever (many miners seem to be deeply attached to this playstyle). By procedurally generating the ore veins every time the rock respawns, we can make them significantly hard to macro efficiently; bots will almost certainly "mine dumb" and just chew through the whole rock. Thus smart human players actually playing the game will be able to gain a significant advantage (3-10x) over macro bots if they choose to. Since their attention will actually be directed at the screen, they can also maintain situation awareness and all the safety benefits that entails.
*We will assume that mining lasers automatically filter out and eject as space-dust the "dead rock", with only the ore being deposited.
*Additionally, all ORE vessels have asteroid-scanning capability built in to the ship, with no need to add an asteroid scanner. Non-specialised mining ships like Ospreys and Rokhs have to give up a midslot or "mine dumb". Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
Traidir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 10:36:00 -
[91] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: The second is more complex but more efficient: you use an asteroid scanner* to see those veins of ore, and you target your MLs on the asteroid to chew through to get the good stuff. The angle and focus with which you target your MLs determines how efficiently you can do this (ie: how much ore you can get while mining out as little "dead rock" as possible. That sounds like an excellent (and very familiar idea).
Some other things to consider: Use of tractor beams and explosives to tear apart rocks (along with a scanner for "seeing" fracture lines). Calibration of mining laser cut "depth". Limited "image resolution" and "scan depth" of scanners. Booby traps (mercoxit creating gas clouds if you cut into the wrong thing for example). Specific patterns and shapes of "veins" in the rocks for each type of asteroid (more experienced players have the advantage of knowing how the veins (and traps) are likely to appear within the rock, despite scanner depth/resolution limitations) Some examples of possible vein shapes: lightning shapes, nuggets, tapered cylinders, sheets, crystals... This would also give a great deal of variety to the challenge of ore extraction for the different asteroid types.
Almost all of these can be based on skills already in game (e.g. Astrogeology for scanning, Mining and its various Specializations for depth calibration and cut precision, Graviton Physics for tractor beam attenuation, ect...). |
Prince Kobol
592
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 12:02:00 -
[92] - Quote
Let cut the BS and get straight to the point.
We all know that most if not all the CSM only care about Indy in regards how it affects them in null.
So how about this.
Why not just make so you can only manufacture T2 ships and mods in Sov Space. Whilst we are at it why not just remove all ore expect veld out of high sec?
After all isn't this what you really want?
|
Revolution Rising
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 06:56:00 -
[93] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Let cut the BS and get straight to the point.
We all know that most if not all the CSM only care about Indy in regards how it affects them in null.
So how about this.
Why not just make so you can only manufacture T2 ships and mods in Sov Space. Whilst we are at it why not just remove all ore expect veld out of high sec?
After all isn't this what you really want?
Well.. the.. wait.. what ?
Dude have you even spoken to any of the CSM members? MOST of them are indy guys or at least interested in some serious change to indy this time around.
I would've thought mittani being replaced by seleene would've made some impact in your conscioousness along this thought process.
I guess not.
If the conversations I've had over the past 6 months or more with Seleene and others mean anything I would be expecting a BONUS to invention in 0.0, t2 mining of some kind, improved mining mechanics - spodumain rocks for 3 days is no way to mine, possibly CCP will start along the lines of POS reinvention over the next year.
If you want something in the CSM to imrpove, you need to be active in this arena. I can't even understand people that come on and rage about their imagined perceptions like this.
If you want to rage at someone about datacores, rage at Soundwave. I don't understand how mining with guns is bad, but mining for datacores with guns is good personally. So I would agree with that if that was the point of your awfully constructed post. CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Revolution Rising
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
332
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 07:14:00 -
[94] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The basic problem with mining is that the actual act of mining is incredibly dull. When it becomes something that draws attention to the screen rather than repels it, a lot of problems with mining go away.
To make mining actually some kind of fun, you need to make it a mental challenge. In fact you need to make it actual gameplay, and historically, CCP have been very bad at gameplay.
Still, what if the actual act of mining were completely different to how it is now? Consider this possibility:
Each asteroid is represented as a 3-dimensional object, with veins of ore ruunning through it in a semi-random, non repeating way (ie: unpredictably). The concentration of ore varies from, say, 10-33% of the rock by volume. There are two way you can mine such an asteroid.
The first is the simplest: to lock onto the rock, activate your mining laser and let it chew through the entire rock, as we do at present. This will eventually extract all the ore in the asteroid in the time it takes your ML to pulverize the entire thing*.
The second is more complex but more efficient: you use an asteroid scanner* to see those veins of ore, and you target your MLs on the asteroid to chew through to get the good stuff. The angle and focus with which you target your MLs determines how efficiently you can do this (ie: how much ore you can get while mining out as little "dead rock" as possible.
