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?

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 definitions?

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?

I for one would love to see expander modules and rigs that trade hull strength for more ore hold m3.

I detest the logic that lead to standardized, safe4bears, ore holds that no longer force pilots to choose between efficiency and hull integrity.

Let me mine in an oversized, wet, cardboard box if I want!
You can't force me to be safe!

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..

If this is true. 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. End of they its a QoL improvement more than anything.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

That is not what the word "literally" means, as they have not in fact fitted the ship.

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.

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.