Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Kalido Raddi
Echelon Research The Volition Cult
25
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 00:04:45 -
[31] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:A small nerf to the Covetor and Hulk?
OLD Covetor 3 * 1.25 (20% Duration MBV) = 3.75
NEW Covetor 2 * 1.25 (New Strip Miner Boost) = 2.5 * 1.33 (25% Duration Role Bonus) = 3.325 * 1.11 (10% Duration MBV) = 3.69
A small loss of 0.06 effective miners. I know you can fit a mining upgrade to offset this though with the extra slot. No you can't; you don't have enough CPU ('cos CCP have decided that removing a Strip Miner means less CPU, but adding a Mining Laser Upgrade doesn't mean more CPU). |
Autism Intensifies
some random local shitlords
13
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 00:48:41 -
[32] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:A small nerf to the Covetor and Hulk?
OLD Covetor 3 * 1.25 (20% Duration MBV) = 3.75
NEW Covetor 2 * 1.25 (New Strip Miner Boost) = 2.5 * 1.33 (25% Duration Role Bonus) = 3.325 * 1.11 (10% Duration MBV) = 3.69
A small loss of 0.06 effective miners. I know you can fit a mining upgrade to offset this though with the extra slot.
It's 3.75, too. You get 3.69 because you multiply by 1.33 instead of dividing by 0.75 (you mean the same, but rounding fucks your values). Same for *1.11 instead of /0.9 |
Avon Salinder
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 01:13:33 -
[33] - Quote
These tweaks are fine, in that they are just in to compensate for the two strip miner modification.
Sometime down the road a bit, some other improvements could be useful for mining ships, some of these have already been mentioned as they're really good ideas that should happen.
* The Venture and Endurance are excellent as is, wouldn't change a thing. * The Prospect is only useful for mining gas as it has no drones to defence against belt rats. Perhaps give it the same drone bay as the venture so it can mine in ore belts too. * Make ORE strip miners worth the cost, they're pretty 'meh' at the moment. An extra 3% yield would be nice. * Consider balancing the slots on barges to 7 each: Procurer = 2/3/2 (It's already got a massive HP tank, it's a little overkill tbh). Retriever and Covetor = 2/2/3 (Yes, add a second slot but only a tiny amount of CPU, be nice to have at least a few options here such as a small shield extender + survey scanner)
Exhumers should be better able to handle dangerous space (lowsec and w-space) better than they currently do (skiff is marginally good here). Eve is a pvp game but mining ships are just content for actual combat ships: tether yourself to an asteroid and say "I am content" on the dscan, effectively. What if exhumers in general were given more survivability to encourage their use outside of their "safe" space?
Throwin' this out there: * Each exhumer loses a midslot but gains +1 warp core strength. * Mack and Hulk gain +5 PG so they can fit medium extenders. * Exhumers don't appear on d-scan (this enables the ship to mine without being obvious in-system, even when hostile combat ships are in the area - only when they warp to a site will they find the exhumer).
Finally, mining but not barge related. Plenty more work to be done here but attempting to make mining outside of HS more attractive: * Remove jaspet, Hemorphite and Hedbergite ore sites from HS - why go to lowsec when you can get LS ores in HS? * Remove the +5% and +10% asteroids from HS belts. * Put Spodumain into 0.3 and lower space.
Peace out, spacebros |
Dehval
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
59
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 01:21:07 -
[34] - Quote
Kalido Raddi wrote:Suitonia wrote:A small nerf to the Covetor and Hulk?
OLD Covetor 3 * 1.25 (20% Duration MBV) = 3.75
NEW Covetor 2 * 1.25 (New Strip Miner Boost) = 2.5 * 1.33 (25% Duration Role Bonus) = 3.325 * 1.11 (10% Duration MBV) = 3.69
A small loss of 0.06 effective miners. I know you can fit a mining upgrade to offset this though with the extra slot. No you can't; you don't have enough CPU ('cos CCP have decided that removing a Strip Miner means less CPU, but adding a Mining Laser Upgrade doesn't mean more CPU). You can. Put on a T2 CPU rig (6m) and you can fit a basic barebones (t1) tank if you don't bling. It isn't great but that is the price you pay for 9% more yield. |
Elenahina
agony unleashed Agony Empire
1034
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 01:29:25 -
[35] - Quote
Avon Salinder wrote: Finally, mining but not barge related. Plenty more work to be done here but attempting to make mining outside of HS more attractive: * Remove jaspet, Hemorphite and Hedbergite ore sites from HS - why go to lowsec when you can get LS ores in HS? * Remove the +5% and +10% asteroids from HS belts. * Put Spodumain into 0.3 and lower space.
Why on earth would miners go to lowsec at all? There is literally nothing in low sec that a mining laser can get me that I cannot get with far less risk in either high sec or null.
All your changes would do is move more mining out to nullsec (which isn't a bad thing, mind you) and the market would stabilize marginally higher to compensate for the shipping costs. Mining in lowsec is not going to happen on a large scale because it's been hunted to death. It's like trying to swim in a group of sharks. Eventually, you will get a chunk taken out of your leg.
I'd actually be curious to see stats on which type of ore is mined most in what space. I'd be willing to bet that most of the "lowsec" ores actually get mined in nullsec because, frankly, it's safer.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3541
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 01:34:54 -
[36] - Quote
This update while a slight improvement still has the same issue as the initial one. All the stats of the barges are decided in the choice of hull, they don't have the PG/CPU to be fitting any interesting choices, you can't fit a prop mod of appropriate size without entirely filling them with fitting modules even.
If you gave them a decent cargo hold as well as the ore hold, & then treated them like a Cruiser or BC, giving them equivalent slots, PG & CPU, then you would actually be able to make fittings matter, and one hull would serve all three archetype requirements based on how players fitted it. (Cargo extenders still need a stacking penalty btw so it's not all or nothing when using them). Strip Miners could be hard-capped in number just like you cap things like AAR & Command Links so they could even have a real number of high slots.
|
Yossarian Toralen
M and M Enterpises
67
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 02:03:39 -
[37] - Quote
What is the intended outcome that will come from this change?
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
5886
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 02:29:55 -
[38] - Quote
Not the change that mining needs, which is incentivizing group mining to the point that fielding defense fleets becomes worthwhile. Something that makes miners leave their system to go to a specific location in their constellation.
As a ganker I'm happy to see the Hulk and Covetor get a minor buff that might see more of them being used, but this is basically no change.
I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Sabriz's Rule: "Any time someone argues for a game change claiming it is a quality of life change, the change is actually a game balance change".
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3906
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 02:31:44 -
[39] - Quote
Mark O'Helm wrote:I like the new design. But why make them equal in part of highslots? I liked that they were unique in this. Is there another reason then just to simplify the design? I look on it this way: First remember this is a MMORPG, where RP stands for role play. As a role player, I look at this statement about the Skiff: "Special loading algorithms allow for a +150% yield", and wonder, why does ORE not use those on the Hulk? That +150% bonus is just weird, a hack to do the tiericide, with a force fit explanation on the RP side.
I much prefer solutions to fixing game play that also flow naturally for the role player. Equalizing the turret count across all the barges does just that.
Also, remember that this change is mainly an artwork change. Its not a barge re-balance, or a mining change. Barges came up on the "revap artwork" schedule, so CCP is doing it.
Yossarian Toralen wrote:What is the intended outcome that will come from this change?
Nicer looking barges and exhumers.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Resa Moon
New Eden Miners Association
15
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 02:35:04 -
[40] - Quote
Morn Hylund wrote:I don't get it.
It looks like you're taking away one of the Mining lasers with the Hulk (so more active switching by a miner to go do what is already an extremely tedious activity in Eve and reducing mining yield by a 1/3rd) - while boosting it by 25% (1/4) in other areas with perhaps more boosting in the low slots? Which comes out to about even except again - anyone mining with a Hulk has to be switching Asteroids more often??
How is this not just make mining even more a boring less lucrative activity (especially with the planned mineral price nerf changes)?
I mean come on ... First you have Citadels that are absolutely useless to defend unless you happen to have a fleet on your beck and call (so much for POS equivalency, especially for wormhole manufacturing), now you screw over mining with more ludicrous hand waving - and silly do nothing upgrades ...
