|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
21
   |
Posted - 2014.01.29 03:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Because miners need to be ganked, that's just the way of the universe. You can't argue with that.
I may disagree with a lot of your posts, but damn I love this one.
|
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 03:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
James Nikolas Tesla wrote:I've been thinking of this idea for quite some time and have beat out some rough numbers for a versatile battleship hull of ORE design that can be used for mining, mining fleet defence, or somewhere in between.
Name: Bulwark (Suggestions Welcome)
H - 4
M - 5
L - 5
Turret Hardpoints - 2
Cargo Hold - 500
Ore Hold - 20,000 m^3
Drone Bay - 125 m^3
Drone Bandwidth - 125 mbps
Shield - 3500
Armor - 4500
Structure - 4000
Rig Size - Large
Velocity - 60 m/s
PG - (Battleship Powergrid)
CPU - (Battleship CPU)
Capacitor - (Battleship Capacitor)
Cap Recharge -
Cap Recharge Rate - 8 gj/s
Lock Range - 50 km
Role Bonus
100% increase in large turret damage
50% increase in large turret optimal and falloff range
Can fit Mining Foreman Links.
Exhumers Skill Bonus
10% Increased scan range for Survey Scanners per level
20% Increased range of Strip Miners per level
5% increase of mining crystal effectiveness per level.
Skill Requirements: Exhumers III and its prerequisite skills
Any ideas for suggestions/changes are welcome.
I don't like the current iteration of this idea. Your efficiency for mining should be slightly lower than a skiff, perhaps make it so that it is restricted to one strip miner and has three turret hardpoints. That gives it 6 effective hardpoints, making its dps respectable but less than combat battleships who typically have hull bonuses to make their turrets worth much more than 6. The drone bandwidth would also allow you to field a flight of heavies or senties which might be a little strong but perhaps not.
The ore is ridiculous in size. It should be large enough to fit a single cycle of the strips at max skills and with implants. That gives you plenty of time to jetcan or move otherwise free up your ore hold for another cycle, this isn't like rokh mining with the hand cramping pain that was a full rack of miner IIs, you don't need a bigger hold than one cycle gives you.
To review:
Less mining power than a skiff
Less dps than a combat battleship
Ore hold only large enough for one cycle
I would accept this as a new ship, and it might even be useful. The EHP values I don't even want to look at, but they shouldn't be excessive.
|
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
Meyr wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Because miners need to be ganked, that's just the way of the universe. You can't argue with that. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
Sounds like baby needs a nap.
|
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
Edwin McAlister wrote:is there any logical economic / game play balance reason why there can not be a battleship sized version the 3 existing miner types that is better... a battleship hulk that mines more, a battleship mak that holds ect ect?? figuring 10%-20% more
or is it only about the gankability of said ships?
the ability to suicide gank another player is not a game balance factor and all decisions should not be revolved around that factor alone
I want to see reasons why in the bigger picture of things... will it drive the economy up or down or maintain a form of balance, would it drastically alter the state of the game....
Well for starters, they have stated that they don't want anything more powerful than the hulk in terms of yield. I don't know where, it's probably everywhere. So more yield than a hulk is already a no no. Secondly, if you look at the trend between the three classes of current mining ships you'll see that they always trade off something for something else. Usually trading off the primary fuction for utility. The procurer/skiff has the highest EHP and in consequence has the second highest capacity and lowest yield. The retriever/mackinaw has the highest cargohold but second highest yield and second highest EHP. The hulk is max yield but sacrificing everything else.
Yield is the primary function of a mining ship, so they sacrifice yield to get secondary utility. What you propose gains yield and sacrifices nothing in fact it gains in all areas except cargo. it is very clear that they do not want people mining freely in high sec, which is why these ships aren't indestructible. The hardest ones to kill have the lowest yield, so if you want to get more ore per hour you need to do it in a riskier ship.
I don't have statistics (but I'm sure CCP does) but yes I believe it would very likely hurt the economy. Something like this would be excessively cost-inefficient to gank, most groups just would not be able to afford it and allowing mass mining freely like that does hurt the economy. Not only from botting but from multiboxing too. Not being able to explode them stops us from disrupting the supply driving prices down. It's not healthy for the economy.
Could be an overestimation of how much high sec mining affects the economy when nullbear miners are mining in almost complete safety on vastly superior ore with much larger roid sizes. |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
James Nikolas Tesla wrote:PG - 15,000
CPU - 500
Capacitor - 5,000
How about these numbers?
I think you should focus less on numbers are more about the high level detail of the ship. Leave the numbers to CCP if they end up making it. Number of turrets, what the role bonus is maybe, but no hard numbers and not for the rest of the stuff either. Capacitor, fitting require testing, leave that to CCP (to not do, release on TQ anyway and then tweak after it's been abused for a few days/months/years/still going).
You want a battleship that can mine a respectable amount and still fight back, yes? |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Stephanie Rosefire wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What makes this ship worth the cost of ganking it? the point of this ship, from what im reading, is to deal with gankers like you. there should never be an incentive for something to be ganked. CCP doesnt design ships with an incentive to be ganked.
Actually, the redone designs of the exhumers had gankers in mind when they tweaked them.
The hulk's low EHP is specifically to be easy to gank. Conversely the skiff's high EHP is specifically to be difficult to gank, and it trades yield for it.
They DO want people to gank mining ships, but obviously they want it to cost something in terms of player time and/or isk. |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
Too many stupid people in this thread asking for a high EHP, high yield and large cargo bay along with the ability to shoot back effectively.
They aren't going to give that to you, you know that, right? If they had wanted to give that in the first place they would have given the hulk battleship EHP, a huge ore hold and a full flight of sentries/heavies, maybe some turret slots too.
If you want a ship that can fight back and take a hit, you need to sacrifice in some locations that directly benefit the mining aspect, ore hold and yield.
Like this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4166349#post4166349 |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:Stephanie Rosefire wrote:there should never be an incentive for something to be ganked. CCP doesnt design ships with an incentive to be ganked. Suicide ganking was a factor in the mining barge rebalancing. Since then, I believe they've even stated they got the numbers wrong and gave mining barges too much EHP.
Really, where? Are they going to adjust them down at all? Now you've got me excited, don't you ******* tease me. |
My Little Pyongyang
State War Academy
Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:My Little Pyongyang wrote:Riot Girl wrote:Stephanie Rosefire wrote:there should never be an incentive for something to be ganked. CCP doesnt design ships with an incentive to be ganked. Suicide ganking was a factor in the mining barge rebalancing. Since then, I believe they've even stated they got the numbers wrong and gave mining barges too much EHP. Really, where? Are they going to adjust them down at all? Now you've got me excited, don't you ******* tease me. I don't know, it was something I read from another poster so it may not be accurate.
Dammit, now I'm all disappointed. |
|
|
| |
|