|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
0
   |
Posted - 2017.04.10 17:02:48 -
[1] - Quote
Hi. Currently mining in my Exchumer. Would CCP make some modules that expand ore hold? |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
0
|
Posted - 2017.04.10 17:32:47 -
[2] - Quote
i dont think its possible to be able to mine afk. i have to constantly babysit the strip miners. maybe i am missing something. anyhow, a module that maybe does +5% ore hold but reduces maybe drone space and cargohold + structural hitpoints etc. seem like a fair tradeoff. Of course this is just off the top of my head and people who actually know how to balance may have a better idea. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 22:34:09 -
[3] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Why do you want your current hold nerfed and then force you to chose between ore hold or mining efficiency?
Convenience. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 22:35:14 -
[4] - Quote
Alderson Point wrote:The ore holds are arguably the main balance feature of mining barges, altering that balance would have consequences.
You might not like the consequences, really not like them at all.
What excactly would be imbalanced about increasing the ore hold? Im genuinely curious. It seems more like a QoL improvement |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 22:35:59 -
[5] - Quote
Max Deveron wrote:You do not need more space,
That is not up to you to decide. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 22:38:47 -
[6] - Quote
Matthias Ancaladron wrote:Support, just alter expanders to provide a percentage for every hold. Not just cargo.
I dont agree. Adding a specific Ore Hold increase module gives players greater flexiblility, but it also gives devs greater flexibility when it comes to balancing. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 22:41:14 -
[7] - Quote
Max Deveron wrote:Matthias Ancaladron wrote:Support, just alter expanders to provide a percentage for every hold. Not just cargo. Uhm yeah, how about no..... an the reason for that is the way CCP balances things like freighters. To get the same space we have now they will nerf the size down so that using expanders will get us the same space we already have now when using them. Some of you need to learn your history. no, no ,no Did I say NO, i think i did.
The current size of Ore Holds are completely arbitrary as far as i can tell. It wouldnt change the game much if the end result was a buff to ore hold sizes. But it would increase QoL for miners. But it comes with a trade off course, as usual. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.11 23:53:13 -
[8] - Quote
Are you suggesting i buy a rorqual? You cant be serious. Expandable ore holds is a neat "middle groound", altho its much more casual than getting a rorqual. Dont forget the casual players. Besides its an insult to the game when ships have attributes tlike ore holds that cannot be altered with fittings. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.15 08:17:32 -
[9] - Quote
The current level 4 mining mission im doing requires 44800m3 ore hold, but afaik no barge can keep that much.
For example my mackinaw has 35000m3 ore hold with my skills. Also why does skills affect the size of the ore hold? Makes no sense
Anyway, 35000m3. In order to be able to fit all the ore needed for this level 4 mission, it just needs an increase of 30% from modules. Would that be so bad? Im sacrificing possibly Yield and/or Tank.
To the people who think that Ore hold size needs to be nerfed when introducing Ore Hold increasing modules, get a grip. The ore hold sizes are arbitrary and do not affect PVP or PVE. If we could increase them by 30% or more with modules what excactly would be the harm? |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
2
|
Posted - 2017.04.15 08:39:09 -
[10] - Quote
Thanks for the input captain Obvious. But thats not what i meant by PVE. In fact nobody uses PVE to refer to mining. So why dont you go back to your wormhole with your strange definitions? |
|
|
manus
WESCORP 2.0
6
|
Posted - 2017.04.17 13:22:56 -
[11] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:The reason there aren't rigs or modules for or hold is because there's nothing there that would be a good trade-off except for an AFK player, and AFK play isn't something CCP wants to encourage..
But they are doing it completely wrong. In order to "punish" afk play, they compromise in the fundamental part of the game that makes it interesting. So the end result is yes they punish AFK play, but they also punish "legit" play by making the ships less flexible. It takes away from the enjoyment when CCP creates a ship with static attributes that cannot be changed by players. Its such a fundamental part of the game they cripple, just because they dont like AFK play. Besides, what difference does it make if an "AFK" miner, is able to get 10.000m3 larger Ore hold or more? I dont think more people will start AFK mining because of that. Mining just dont appeal to some people no matter what. Besides, IF more people starting AFK mining and more ore would enter the market, prices would fall, and isk/hour would even out. But seriously the change would be insignifcant. Its not like everyone will start mining just because barges get 10,000m3 larger ore holds. So please stop with the none sense. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
6
|
Posted - 2017.04.17 16:27:22 -
[12] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:AFK play is not something CCP wants to encourage.
What do you mean by AFK play? Do you consider mining AFK play?
|
manus
WESCORP 2.0
6
|
Posted - 2017.04.17 17:58:28 -
[13] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:manus wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:AFK play is not something CCP wants to encourage. What do you mean by AFK play? Do you consider mining AFK play? AFK play means you're doing stuff while not actually at the keyboard. If I'm in a Skiff and watching for hostiles while mining, that's at keyboard, even if I watch Netflix while I mine. AFK play would be firing up a Retriever's mining lasers and then tabbing out to play another game. Mining and ratting can be AFK play, but they don't have to be.
Nice try, but i dont see the difference between firing your lasers and watching netflix or fplaying another game. And obviously the less attention you pay while in space the more risk and the less isk you gonna make. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
6
|
Posted - 2017.04.18 15:23:26 -
[14] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:manus wrote:Dark Lord Trump wrote:manus wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:AFK play is not something CCP wants to encourage. What do you mean by AFK play? Do you consider mining AFK play? AFK play means you're doing stuff while not actually at the keyboard. If I'm in a Skiff and watching for hostiles while mining, that's at keyboard, even if I watch Netflix while I mine. AFK play would be firing up a Retriever's mining lasers and then tabbing out to play another game. Mining and ratting can be AFK play, but they don't have to be. Nice try, but i dont see the difference between firing your lasers and watching netflix or fplaying another game. And obviously the less attention you pay while in space the more risk and the less isk you gonna make. The difference is that I'm still looking at the screen instead of tabbed out completely. The former is multitasking, the latter is being AFK.
I think you are being redicolous. I mean things have gone too far when people concern themselves with things like this. "Its ok if he watches netflix while eve runs in the background, but if he plays another game he should be burned on a stake."
I mean if thats your best argument against Expanded Ore hold modules, i think its a go. |
manus
WESCORP 2.0
14
|
Posted - 2017.04.22 12:44:11 -
[15] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Personally I would do away with ore holds entirely. It should be up to the pilot to decide if they want max cargo at the expense of yeild and tank. As it is CCP have literally fitted the ship for you.
Ah yes. This reminds me of Transport Tycoon where you decide which type of cargohold your train, boat or plane has by refitting them. Maybe when they make EVE Online 2 they can do this type of thing. |
|
|
| |
|