No wonder Eve subscriptions are dropping - and people are jumping ship for more entertaining games like Star Citizen, No Man's Sky, Elite Dangerous etc.
Wake the F*** Up.
Exactly right regarding the Hulk and highsec asteroids - why in the world do we need even more frequent switching and ore bay emptying? Nullsec, this will be fine, but many of us use Hulks in highsec too and this will not add to the enjoyment, especially multi-boxing.
New Eden Mining Blog
|
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3542
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 02:54:39 -
[41] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Not the change that mining needs, which is incentivizing group mining to the point that fielding defense fleets becomes worthwhile. Something that makes miners leave their system to go to a specific location in their constellation.
As a ganker I'm happy to see the Hulk and Covetor get a minor buff that might see more of them being used, but this is basically no change. This will never happen unless Mining earns vastly more than ratting does. To make a defence fleet worthwhile regularly you have to be able to pay the escort an equal amount to what they would have earned ratting for the same time. People might do it for the sake of pew and accept a loss once or twice, but not every day.
We could divide bounties by about 10, then mining might be worth more than ratting though.... But that's about how silly the idea of regular escort fleets actually happening in the meta is. |
FT Cold
R3d Fire Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
64
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 03:54:12 -
[42] - Quote
I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I would have thought (for sake of risk/reward and diversity) it'd look like this:
Hulk: least tank, small ore hold, highest yield, range bonus to strip miners, balanced towards fleet activity. Mack: medium tank, largest ore hold, medium yield, balanced for solo/small scale mining. Skiff: most tank, medium ore hold, lowest yield, drone damage bonus, balanced for minimum risk.
As for increasing the tank of the mack, maybe the hull cost of all barges could be reduced, and the cost of mining lasers/upgrades be increased to fill the gap on a fitted barge to help offset the cost of ganks as a measure to placate gankers.
Also, have you considered more mid-slot mining modules? Maybe they could work like tracking computers and the base range of all strip miners could be reduced slightly to compensate. Might help with forcing players to make fitting choices. Hell, you could even add 'ancillary' strip miners, with extremely short range, optimized so that non-afk miners fit with 'mining tracking computers' and hyperspatials might out-compete afk players. Warp in, mine until the ore hold is full, warp to station when ancillary modules are on cooldown and repeat, with greater yield at the cost of less tank.
Not a miner, just throwing some ideas on the table in the interest of play-style and fitting variety. |
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 04:27:41 -
[43] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Not the change that mining needs, which is incentivizing group mining to the point that fielding defense fleets becomes worthwhile. Something that makes miners leave their system to go to a specific location in their constellation.
As a ganker I'm happy to see the Hulk and Covetor get a minor buff that might see more of them being used, but this is basically no change. This will never happen unless Mining earns vastly more than ratting does. To make a defence fleet worthwhile regularly you have to be able to pay the escort an equal amount to what they would have earned ratting for the same time. People might do it for the sake of pew and accept a loss once or twice, but not every day. We could divide bounties by about 10, then mining might be worth more than ratting though.... But that's about how silly the idea of regular escort fleets actually happening in the meta is.
The CCP design model for this interaction is that a durable mining ship like a procurer or a skiff puts a point on a hostile, and your ratting guards have appropriate fits to warp straight from combat anoms to the fight.
If this doesn't happen, its because your corporation has not recruited people based on cooperating to produce resources in your home (bearing in mind the game design has missteps which overly incentivise people to specialize).
Also CCP has repeatedly made it harder to rat a hull. They have raised material requirements for hulls, reduced the materials available from gun mining and removed drone minerals as a kill drop altogether, and now they are steadily providing incentives to use yet larger hulls in null PVE.
Can assure you if they dropped bounties by 90%, the price paid for ore would also drop 90%
|
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
138
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 04:30:05 -
[44] - Quote
This seems like a nothing burger to me. If you're going to make changes, might as well make some bigger ones that make mining better / more interesting. These changes just seem to make things harder to fit.
Mid slot modules sound good to me too. |
Grognard Commissar
Splinter Cell Operations inPanic
10
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 05:28:25 -
[45] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Anoron Secheh wrote:What about changes to the Rorqual and Orca? Changes to the Rorqual and Orca are currently planned for November (rather than September for these mining barge changes). We'll be discussing those more as we get a bit closer. soooo... ya'll are changing the boosts *without* giving a good enough reason to have them on-grid? guess my rorq's staying in dock till november. not enough reward for my rorqual to be on-grid. ... unless the boosting changes are planned for november as well?
FT Cold wrote:
increase the probability of profitable ganking under ideal conditions. .
i think we got enough of that already. |
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
1131
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 06:30:41 -
[46] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:This will never happen unless Mining earns vastly more than ratting does. To make a defence fleet worthwhile regularly you have to be able to pay the escort an equal amount to what they would have earned ratting for the same time. No amount of tweaking will change the fact that it's always better to field extra mining ships instead of that escort and take safety measures that don't involve making people to not play the game even if they earn more ISK this way, as well as corresponding risks, which are still more likely to be justified by extra production rather than by chance that some ship will be saved by combat-shipped fleetmates.
Not to mention that balancing income that relies on market is rather hard.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Mark O'Helm
Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt
212
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 06:33:08 -
[47] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Mark O'Helm wrote:I like the new design. But why make them equal in part of highslots? I liked that they were unique in this. Is there another reason then just to simplify the design? I look on it this way: First remember this is a MMORPG, where RP stands for role play. As a role player, I look at this statement about the Skiff: "Special loading algorithms allow for a +150% yield", and wonder, why does ORE not use those on the Hulk? That +150% bonus is just weird, a hack to do the tiericide, with a force fit explanation on the RP side. I much prefer solutions to fixing game play that also flow naturally for the role player. Equalizing the turret count across all the barges does just that. Also, remember that this change is mainly an artwork change. Its not a barge re-balance, or a mining change. Barges came up on the "revap artwork" schedule, so CCP is doing it. If you think that +150% bonus is weird, what's about every other ship bonus in the game? Take the vexor and her 2 variations for example. They all look the same besides painting. But they have different stats. How is that possible? Why can we not upgrade a tech 1 ship to tech 2 or tech 3, when they are based on the same hull?(That is a change i would like to see.)
The 3 barges look different now, and have different sizes, shapes and stats. Why should they not have a different counts of strip miners? Now they will become the same ship, optical only different in size and not unique any more. This is wrong.
"Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen.
Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher.
Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen." (Ein Single)
"Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind." (Einer, dem es egal ist)
|
Lorelei Victoria Gilmore
Gilmore Mining And Manufacturing
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 06:49:02 -
[48] - Quote
I really like the bulkiness of the new graphical design, they now look like they cloud withstand collisions with some smaller asteroids.
Also I think that the removal of the role boni makes it easier for new players to distinguish between the roles of the Barges - I remember having to double-check the statement that the Procurer and die Retriever have similar yield, since at a first glance the Retriever clearly had double the amount of turrets. Sure, it was just a matter of looking up the Role Bonus, but this was easy for me because by then I already had some some calculations in EVE.
I do believe that now it is pretty clear that all three Barges can mine the same amount, while the Covetor gets that stuff faster, the Procurer more secure and the Retriever with less warping back to station. |
Mecatama Mk2
Dirt Cutleries Integritas Constans
47
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 07:04:48 -
[49] - Quote
Retriever, Covetor have 1 mid keep going?
if they get 2midn not makebalance issue
Rule #34 to EVEOnline.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296094
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=367650
|
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
237
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 07:22:28 -
[50] - Quote
Well, that was underwhelming. Just like the visual revamp.
Looks like you're still required to receive boosts to have any notable ISK income.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
|
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
836
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 07:46:59 -
[51] - Quote
How about a little more tank and drone Bay increase?
Currently, it's stupid easy to blow a Mackinaw and Hulk, and their T1 counterparts out of the sky. It's extremely unbalanced to still have 1-2 Destroyers easily kill a Barge in a 0.6 or even a 0.7 system. The HP increase in the last balance didn't do much in the way of preventing them from dying when someone sneezes on them...