On some rocks, this will be a fairly simple puzzle; on others, it will be very tricky to get optimum yield. Thus we can reward actual player intelligence and skill, whilst still leaving the possibility of making some ISK being semi-AFK and studying for exams or whatever (many miners seem to be deeply attached to this playstyle). By procedurally generating the ore veins every time the rock respawns, we can make them significantly hard to macro efficiently; bots will almost certainly "mine dumb" and just chew through the whole rock. Thus smart human players actually playing the game will be able to gain a significant advantage (3-10x) over macro bots if they choose to. Since their attention will actually be directed at the screen, they can also maintain situation awareness and all the safety benefits that entails.
*We will assume that mining lasers automatically filter out and eject as space-dust the "dead rock", with only the ore being deposited.
*Additionally, all ORE vessels have asteroid-scanning capability built in to the ship, with no need to add an asteroid scanner. Non-specialised mining ships like Ospreys and Rokhs have to give up a midslot or "mine dumb".
I love this idea, however..
tbh, I'm far more interested in the low hanging fruit at the moment. I'm all for ADDED bonuses to mining based on such systems in the future, as long as it doesn't interfer with current gameplay. Looking out for reds in 0.0 while trying to solve a puzzle is going to be harsh to say the least.
Sometimes I just want to go to the kitchen and grab a coffee while my lasers run too... I don't want to stop mining to do this.
Sometimes I need to work out corp contracts while I'm mining.
Sometimes I just want to chat to others while mining.
I don't want these types of gameplay and added gameplay to be effected by puzzle games that are unnecessary to the current system.
If it is just an ADDED system, whereby I can grab more yield if I'm concentrating, fine.
I would hate to see CCP just run with one part of this idea and take out current gameplay.
CCP don't have a good track record of gameplay change before this last expansion, sometimes it's best to keep it simple with them ;)
CSM7 Skype Leak
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4002
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 15:58:00 -
[95] - Quote
In other words, you want to just PUSH BUTAN RECEIVE ORE, and you don't want anything to affect the yield of that.
Do we really have to explain comparative advantage all over again? /o\ Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Dex Nederland
Lai Dai Infinity Systems The Fourth District
45
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 04:10:00 -
[96] - Quote
Player Awareness - Linking Manufacturing to the Market
Inferno introduced price estimations (based on local market) into all hangars and items, it would be awesome to extend this to the manufacturing "preview" window. Even the most basic T1 module is built using items that have a market value. Before accepting the run, cost of the facility and lose of items, anyone should be able to easily see how much ISK they can expect to earn (or lose!) based on the current market without relying on out-game utilities (eve-central, battleclinic, spreadsheets etc).
Mitigate the "If I mine it, it is free" mindset by educating them as they step through the process of building an item.
*Warning: may cause the price of T1 items to rise to exceed mineral cost!
Cooperative Industry - Project Management Tools
There is no simple solution to encouraging miners, researchers, and manufacturers to group up and cooperate. It is very possible to engage in all of those activities solo in a non-player corp and not encounter any downsides. The primary reason to form a player corp for industrialist is the ability to setup starbases for more readily available Material Research & Copy slots.
Introduce straight forward, non-time intensive tools that make cooperative corporate industry easier as part of having a corporation could be very useful. It might include standing contracts that refresh when filled, "programmable" project trees, etc. Lai Dai Infinity Systems |
Kreeia Dgore
EntroPrelatial Industria T A B O O
31
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 11:20:00 -
[97] - Quote
No big surprise here: boost exhumers tanking capability. Destroyers, and the minnie one in particular, have been boosted in terms of DPS. The balance existing until that moment was broken when every noob with lousy equipment is able to gank any exhumer, no matter how well is it tanked. I want nothing else than boosting their defence capabilities by the same % the destroyers got.
Other than that, mining should be more fun. I find that folks are still happy mining (=doing activity that was boring 9 years ago and didn't improve ever since) an unpleasant evidence of higher incidence of masochists in general population in the last years. Sorry, I just don't see any other way of looking at it. |
Nevryn Takis
University of Caille Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 17:59:00 -
[98] - Quote
Mining is boring .. we all know that.. lots of people (including me) have made proposals ove rthe years to fix it .. they all get ignored so we're now in the positiion(thanks to the goons) that mining is dead as a profession.. Am I going to risk my tanked 300m hulk in high sec when it can be reduced to ash is 6 seconds by 3 1.5m fit catalysts or thrashers.. No chance.. Any competant player can run a l3 mission and replace said catalyst/thrasher in 20 minutes.. Replacing the hulk thats 30 hours running L4 missions .. For the casual player who has a couple of hours a night to play thats just not worth doing ... risk/vs reward ...broken Am I likewise going to risk a 150m mack that can't tank for toffee no matter how you fit it to mine Ice to supply a pos .. no chance With all the rest of the changes theres a lot of people who are now seriosuly considering un-subbing.. Perhaps then ccp and goons will get the message Flame me all you like and talk about tears .. it'll just make the decision easier... |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1070
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:31:00 -
[99] - Quote
If supply of minerals decreases enough from miners leaving their profession, demand will increase to the point where mining ore and ice will be well worth the hazards. If not, suicide ganking was not a real problem to begin with. |
None ofthe Above
197
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:24:00 -
[100] - Quote
Kreeia Dgore wrote:No big surprise here: boost exhumers tanking capability. Destroyers, and the minnie one in particular, have been boosted in terms of DPS. The balance existing until that moment was broken when every noob with lousy equipment is able to gank any exhumer, no matter how well is it tanked. I want nothing else than boosting their defence capabilities by the same % the destroyers got.
Actually the Catalyst in particular, Gallente. But yes destroyers got a big boost, and also for high end ganking Tier 3 battlecruisers.
That's two pretty major buffs to ganking without a commensurate buff to its primary prey.
I recommend a boost to Mining Barge and Exhumer Powergrid and CPU so they can fit a decent tank without so much difficulty (particularly on the Retriever, Covertor based hulls).
|
|
Lord Zim
747
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:27:00 -
[101] - Quote
Don't forget the fact suicide ganking got a nerf in the shape of loss of insurance. |
Yukino Yuu
Zat's Affiliated Traders Originally Riotous Corps
1
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 07:20:00 -
[102] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Don't forget the fact suicide ganking got a nerf in the shape of loss of insurance. yes 3x1.5mil hurts the wallet so much to alpha pop a 300mil ship but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that this was sarcasm or only refering to the tier3 BC
anyways, I am of the mind set that there is not enough variety in the types of mining barges and exhumers that are considered viable, especially when compared to the number and variety of combat ships, which needs to be addressed.
First, similar to Gevlin's, I think that getting rid of the ship tiers like they did with the frigates in inferno and giving each ship type a clear role with pros and cons when deciding which to use would be great.
second, I think that there should be some way that miners can defend themselves until help arrives. Note that I am not talking about offensive weapons but defensive and mostly group oriented. Like a cheaper mining barge which mines less per hour that would shield other mining barges and exhumers at the expense of its own shields and armor thus protecting the more expensive mining barges and exhumers but not making miners immortal just takes longer to kill. That was just an example, other group type combos should also be considered.
Right now there is no point to fleeting up to go mine except for the good times and your just a bigger target, and even if you bring combat ships they won't be able to react fast enough to an alpha strike plus why bring combat ships when you can bring another miner which I find to be a miners mind set. There is no in-between solution. I often hear gankers and miners compared to predator and prey but right now only the gankers have many types of teeth, claws, speed, etc while the prey only have one speed, no horns, limited defensive mechanisms(dscan and local), no way to posture or group up to make a ganker/s think twice about whether or not they can pull off a kill. Another example of darwin's theory, evolve the tools to survive or go extinct. Which is why I think that group based defensive roles should be added for specialized mining ships and modules.
To sum it up, diversity in ships and their abilities
defensive type ships must have a use outside combat preferably for mining or they won't be used by a serious carebear
point is not to kill aggressors but to delay, divert, or escape
this will not make miners invulnerable, gankers will have to adapt to the situation that is all |
Lord Helghast
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
98
|
Posted - 2012.06.08 04:53:00 -
[103] - Quote
any chance of t3 exhumers, or capital exhumers? like a rorq sized hulk :)
endgame miners need something to train for as it is currently you can prettymuch max miner characters in what ... 3 months? LAME |
Takara Mora
University of Caille Gallente Federation
56
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 14:04:00 -
[104] - Quote
Hehehehe ... how about making Strip Mining Lasers do damage, webbing, and warp disruption against enemy ships?
Not copious amounts, just enough to encourage grouping up so that say 3 or 5 hulks put together, could stop and destroy a single can flipper? Might generate some fun encounters ....
Would have no impact against gankers, since there is no possible defense against alpha strikes .... unless you did something like generate a giant protective dust cloud or something ... |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
459
|
Posted - 2012.06.09 15:08:00 -
[105] - Quote
Oh god yes please lets have hulks trying to aggro can flippers with their mining lasers.
I will fly a blasterthron and canflip forever. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Bossy Lady
Aliastra Gallente Federation
57
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 01:54:00 -
[106] - Quote
Yukino Yuu wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Don't forget the fact suicide ganking got a nerf in the shape of loss of insurance. yes 3x1.5mil hurts the wallet so much to alpha pop a 300mil ship
It's dishonest to say that Catalysts "alpha pop" a Hulk. They use DPS, and can be countered with remote repping. Alpha requires tier 3 battlecruisers and those run to 100M or so with a rack of 1400mm arty fitted. Please don't muddy this thread with obvious inaccuracies.
Posting on this character because apparently some people get upset when they're asked difficult questions. M. |
Yukino Yuu
Zat's Affiliated Traders Originally Riotous Corps
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 06:44:00 -
[107] - Quote
Bossy Lady wrote:Yukino Yuu wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Don't forget the fact suicide ganking got a nerf in the shape of loss of insurance. yes 3x1.5mil hurts the wallet so much to alpha pop a 300mil ship It's dishonest to say that Catalysts "alpha pop" a Hulk. They use DPS, and can be countered with remote repping. Alpha requires tier 3 battlecruisers and those run to 100M or so with a rack of 1400mm arty fitted. Please don't muddy this thread with obvious inaccuracies. I stand corrected. it was second hand information, I haven't gotten killed in a hulk in a long time, since I fly a covetor in WH and haven't gotten attacked yet there either. I think its still valid argument that the cost vs reward is skewed. |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 08:11:00 -
[108] - Quote
Yukino Yuu wrote:I think its still valid argument that the cost vs reward is skewed. It is not. |
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 09:01:00 -
[109] - Quote
For PvP and like to encourage more of it?
Want to validate a potential Career path in GëívGëí with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?
Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?
You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in GëívGëí where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?
Or simply want to make GëívGëí less boring?
Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.
CCP Design panel wrote: "It's going to be awesome."
"It's absolutley on the list of things to do."
"We have a spaceships game, but you can't be han solo or boba fett, that's not clever."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_pLi1J9YrkM#t=1199s
Don't believe the ganker hype and lies. Theres plenty of examples about the order of difference in asset losses with soft industrials continuing to be treated as pinatas by these cowards.
Help promote the use of bounty hunting as a result. See if the criminal element like suicide gankers can adapt to a challenge for once, for years they have been acting complacently about this with this ineffectual if not "broken" mechanic, yet they will simply cry about its introduction than "man up" to a real fight or actually have a player shoot back at them.
Same with all the other tears employed about how their life is so difficult. And then they have the arrgoance and stupidity to blame the carebears for whining when concerns are raised. Typical meta interests and laziness as opposed to real skill or credibility. As such the changes being applied by CCP are long overdue and needed to readress this imbalance in the game. After all CCP do know the real stats and understand the situation here. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 09:42:00 -
[110] - Quote
While the bounty system Malcanis came up with has a lot of merit, it's not particularly related to neither industry nor mining. Wardec/crimewatch is probably the more correct avenue, and oh wait I see you've already posted it there. |
|
Grumpy Owly
612
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 10:12:00 -
[111] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:While the bounty system Malcanis came up with has a lot of merit, it's not particularly related to neither industry nor mining. Wardec/crimewatch is probably the more correct avenue, and oh wait I see you've already posted it there.
if suicide ganking is considered of merit to be discussed in this topic then there is no prescriptive reason for you to attempt to censor my relevant contribution regarding Bounty Hunting. Bounty Hunting for CSM7 |
Lord Zim
782
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 11:34:00 -
[112] - Quote
Yes, telling you of a better thread to spam an idea in is definitely "censoring". |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
72
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 17:01:00 -
[113] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:For PvP and like to encourage more of it? Or maybe an industrial focussed pilot with no real means to answer the call to arms personally against multiple PvP focussed foes who ganked you en masse? Want to validate a potential Career path in GëívGëí with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another? Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume? You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in GëívGëí where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve? Or simply want to make GëívGëí less boring? Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7. CCP Design panel wrote: "It's going to be awesome."
"It's absolutley on the list of things to do."
"We have a spaceships game, but you can't be han solo or boba fett, that's not clever."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_pLi1J9YrkM#t=1199s
Don't believe the ganker hype and lies. Theres plenty of examples about the order of difference in asset losses with soft industrials continuing to be treated as pinatas by these cowards. Plex in an afternoon anyone? Help promote the use of bounty hunting as a result. See if the criminal element like suicide gankers can adapt to a challenge for once, for years they have been acting complacently about this with this ineffectual if not "broken" mechanic, yet they will simply cry about its introduction than "man up" to a real fight or actually have a player shoot back at them. Same with all the other tears employed about how their life is so difficult. And then they have the arrgoance and stupidity to blame the carebears for whining when concerns are raised. Typical meta interests and laziness as opposed to real skill or credibility. As such the changes being applied by CCP are long overdue and needed to readress this imbalance in the game. After all CCP do know the real stats and understand the situation here.
This literally has nothing to do, at all, with industry and/or mining.
Edit: Also, reported. |
Bossy Lady
Aliastra Gallente Federation
64
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 17:59:00 -
[114] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:While the bounty system Malcanis came up with has a lot of merit...
Well aren't you a little sweetcake to say so
Posting on this character because apparently some people get upset when they're asked difficult questions. M. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |