EVE Search - Mobile Mining Gun

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Mobile Mining Gun

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Conspicio Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.26 19:52:00 - [1] CCP would like to see more pilots in null/low sec than in high sec. PvP pilot would love to have more targets in null/low sec. But alot of pilots do not see any benefits in going to lower security than 0.5. The reason is simple. Risk versus profit/gain. As an experience mining op***cutive. I have had several problem to get PvP pilots to attend to mining ops as Security force. To protect the mining op. The reason why they do not want to be there, is that there is to little action. Even if the payment have always been good. For skilled PvP pilot in a single Cruiser it is pretty simple to make a total havoc of a mining op in low sec without security. Even if the miners have really nice outfitted ship. So there is a need for some nice equipment for the miners to protect themself, and still be a nice fight for the pirates. One important thing with the Mobile Mining gun is that it should not make the mining belt 100% secure and that the pirates shouldn't have any chance at all. Only to even out the field a little. Especially since it is pretty unbalance today in favor for the pirates/PvP pilots. Restriction on the Mobile Mining Guns: Max Range between the guns. So that a belt can't be a fortress. * The guns should not be able to take out rats (NPC ship have MMG protection algorithm in they defense system. * Each MMG should consume fuel/hour small 1Misk, Medium 2Misk, Large 4Misk. * Each MMG should not be able to have more fuel than max 3-4 hours online state. * Each MMG should only have ammo for a small fight (ie 15-30 minutes). Skills: Anchoring (3) cost 75 000 ISK Mobile Mining Gun (3) 400 000 ISK Corporation Belt Protection (6) 1 000 000 ISK. Size vs skill-level Small: Anchoring II Mobile Mining Gun III (Corporation Belt Protection )to operate Medium Anchoring III Mobile Mining Gun IV (Corporation Belt Protection )to operate Large Anchoring IV Mobile Mining Gun V (Corporation Belt Protection )to operate Price Small: 700 000 ISK Medium: 2 700 000 ISK Large: 11 000 000 ISK =================== Function ============== The guns should behavie similar to Control Tower guns. So pilots that have the skill Corporation Belt Protection should be able to use one gun per level. To anchor and power up, only anchoring and Mobile Mining Gun skill should be enought. If an enemy pilot shoots down the MMG to the structure. The gun stop firing. That means a fleet of pirates that takes out a couple of sniper Battleship can "silent" takes out the guns. When the guns is offline, then it is time to send in the cavalry and take out the mining fleet. If an pilot that have the "Corporation Belt protection" skill, can take command over one to five guns, and then make a concentrate fire on the tactical right enemy. In that way "securing" the belt. With one little exception, he can't use it against an NPC pirate (aka rats).
Conspicio Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.26 19:55:00 - [2] Some attribute for the three sizes for this gun. Attribute Small Medium Large Volume 500 1000 5000 Anchoring Delay 150 sec 150 sec 150 sec Online delay 150 sec 150 sec 150 sec Shield Capacity 25 000 HP 50 000 HP 100 000 HP Shield recharge 2,500 sec 5,000 sec 10,000 sec Armor 375 000 HP 750 000 HP 1 500 000 HP Structure 500 000 1 000 000 2 000 000 Signature radius 50 150 450 Fuel size Ammo Capacity 2000 2000 2000 Charge Size Medium Large Extra Large Damage modifier 18 27 40 Optimal Range 150 000m 225 000m 300 000m Accuracy falloff 75 000m 112 000m 150 000m Signature Resolution 125m 400m 1000m Trackingspeed /Accuracy 0.01104 0.004107 0.00154 Max Anchor distance to other gun10 000m 20 000m 40 000m
iaminjita	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:04:00 - [3] ye be a great add on to a o.0 or wh mining ops
eva seive	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:12:00 - [4] Seems a decent enough idea for fuzzy care bears.
Erik Finnegan	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:14:00 - [5] Sounds quite reasonable ! I would like to hear, what the CSM assembly says to that next Sunday. IMHO this could really improve mining in low-sec. I would like to point the interested reader to a post on Features&Ideas, called Deployables and corporate specialisation, which could be capitalized together with this posting. Just a thought.
iP0D	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:29:00 - [6] Um, I thought this feature was called "Corporation and/or Alliance members"? I agree it is stupidly easy to break up mining ops and have a gank, IF you can find such an operation in 0.0 which does not have advance warning through scouts . Still, this is kind of a multiplayer game, right?
Arkale Dark Cursed Souls	Posted - 2009.07.26 20:43:00 - [7] Aye, i think this is a very good idea, as Cons specifies in his orginal post, no PvP pilots wanna be sitting around for hours on end protecting Hulks etc so it does leave them wide open for attack, at the moment for miners its either stay in High Sec or go to 0.0 for the rarer minerals where a bigger alliance can give system protection. The MMG sounds like a great idea, id say maybe limit the amount of Guns you can have in a belt (sorry typing and dunno if Cons mentioned this) but if u get each person flying Haulers/ Mining ships to drop a "MMG" it will be to powerful having say 20 of these guns in 1 belt wud be slaughter. But apart from that i think its a really good idea, cause at the moment for miners low sec is a nono. (not that im a miner myself i just think low sec is to overpowered on the Pirates side , miners deserve some defence, plus it makes it more fun for the pirates:P) Ark.
Deaths Doorsetp	Posted - 2009.07.26 21:21:00 - [8] sounds like a bad idea to me... thats what sentry drones are.... it would make low sec and null sec mining too easy. PVP is an integrel part of the game and pvp vs low sec miners keeps the market stable by keeping people that dont want to get shot in high sec. A security force isn't hard to get in a corp and if its that much of a problem hire some mercs for an hour or just mine smarter...
BlinDeamon	Posted - 2009.07.26 21:27:00 - [9] If you don't want to be shot then don't go into low sec. Whats to stop pvp'ers from setting these up to keep miners away? What stops me from defending a pos with these? Why not just fly a ship with warp core stabs when mining? wouldnt this cause more deaths of low sec miners that feel safe with these guns up? How many can you put out at once? What would stop people from gate camping with them? just a few questions/comments I have about these guns for carebears.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.07.26 21:48:00 - [10] Originally by: BlinDeamon If you don't want to be shot then don't go into low sec. Whats to stop pvp'ers from setting these up to keep miners away? what's to stop them? Well first... there's a fuel cost? Second there is no miners already. Lastly... what miners are being kept away? The real change is... 0.0... I could set them up... then ratting would be way safer. At the same time... the boring 2nd accounts can be mining. Then it comes back to uberblob time. EWWWWWWWW ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Sarcasm sux	Posted - 2009.07.26 22:00:00 - [11] The proposed fuel costs are low, you never said a dmg mod for the guns or a range mod. Your also puting dreadnought size guns on an auto turret... how does that protect agains a crusier that ruins ur ops since it wont be able to track? I mean, that was ur big example of why its needed right? What ever happened to this being a mulit-player game, play with some security members and get them into ur corp. If you want to be safe stay in high sec or get some security. If you dont want to be bothered by pvp'ers your playing the wrong game. As for 0.0 your alliance isnt doing its job if u have roaming bands of pirates taking down ur mining ops in ur sovergn space... If you dont own the space its your fault ur getting owned in it... join an alliance that controls the space already. Basicaly this seems to me like you trying to thake the multiplayer out of the MMO RPG.
Aethrwolf Home for Wayward Gamers	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:11:00 - [12] I like the idea, as long as its balanced not to eliminate the need for player protection. I'd see this more as a means to allow your guards to respond from somewhere else in system, not as a way to eliminate the need for them. I agree that currently balance is too much in the favor of pirates these days, but eve isnt supposed to be safe, so the balance should probably always favor them a bit. I say this AS an industrial player, btw. Absolutely everything is subjective.
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:29:00 - [13] So how many can be anchored on a particular grid? Currently towers have a fixed 'load' that they can support so these devices would also need some sort of limitation on how many could be plunked down. Or force them to require some other 'core' anchored device that provides power/cpu on the grid. They'll also need some sort of limitation as to where they can be anchored: Must be anchored within 100km of an asteroid. This to prevent them being spammed at gates, around stations/outposts, and used as supplemental POS defenses. Enable them to actively engage NPCs (because the NPCs will certainly engage them). Tracknig and ROF should be on par with POS anchored defenses and their scan resolution terribly low. Otherwise... it's a pretty decent idea. Also, they need to implement the same mechanic to allow 0.0 alliances to anchor defenses around other objects (gates/stations/outposts, but not POS structures that already have fixed defenses) Better yet: all they need is one device - The Defensive Screen Array. This item can be anchored at a belt or near a station/outpost/gate and allows the anchoring party to then put in place the same exact weapon arrays that are in the game for POS defense. The Defensive Screen Array can lock up to 6 targets and can be controlled by someone with Starbase Defense Skills in the corporation that anchored the Screen. No additional rights are needed.
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:35:00 - [14] This idea just seems ill-considered on all fronts. POS guns for temporary installations? Fuel costs per hour higher than the actual cost of the guns? If you want security on a mining op, bring friends, or fly a ship that can both mine and fight.
darius mclever	Posted - 2009.07.27 01:39:00 - [15] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto This idea just seems ill-considered on all fronts. POS guns for temporary installations? Fuel costs per hour higher than the actual cost of the guns? If you want security on a mining op, bring friends, or fly a ship that can both mine and fight. This.

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2009.07.27 07:13:00 - [16] would they go bzzt-bzzt instead of pew-pew then? sounds nifty.

Grann Thefauto Spook Division BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.07.27 16:44:00 - [17] This would be intriguing. Whats to stop them from being used for gate camps though?
Conspicio Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.27 16:59:00 - [18] Some short answer to the replies I have got. Yes this is a multiplayer game, iPOD is right there. The MMG is not to be used by a single player. Since the guns takes time to setup, needs to be maintaine with fuel. It isn't a work for a single player at the same time he/she is doing mining. So it is tool for mining ops with multiple miners. I have tried in my first post to point out it is for miners as in a collective group doing a mining ops. Death Doorsetp talks about sentry guns for miners. Well if we take the might hulk, it have a dronebay on 50m3 and a bandwith on 25m3. A single sentry drone takes 25m3. So if a miner in a hulk would use a sentry drone, he/she can only use one at a time. Also sentry drones is to target Battlecruiser or bigger ship. Most loadout on Hulk is about hobgoblin and in some case Hammerhead. Hobs is better since you will have 5 of the same type. Conclussion is simple for a miner: Don't use sentry drones, instead five hobs or equivalent drones. Sarcasm says that the fuel cost is to low. Well perhaps if you mount a single one. But the idea is that you should mount zero to many MMG in the belt. The more you put there, the more expensive is it. So from an economical point a mining op will not have so many of them, because they will drain the profit from the op. Herschel says that "bring friends to the mining op". Well the thing is that carebears tend to be with carebears and PvP with PvP. But that is not the main problem. The main problem is that PvP pilots don't want to be in a mining op. Since there is to little action. Hence the need for some kinds of protection for a mining ops (several miners and haulers). In the second post on the lowest row, I put some limitation how many guns you can have. That depends entirly on how long the mining belt is. The limitation is "Max Anchor distance to other gun (s)10 000m (m)20 000m (l)40 000m" Also in all my post above, I have talked about "Mobile Mining gun" from the name it is pretty clear that the guns can only be anchor in the ore belts and not at a gate. Personally I can't see any problem with players putting this on a gate. However, the fuel cost can be alot. So ... if those players would like to drain they wallet with fuelcost on MMG it is they problem :-D. Mister Xerox mention that the large is the same size that kills dreads. Well in theory a pirate could come to a mining belt in a Dread/Carrier. Hence the need for bigger guns. However, if you want to anchor one or more of them it will cost you alot of ISK. So to summarize it: 1.) There is a physical limitation how many guns you can have, depending on the size of the ore belt. 2.) There is an economical limitation how many guns you would like to anchor. 3.) The MMG is a support to a corp/alliance mining operations with several miners/haulers to participate in.
Conspicio Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.27 17:02:00 - [19] Originally by: Grann Thefauto This would be intriguing. Whats to stop them from being used for gate camps though? The name states pretty clear that it is "Mobile Mining Gun", ie for the ore belt. Also there is a cost factor, they will cost alot to run every hour. So having those guns on a Gatecamp will cost alot. So if CCP would give you the chance to use in a gate camp. The question would then be for you. How much should that gatecamp cost you per hour? 1Misk ... 2Misk ... 14000M isk? But that is only theoretical since the purpose of the guns is to be placed in a asteriod belt.
Malsvir Darastrix	Posted - 2009.07.27 18:28:00 - [20] Originally by: BlinDeamon If you don't want to be shot then don't go into low sec. Whats to stop pvp'ers from setting these up to keep miners away? What stops me from defending a pos with these? Why not just fly a ship with warp core stabs when mining? wouldnt this cause more deaths of low sec miners that feel safe with these guns up? How many can you put out at once? What would stop people from gate camping with them? just a few questions/comments I have about these guns for carebears. How sad that we don't want to be shoot at? With this guns there would be equal fights. But I guess that pirates don't like that. It is better for us miners to stay in high sec and mine there, and you get less target to shoot at. So for me, it is Thumbs up all the way for this really good idea.
PRO TECH	Posted - 2009.07.27 18:47:00 - [21] sounds good to me Cons but then TBH I think there needs to be something like a carrier thats crossed with a hulk (mines around the same as a hulk but has the use of fighters / drones like a carrier)might be something else to think about for none empire mining and being a capital ship it would take a fair few SP to be able to fly it unless your hulk pilot is also a carrier pilot
Kilostream Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:11:00 - [22] Edited by: Kilostream on 27/07/2009 20:11:50 Originally by: Mister Xerox So how many can be anchored on a particular grid? Must be anchored within 100km of an asteroid. How about, instead of a fuel cost, give it a time cost? Instead of some artificially-imposed limit on how many you may have on a grid, and another artificially imposed limit on having to anchor within 'x' kilometres of an asteroid, how about making the guns asteroid-mounted, with the mounting process requiring a drilling and fixing procedure that takes 'x' minutes to secure the gun to the asteroid. This way you do away with some artificial reason why the guns can only be in belts and replace it with an expected reason, and the fact that drilling the host asteroid and mounting the guns (to replace anchoring) will take a significant portion of time means players will be less inclined to spam them. Also perhaps an additional requirement that asteroids that have guns fitted cannot then be mined themselves (or perhaps if it is mined, the gun's fixings become unstable and the gun ceases to operate). Just a few more ideas for the pot! Nice idea - probably needs a bit of kinking out but you could be onto something!
james56 Shadow Incursion Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:41:00 - [23] Edited by: james56 on 27/07/2009 20:43:08 I love the idea, Its great for stimulating the industrial side of 0.0 and via that, to drop the mineral prices in empire. This will be a benefit for all in the long run. BUT!! The guns must have a range that is good enough to hit a fleet of 10 to 15 sniper battleships and actually scare them. They must therefore also have enough Hitpoints to be able to survive a at least a couple of volleys from 5 sniper battleships. You would be looking at something along the lines of 40k to 75k hitpoints. This is to let them actually be usable in fighting for a period of time and to give the miners the time to run away or do what miners do in 0.0. With a decent price tag and maybe some playing around with price tags, and ranges between guns it could be very interesting. Espescially when you start incorprating remote repping from logistics and people nearby to help out it could be very interesting. It would also give a good base for other tower that would limit the use of HICS/Dics, remote rep tower, etc etc etc. But all in all, Its pretty genius
steave435 Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.07.27 22:09:00 - [24] Not supported. If mining ships were supposed to be able to hold off PVP ships (which they shouldn't, ships designed and fitted for PVP should beat ships designed and fitted for PVE), they'd have spare slots and hardpoints for guns/missiles and a tank.
BelNevyn	Posted - 2009.07.28 17:20:00 - [25] Originally by: steave435 Not supported. If mining ships were supposed to be able to hold off PVP ships (which they shouldn't, ships designed and fitted for PVP should beat ships designed and fitted for PVE), they'd have spare slots and hardpoints for guns/missiles and a tank. Well the idea is not to give the miners weapon to defend of every PvP pilot. The idea is to give them some tools to make the fight a little bit more even. The only defence a miner have today is a few drones. Even the drones is not much help, since you can only have 5 active small drones. Or an mixed of medium and small drones (which we all know is crap setup to have). Or god forbid a single Sentry/Large drone. Another problem, which I belive this idea will help, is that there is few pilot in low sec and way to many in high sec. So how to get pilots out from high sec and into low sec and finally to the life of nullspace?. Well introduce them gently into the environment. Give them some equipment so that they can defend them self. Once they can see that they can defende them self without to much losses. They will begin to get more and more friends out. And at one point it could be that high sec will be for noobs (except Jita and other major tradehubs), lowsec for some experient pilots and nullsec for the eliteplayers or pilots that shouldn't be there but is there anyway. So for that reason I fully support this great idea. For us PvP there is also a nice addition. I can think about alot of nice tactical situation where even we can have use of these guns. I would love to have a couple in my hangar and have them deployed in mining belts for some nice target to take out :-D.
Agent Known Apotheosis of Virtue	Posted - 2009.07.29 00:19:00 - [26] Supported. Not like a support fleet can help the miners much if they get BBQ'd by snipers to begin with.
Felix Mibaz	Posted - 2009.07.29 12:30:00 - [27] There used to be an alliance that did pretty good for itself, living in low sec behind a scouted pipe, while they did missions and mined inside. It took some scouts, a good location, while still they weren't free from disaster, they gave themselves a higher chance to make isk/live there without much threat. I can't remember their names, but living or operating in low sec takes more effort than endlessly sitting in high sec wishing you could go there, waiting for CCP to fix low sec. Not supported. Becoming more dedicated as a corp/alliance, is the only really fix for this.
Conspicio Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.30 19:17:00 - [28] Daily Bump :-D
iP0D	Posted - 2009.07.30 21:26:00 - [29] Originally by: steave435 Not supported. If mining ships were supposed to be able to hold off PVP ships (which they shouldn't, ships designed and fitted for PVP should beat ships designed and fitted for PVE), they'd have spare slots and hardpoints for guns/missiles and a tank. As much as I think the concept proposed by the OP is horrible, since this is a multiplayer game, you probably need to look a bit further out Mining ships, industrial ships, they do not have a primary focus on shooting stuff making pretty explosions, but like every ship in EVE they have an inherent design to participate in PVP. For a big part through teamwork (again). Besides, I have seen plenty l33t wannabee pvp nano or long range roam get creamed by carebear ships over the years Think outside the (sand)box. Now on topic. The proposal is pretty much something between a POS gun and a sentry drone which uses consumables in order to let people be more afk then already. Well, the ganker in me says "cool", the more sleeping targets the better. But come on, please, use a little teamwork. Stay active a little. Every seen a mad gang of barges eating a belt with drones & sentries packed and cloaked tacklers around the belt, not to mention the scouts in the neighbouring systems?
Conspicio	Posted - 2009.08.01 21:10:00 - [30] Daily Bump

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.