Insert trolling in 3......2...... |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
5884
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 08:36:48 -
[52] - Quote
Kueyen wrote:This new Ore Strip Miner, at 4% better than a T1 Strip Miner, will be going as unused as the old one.
Don't the ORE strip miners and ice harvesters have a range bonus?
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
5884
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 08:42:58 -
[53] - Quote
New CSM, new developers dipping their toes into the mining pool. Time to push my ancient Mining is Boring blogpost about new ideas for mining itself, rather than shifting the mining barge deck chairs around on the proverbial Titanic.
And yes, I miss the days when grav sites were a thing.
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
5884
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 08:52:18 -
[54] - Quote
Cassiel Seraphim wrote:I'd rather see a shift towards faster cycling mining lasers, considerably faster cycling mining lasers.
So instead of buffing yield per pull, why not reduce cycle time (and cap usage) by the equivalent amount instead, so you mine the same yield/second but with more frequent and weaker pulls? It would make the gaming style less passive and annoying when mining multiple smaller asteroids for example.
I think part of the reasoning behind higher yield but long cycles is that the attentive player can increase yield by aborting a strip harvester cycle early, or even just leaving an asteroid behind once it no longer has a full cycle's worth of ore to extract.
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3557
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 08:58:42 -
[55] - Quote
i never used a barge before but i always thought that it was cool that the larger barges had more mining lasers. Why was that changed? Maybe to easier compare large barges with smaller ones since the bonus is now similar?
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1375
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 09:07:48 -
[56] - Quote
Mark O'Helm wrote:...Take the vexor and her 2 variations for example. They all look the same besides painting. But they have different stats. How is that possible? Why can we not upgrade a tech 1 ship to a tech 2 or tech 3, when they are based on the same hull?(That is a change i would like to see.)...
Read this and save it as desktop background. Then print it out 1000 times and hang in on your walls, so you can always look at it as if you were practicing for your SATs.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Yarosara Ruil
525
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 09:16:56 -
[57] - Quote
Maybe now I can finally convince my fellow miners to use the Procurer and not hear them moan about the lack of Highslots.
Mark O'Helm wrote: Take the vexor and her 2 variations for example. They all look the same besides painting. But they have different stats. How is that possible? Why can we not upgrade a tech 1 ship to a tech 2 or tech 3, when they are based on the same hull?(That is a change i would like to see.)
You must be new here. Last I checked, Tech 2 actually use Tech 1 ships to be produced, since they are basically overhauled Tech 1 ships with shinny new components and engines. Navy Issue ships follow the same principle as Tech 2, but they are built solely by their respective navies.
As for Tech 3, your lack of basic knowledge has been made very clear, so I'm not going to explain what's their deal. |
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
686
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 09:22:29 -
[58] - Quote
I am actually surprised that the retriever and mackinaw are in the top spot with the skiff and the procurer all the way down towards the lower end. I would be interested to see figures on for instance, how much time is spent in space in the various barges rather than ore mined. I expect the top ships are used in highly optimised fleet mining setups which skew the usage results.
All in all though at a glance the changes look good and the new barge artwork looks great. Good job.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1581
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 10:14:47 -
[59] - Quote
The new barges look sexy. And the new skins look even sexier, just sad they cost 10 F*CKING dollars!
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Alexis Ford
Good Names All Gone Southern Sitizens
4
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 10:26:50 -
[60] - Quote
So the only reason to train Exhumer to 5 will be for more shild resistances only ?
Sorry but thats not EVE ... who in Highsec would ever invest 30days of training with no reason ?
If you realy want to shift the use from Mackinaw to Hulk/Skiff there should be a real benefit from it.
Excample suggestions for Exhumer: +3% CPU or/and +3% Powergrid or/and -3% of miningcrystal Damage
Increasing Orehold with each level. Mackinaw should reach the 35k with Exhumer @L5 Skiff and Hulk will recieve 1k more each Level starting with their current Orecargo Value.
shortly said ... give Hulk/Skiff some "sexiness". I the original suggested change these are mostly "choose your skin" :) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |