Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Bein Glorious
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.08.13 22:47:00 -
[301]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Its not an exaggeration, but neither will I state how its possible.
If, as i suspect, it involves T2 rigs, then its an exaggeration. Even then, this particular situation could be solved by putting an extra 1,000m3 on the item involved.
I know what he is talking about and it is not exaggeration, though I don't know if anybody's actually bothered to do it. Firstname Lastname figured it out about a year ago. |
kasalupin
|
Posted - 2007.08.13 22:49:00 -
[302]
OK folks,
Fasten your seatbelt, this is going to be a long post but it is gonna be worth it i hope since it will shine a light on the whole reprocess/rorqual issue since those two items look like to be closely linked.
Ok, so instead of the usual whine and how to fix the issue and since the decision is at least posponed let try to figure out why the devs at ccp reached this option and the underlying rationale behind it.
So let start by the first player in this match: the new shiny ship the rorqual.......
CCP would like them to be in belt with a bunch of hulks and mine a lot of roids to everybody profit.....
We all know the general player inventiveness in figuring out new use for this ship. Instead, this ship probably become a glorified mini freighter with the cargohold of a pimped up dread and the ship bay of a carrier.....
It might stay at a pos for its nice mining bonus and might have his ore compression feature being used to carry even more minerals in ninja mining ops.
This ore compression feature is the main issue with the traditional ore compression method.
So let say hello to the second player: the minerals compressions bit
We all know that no one in its right mind mine veldspar in low sec or 0.0 and that pvp in such regions require massive amount of minerals to build the replacement ships and the massive capital ships that require oodle of low end minerals.
At the beginning,you had nice and impressive convoy ops where you would find freighters loaded with tons of uncompressed trit and 30 ships just there to do the escort. Most people figured out that it is a very inefficient way to move stuff and here come the carrier with mineral compressions technology. Sure it cost some money to make the jump but it is so much safer and more importantly so much faster....... A freighter op easily take a few hours to do, a carrier jump take just a few minutes.
Surely, ccp focus on the more massive mineral compressor but there is a catch to mineral compression: it is time....... Not only you have to check the compression ratio but you also have to check the compression time..... Compressing minerals and moving them require some form of planning as with moving them.
As stated by other people in the various threads, we all agree that the jump portal and doomsday compression rate are absurd and should be reduced but the other items fullfill a crucial roles since no one move low end minerals in uncompressed form in low sec or 0.0 since the value of the cargo is not worth the risk.
But let go back to the issue, ore compression and mineral compression are clearly competitot right?
Wrong, there could be ways to make them work both together and to be beneficial to everybody.
But why then this mineral nerf..... I feel it is due to:
a) trying to advantage the use of the compression feature of the rorqual
b) trying to deal with a predicted increase in mineral supply.....
Increase in mineral supply????? wtf?? Well let think about it.....
Except for chribba and excluding macroers, it is mostly new players that mine the low end ore and they usually have crap refine rates so about 20% of the mined amount is lost. What would probably happen is that major industrialist would buy the raw ore direct and then compress it to refine it later so you basically end up having lot of trit that will not end in roid repro waste but being used. Sure,roids are being bought atm but with this ore compression feature, the roids value will increase to probably more than their raw refine rate since their valuewill lie in their ability tbe compressed.
So you now see the rationale of the whole story: reduce the repro rate of some items to reduce the low end availability and expect this to be balanced out with more roids low end to flood the market.
|
kasalupin
|
Posted - 2007.08.13 22:49:00 -
[303]
As shown in this thread,the reprocessing not only affect logistic but it also affect the livelyhood of many low sec and 0.0 dwellers that need these minerals to built their replacement parts (ships and ammo) in such treacherous space.
Also, this thread show that you shouldn't try to force fed a new feature such as this one with wide implication instead make the alternative more appealing.
Everybody know that eve is about pvp and logistic is not really pvp it is dull and tedious for most people. It is a grind and like all grind you will see as little as possible amount of ressource and player time used to do it.
So sure after the 30% carrier carrying capacity nerf, a new capital ship designed to haul stuff is good but it doesn't have the base range of a carrier which still make the carrier suitable for interregion jumping. Again it is dull to have cyno alt and if you can get rid of some you will probably use a more efficient ship. The rorqual with the same range of the carrier will replace it since it carry more while the dread has not replaced the carrier even after the carrier nerf since its jump range limit him a bit.
As regard to the ore compression feature, it will all depend on the strontium cost of it vs its usefullness but a virtual 600k compressed bay sure look sexy.
The orqual in roid feature will probably not happen since a hulk cost 150M top to replace compared to 2Bill for the rorqual. Maybe if the rorqual was EW resistant and had a capital shield boost feature both on the capital shield booster and capital shield transport amount then it might make a viable tanker but atm with no offensive ships in its bay it just look like a big shoot me sign.
As regard to the way it was handled, i just don't understand why i was not proposed sooner and the time delay of the rorqual operation compared to the immediate reduction in mineral availability taken in account. Surely, a DB query can show you how many players can currently pilot this ship and thus its availability in the current game dynamic.
But, most importantly, why no prior discussion, the indusrialist and traders out there are a bunch of well behaved folks that are more than happy to discuss how to improve the overall trade industrialist part of the game.
I am happy that this change has be postponed but since it is only postponed let try in a few months after the rorqual full effect to check if it is still needed or a small tinkering of compression volume is required.
|
Luaren Avidius
|
Posted - 2007.08.13 23:45:00 -
[304]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Important Update
The item material reprocessing fix will be delayed until a future patch after kali 2.2. Many players have asked for more time to adapt to the changes and time to assess suitable alternatives being implemented as we talked about previously such as addressing the mining of veldspar in null sec for example with additional bonuses to the skiff and mackinaw amongst other suggestions made elsewhere in this thread by many players.
A much better roadmap and sequence of changes is needed and preferable with time to implement and see how the Rorqual and other alternatives mature before we fix this bug and take away something many have come to rely on.
We realise many supercap industries have heavy reliance on this method to supply their minerals from the marketplace and that whilst the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke and something we want to fix, it can be done in a better way.
In summary, nothing with these modules is happening till at least kali 3.0 now, where nearer the time we will address other mechanics such as low/null sec low-ore mining and others in parallel to provide good and better alternatives.
Most importantly, thanks to those of you who provided good constructive feedback, it is always awesome that you care as much as we do about the game and help us find the right direction for it together.
THANK YOU for listening! Now hopefully we can all work with you to find real solutions to the problem of mineral compression that the JPG and DDDs can cough up.
|
Heikki
Gallente Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.13 23:46:00 -
[305]
Just to add an opinion: the planned change (fixing compression) was good and fair; fixing something that was never supposed to be.
It's a game: it works better if things are challenging and changing.
-Lasse
|
Audri Fisher
Caldari VentureCorp Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 00:07:00 -
[306]
Originally by: Francesca Dell'Agio
Originally by: Cringeley Wait, does any of this have to do with the fact that Dr.Eyj=G's background is in "experimental economics"? Are we being used as research subjects?
Always. But there are other questions you should be asking yourself. - why have some folks no longer been bothering with keeping their pets alive for other purposes then the meatshield - why have some folks sold off their jump portal generators en masse about a month ago after non stop production and shipping for 3 months and refining them like mad - why have some folks consciously decided to not upgrade refineries at a point in time well before this came out
I seriously hope it's not getting to that point again, but a few leadership posts on a few forums from before all of this surfaced now make sense.
We have a winner.....
|
Chruker
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 00:41:00 -
[307]
The newest patch on SISI has an unpublished blueprint which can build the advanced lab from a regular lab. Is this something that is coming which will allow us to upgrade existing labs? ----- http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online ----- Top wishes: - No daily downtime - Faster training on sisi - Updated data export - Speedup IGB table rendering |
Admiral Nova
Strike Team Nova
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 02:32:00 -
[308]
Hmm.. Actually I was thinking about bonuses on the Skiff etc, one thing that did concern me was that while being able to mine veld in 0.0 closer to the value of crokite et al would be good, you'd have to be careful to not make it too easy in highsec or prices would really tank.
|
Admiral Nova
Strike Team Nova
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 02:49:00 -
[309]
Hmm. Can you fit a doomsday into the highs of a frigate and just not have it active ?
Mind you training that skill for that purpose...
|
Admiral Nova
Strike Team Nova
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 03:06:00 -
[310]
I'm wondering if this couldn't just be applied to capital mods... After all unless they're going to be dropping as loot (possible ?) there's much less need to refine those...
|
|
Mantalari Altis
Caldari Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 05:56:00 -
[311]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke
OK, you had to know that people were going to at least try to figure this out, especially after someone calls you on it and you claim it isn't an exaggeration but that you're not going to tell us how...
Now, two freighters worth (assuming we're not reprocessing the freighters themselves and also not the frigate) is, in the smallest possible case going to be two Fenrirs. At 720,000 m3 each, that's 1.44M m3. (And that's ignoring the fact that the pilots have to have at least one level of Minmitar Freighter giving them a 5% bonus and taking it to 756,000 m3 per Fenrir).
I've by no means done an exhaustive check, but if we take frigate to literally mean things listed in the market or item database under the 'Frigate' heading, then I think the best cargo hauling frigate is the Inquisitor. It has a base cargo hold of 315 m3, three low slots and three rig slots. Near as I can tell, this gets you (with T2 expanders and T2 rigs) 1,128.2 m3. If you then stuff that full of cargo containers, the best case will be that you gain 20% per 100m3, bringing you to 1348.2 m3.
Now, without going into just which compression item you're going to try to squeeze into those cans, lets assume that we can get the best case 430:1 compression (even though that's on the jump portal generator, which while one would fit in 1000m of our base hold, that means we'd be sacrificing 200 m3 that we could gain from cans). 430 * 1348.2 is only a bit under 580,000 m3. And in reality we can't get that since we can't use all the capacity evenly with something that gets us the full 430:1.
If on the other hand, we take frigate to mean a frigate-sized ship, then we could look at destroyers. Tech II ships tend to have extra slots, but drop a rig slot and generally have smaller cargo holds than the largest frigates and destroyers. Again, I'm betting that Amarr is going to get us the most bang for our buck.
A Coercer looks like the best bet, with a base hold of 300 m3, four low slots and three rig slots. Again, we can fit T2 expanders and rigs for a total hold size of 1369.95 m3 before cans. Cans would bring it to 1629.95. Still a theoretical maximum of no more than 700878.5 m3. That still falls short of a full freighter... not much though.
Even so, these theoretical maximums are unattainable without some way to squeeze our 430:1 ratio items into cans as small as 120 m3 on the inside... not to mention the tens of m3 that are not holding a container.
OK, that still leaves us with high and medium slots on the ship... Again, the destroyer is likely to be the best bet. Can we manage to squeeze 740,000 m3 into the module slots left over and still meet the "no more than 50% over the PG of the ship" requirement to undock? (Or was that restriction removed?)
I'm pretty sure we're not going to manage it...
But let's assume for a moment that we can manage it.
Let's say I've managed to pack 1.44 million m3 of compressed minerals onto and on a coercer hull. Even assuming that it is only tritanium involved, the coercer is now holding 144 million units of compressed trit worth somewhere around two and change isk per unit... Lets just call it 400 million isk. And you expect ANYONE to risk 400 isk in cargo to a ship with the handful of hitpoints that a Coercer has (after modified by expanded cargoholds and cargohold optimizations)? Oh yeah... and then there's the cost of those three T2 rigs and 3 expanders to add into the uber-destroyer we just lost to a rocket kessie in empire.
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that you guys a reconsidering at least the rapid/stealth deployment of this change. But I had to at least try to boggle this one out a bit.
And yes, it is still pretty broken that you could haul two-thirds of a freighter's worth of minerals un just about any frigate or destroyer if you REALLY tried.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 06:57:00 -
[312]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 14/08/2007 06:57:43
Originally by: Mantalari Altis
Originally by: CCP Chronotis the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke
OK, you had to know that people were going to at least try to figure this out, especially after someone calls you on it and you claim it isn't an exaggeration but that you're not going to tell us how...
I don't know enoug about carriers but:
a) can you put a ship in the hangar of a carrier with oversized, inactive modules on?
b) can you install a oversized, unactive module at a POS or with the help of a carrier and then fly throug a gate/use a jump bridge?
If one or both of those option are possible, you have your solution.
|
Sinder Ohm
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 07:32:00 -
[313]
Thankyou for listining to us CCP!
Originally by: Rawne Karrde PVP in EvE is consentual, you agree to it when you login. If you don't like it you're in the wrong game.
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
Techmart Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 09:16:00 -
[314]
With the addition of the new Adv LAB, is it possible to have 12tF CPU added to the small Gallente tower?
To fit 2 x Adv + 1 x basic LAB you will need 1700tF (2x600+500), the tower produce 1688.
People using small Caldari towers will be laughing as they easily can fit 3 Adv LABs and still have spare CPU left.
Ofcourse the best option would be to only add 10% CPU/PG to the Adv LAB. Could fit 3 of them on a small Gallente tower then.
Signature approved by Eldo |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
Techmart Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 09:32:00 -
[315]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke
If you can fit a frig with 4 offline jump portal generators in the highslots using a POS I can see how this would be possible.
Signature approved by Eldo |
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 09:41:00 -
[316]
Originally by: Mantalari Altis
...
And you expect ANYONE to risk 400 mil isk in cargo to a ship with the handful of hitpoints that a Coercer has (after modified by expanded cargoholds and cargohold optimizations)?
Your reasoning has a flaw: you don't need to fly that ship. You could scoop it into shiphangar of carrier. And since frig sized ships are small you could transport lots of them in a single carrier...
|
John McCreedy
Caldari Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 12:40:00 -
[317]
Has it ever actually occured to you that living in 0.0 is hard enough as it is right now and the reason that most logistics are done via Carrier and mineral compression and not Freighter, is not because we can't afford freighters and not because it's safer but because most of us don't want to spend two nights a week doing a six hour round trip to Empire and back? Freighters are fantastic at moving large quantities of items through Empire afk on AP (or would be if you'd stop high-sec ganking) but as a tool for Alliances, they're more a hinderence by putting people off playing Eve than a help.
Has it also ever occured to you that the only reason to live in 0.0 is the fact that it brings greater wealth therefore no one wants to mine veld in 0.0. Where's the reward compared to the risk there when you can just mine it in 1.0?
Give us a jump capable Freighter please for 0.0 logistics if you want to remove mineral compression. Make it easier to live in 0.0, not harder.
Make a Difference
|
Internet Online
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 12:46:00 -
[318]
Someone noted before that the whole mining Veldspar in 0.0 for Tritanium problem could be solved by introducing new types of 0.0 or low sec asteroids with vastly greater low end mineral yields. Is there any reason why such an easy fix to the whole mineral packaging issue wouldn't be feasible?
|
D Gelalder
Gallente Apraxia
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 13:23:00 -
[319]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Important Update
The item material reprocessing fix will be delayed until a future patch after kali 2.2. Many players have asked for more time to adapt to the changes and time to assess suitable alternatives being implemented as we talked about previously such as addressing the mining of veldspar in null sec for example with additional bonuses to the skiff and mackinaw amongst other suggestions made elsewhere in this thread by many players.
Instead of a ship specific bonus, a mining upgrade module that give a bonus for mining a specific group of ores might be interesting to look at.
|
Mantalari Altis
Caldari Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 13:26:00 -
[320]
Originally by: Internet Online Someone noted before that the whole mining Veldspar in 0.0 for Tritanium problem could be solved by introducing new types of 0.0 or low sec asteroids with vastly greater low end mineral yields. Is there any reason why such an easy fix to the whole mineral packaging issue wouldn't be feasible?
Actually, I've been thinking about this a bit with this thread.
Why not new ore types that can only be found via exploration in 0.0 and require deep core mining but yield huge quantities of low-ends?
They could even have very poor reprocessing characteristics without training of extra skills if you feel a need to make it something hard to exploit, or require special POS modules to reprocess them at all... they could even require your new rorqual to mine and or reprocess them, giving the ship a reason to exists in 0.0.
You just need to make the value of the low-ends mined in this way worth the time when compared to either the logistics of hauling in compressed minerals, or the other profitable activities that a highly developed 0.0 character could be doing instead.
|
|
Mynchko Atoch
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 13:27:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Mantalari Altis
Originally by: CCP Chronotis the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke
OK, you had to know that people were going to at least try to figure this out, especially after someone calls you on it and you claim it isn't an exaggeration but that you're not going to tell us how...
Now, two freighters worth (assuming we're not reprocessing the freighters themselves and also not the frigate) is, in the smallest possible case going to be two Fenrirs. At 720,000 m3 each, that's 1.44M m3. (And that's ignoring the fact that the pilots have to have at least one level of Minmitar Freighter giving them a 5% bonus and taking it to 756,000 m3 per Fenrir).
... and lots more blather missing the point ...
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that you guys a reconsidering at least the rapid/stealth deployment of this change. But I had to at least try to boggle this one out a bit.
And yes, it is still pretty broken that you could haul two-thirds of a freighter's worth of minerals un just about any frigate or destroyer if you REALLY tried.
Mate, you are not as clever as you think you are. Who said anything about using the frigate's cargo hold?
|
Mantalari Altis
Caldari Mercatoris Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 21:18:00 -
[322]
Originally by: Mynchko Atoch
Who said anything about using the frigate's cargo hold?
Nobody I suppose. But if you're fitting off-lined capital modules on a frigate and able to fly it around, then that is what's broken. Not the modules.
I'm guilty of the same thing on a smaller scale myself. Back before they put the bit in about not being able to undock if you'd drastically exceeded the ship's grid (and CPU?) I used to fly a frigate with large guns or launchers in the highs (off-lined) to get a couple extra big named items ferried up from 0.0 to empire for sale. It was a cheap way to deal with a small cargo hold while still having a fast maneuverable ship that took a long time to lock so that it could skitter through gate camps. Nowadays there'd be no need for anything like that, but at the time it was a handy little trick.
But now you have the ability to fit in space... who needs to undock? Maybe the check should be moved to when you fit the module. [Cue Aura voice] "You cannot fit that module as you do not have enough power grid to fly the ship, even with the module offline." Problem solved.
Quote:
Mineral compression is broken .. fix the offending modules.
I agree with that to some degree. Certainly compression ratios of 430:1 are pretty wrong. But that's easily fixed in a lot of cases.
How about making jump portal generators have a volume of 10,000 m3 instead of 1000 m3? Suddenly it has a 43:1 compression ratio. Still pretty hefty, but not that bad. Still fits in a industrial, depending on the ship and fittings. Not a few dozen at a time, but it does fit.
Another option is to change the mineral ratios. Decrease the amount of tritanium and pyerite used and increase the amount of mexallon and isogen for example.
Better still, combine the two. Make the module take up 2000 or 3000 m3 while fiddling with the mineral ratios.
The same re-balancing can be done with lots of modules that have high compression ratios. Mix and match which things go up here and there so that you're not putting too much strain on any given mineral.
Would this take a lot of effort to do it well? Yes. But it makes a lot more sense than what had been proposed so far.
And I'm definitely down with reducing the need for massive importation of highly compressed low-ends by making it profitable, or at least reasonable to mine them in 0.0 through the introduction of special 0.0 low-end bearing ores as mentioned in recent posts in this thread.
Quote: There is nothing intrinsically wrong with reducing the perfect recycling to introduce a cost, but while you allow capital ships to be perfectely deconstructed into components, you will just change the engineered process and make it more tedious, with carriers being constructed in low sec and 'recycled' in null sec.
Well, I think there actually is something intrinsically wrong with it. And I think the something is largely bound up in the ramifications that such a cost would have. They've been outlined repeatedly in this thread.
Ultimately, without addressing the issues of availability of low-end ores in 0.0, you could easily end up with carriers being reprocessed as a means of mineral importation.
|
Ki Tarra
Caldari Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.14 22:54:00 -
[323]
Edited by: Ki Tarra on 14/08/2007 22:55:57
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Compression Rates
~20:1 for high end ores ~20:1 for 'medium' ores ~40:1 for low end ores ~8:1 for ice
While 40:1 compression might sound okay, that is the compression of the ore, not the minerals. Your best actual compression ratio is 13:1 with Dense Veldspar.
Here is a quick run down of the mineral compression/expansion ratios. The 'concentrated' and 'dense' versions of the ores would provide and addition 5% or 10% bonus to the compression ratio.
Compression: 11.99 Veldspar 9.90 Scordite 4.09 Pyroxeres 3.47 Plagioclase
Expansion: (Yes, these compressed ores are still larger than their minerals.) 2.03 Omber 2.07 Kernite 3.83 Jaspet 8.56 Hemorphite 6.85 Hedbergite 20.40 Spodumain 11.68 Gneiss 16.00 Ochre 29.36 Crokite 20.02 Bistot 20.02 Arkonor 94.33 Mercoxit
I am glad to hear that the mineral compression nerf has been delayed, but I think that if the ore compression is introduced correctly, the inevitable nerf can be done with much more grace.
I would recommend rebalancing the ores based on their mineral compression ration instead of the ore compression ratio. As an example Low's ~40:1, Mid's ~20:1, Hi's ~10:1, or whatever is deemed to be reasonable. If compressed ore is established as a viable form of minerals transportation, it could be balanced directly.
This might also help boost low sec mining, as the low sec ores would tend to be the best choice for mid range mineral compression. Low sec operations would also be required to compress hi sec ore.
Ultimately the modules used for compression can be nerfed individually overtime, instead of nerfing refining in general. Personally I favor size adjustments for many of the modules.
Quote: No misfortune is so bad that whining about it won't make it worse
|
Adm Tecumseh
Caldari The Templars Knights
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 03:53:00 -
[324]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Important Update
The item material reprocessing fix will be delayed until a future patch after kali 2.2. Many players have asked for more time to adapt to the changes and time to assess suitable alternatives being implemented as we talked about previously such as addressing the mining of veldspar in null sec for example with additional bonuses to the skiff and mackinaw amongst other suggestions made elsewhere in this thread by many players.
A much better roadmap and sequence of changes is needed and preferable with time to implement and see how the Rorqual and other alternatives mature before we fix this bug and take away something many have come to rely on.
We realise many supercap industries have heavy reliance on this method to supply their minerals from the marketplace and that whilst the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke and something we want to fix, it can be done in a better way.
In summary, nothing with these modules is happening till at least kali 3.0 now, where nearer the time we will address other mechanics such as low/null sec low-ore mining and others in parallel to provide good and better alternatives.
Most importantly, thanks to those of you who provided good constructive feedback, it is always awesome that you care as much as we do about the game and help us find the right direction for it together.
OK what we are actually talking about is the jump portal generator. I have the BPO and spent months researching it to level me4. I paid 450 mil or more for it, months ago. I also have 8 perfect passive targetter BPOs. Worth about 15 mil per. So what we are talking about is taking about 800 million in assets from me for no real reason. ( I figure the me4 jump portal generator BPO is worth 650-700 mil now)
Very friggin Nice CCP.
How about this. Make a line of code that prevents capital mods from being put on a non-capital ships impossible.
Or how about this? Decrease the compression rate from 430:1 to something more like 17.2:1 by making the space of the jump portal generator 25k m3, That way only one can be brought down from empire in a carrier at a time. ( unless you find a way to seriously trick out your carrier.)
These 2 solutions result in the same end result however don't screw any player over for net worth.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 06:47:00 -
[325]
Mantalari Altis, your suggestions are the same ones many players have made here and they do achieve a much better solution but more importantly the timing of each change or addition is better placed to allow adjustments to be made by those affected long before the implementation so the transition is much smoother with the extension before the change is applied.
Low sec 'low end' ore mining we will very much want to make more attractive so trit and pyerite can be obtained locally and personally I have been looking at some possibilities that may be even a little fun like 'blast mining' which like dynamite fishing is a highly illegal and dangerous activity not allowed by the empires but leaving such jotted down ideas (that are far from anything but high level concept in chronotis's head to spam the internal wiki with) aside, the most likely solution is some bonus to the skiff or mackinaw that will increase the mining rate in some way.
But if any of you have ideas of your own, feel free to add in the features and ideas forum, we all pretty much read everything posted there.
Advanced Mobile Lab feedback
Regarding the advanced modile lab, the extra slots and its affect on things like the caldari outpost is admittedly a concern. Something that may lead us to adjust some of the final attributes before the patch such as making it have a higher power/cpu need, perhaps limiting the slots more but giving it a bonus to job times over the mobile lab. As with everything, the design will evolve based on internal and community feedback.
Ore compression
Ki Tarra, you are right in that whilst ore is compressed the minerals are not in the case of anything but the low ends. However, this is still fairly desirable as the high end ore is looking to be brought back to a refinery whereas the low end ore is looking to be used for transport to a producer.
Come kali 3 when we will look to add in new low sec methods of mining and the demand for low end ore switches to local suppliers, alongside the compressed ore secondary market that will mature through time to a good future where empires can be built in null sec from the materials near them.
We are not ruling out evolution in the current designs though for the rorqual in future patches. As ever with eve, nothing endures but change.
|
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 07:33:00 -
[326]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Come kali 3 when we will look to add in new low sec methods of mining and the demand for low end ore switches to local suppliers, alongside the compressed ore secondary market that will mature through time to a good future where empires can be built in null sec from the materials near them.
Just for information, this move from high sec to low sec mining, is intended to reduce macrominig/sweatshops activity too?
|
Twarda Sztuka
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 07:53:00 -
[327]
Edited by: Twarda Sztuka on 15/08/2007 07:53:17
Originally by: CCP Chronotis ...A much better roadmap and sequence of changes is needed and preferable with time to implement and see how the Rorqual and other alternatives mature before we fix this bug and take away something many have come to rely on. ...
Thank you. That's what I wanted to hear. Planned changes with a roadmap are much better than "lets change it and see what will happen" approach. Again, thank you. Wery wise decision.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Most importantly, thanks to those of you who provided good constructive feedback, it is always awesome that you care as much as we do about the game and help us find the right direction for it together.
Sadly there was no constructive input on my part. Mostly whinning. But I really didn't see it working as originally described.
|
Farrellus Cameron
Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 08:33:00 -
[328]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Important Update
The item material reprocessing fix will be delayed until a future patch after kali 2.2. Many players have asked for more time to adapt to the changes and time to assess suitable alternatives being implemented as we talked about previously such as addressing the mining of veldspar in null sec for example with additional bonuses to the skiff and mackinaw amongst other suggestions made elsewhere in this thread by many players.
A much better roadmap and sequence of changes is needed and preferable with time to implement and see how the Rorqual and other alternatives mature before we fix this bug and take away something many have come to rely on.
We realise many supercap industries have heavy reliance on this method to supply their minerals from the marketplace and that whilst the ability to move two freighters worth of minerals in a frigate is broke and something we want to fix, it can be done in a better way.
In summary, nothing with these modules is happening till at least kali 3.0 now, where nearer the time we will address other mechanics such as low/null sec low-ore mining and others in parallel to provide good and better alternatives.
Most importantly, thanks to those of you who provided good constructive feedback, it is always awesome that you care as much as we do about the game and help us find the right direction for it together.
Thanks for this. Would like to see some sort of boost to low end mining. The tritanium requirements for maintaining a solid ship industry in null sec is just plain ridiculous to expect to be able to keep up with it using the current mining mechanics. Maybe some sort of boost to tech2 mining crystals for low end ores, or some special low end strip miner laser with higher yield but cannot work on high end ore. ----------------------------------------------------
|
Mestoth
Minmatar Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 10:29:00 -
[329]
The only comment i wish to make is this:
Nice that the rorqual can compress and haul 240m trit....we still need to MINE 20 or so MILLION veld...at a grand total of what...10K per hour...
(exageration there).
To encourage people to actually MINE veldospar, you need to double or tripple its RATE OF MINING (not density of asteroids or number, but physcial RATE that it comes in)...
even with veld II crystals etc etc...you get nothing! Lets tripple or quadruple the amount PER cycle that comes in...then start looking @ changing the rest. Low should be X4 Mids should be X 2 Hights X 1
Hence,...as the names suggest, Low Ends should be abundant!
IE: Real World Example: Iron is available. Everywhere. Cheaply (relativly) (LOW)
Getting Gold (mid range) is not tooo expensive, but is available.
Getting Natural Diamonds (high endS) are expensive and limited in quantity.
In 0,0...it is easier to get TONNES of high ends (the diamonds) but nothing else! and i know we are in 0,0..so it should be skewed to the right side (high)...but not such that the net market has....1 -2 sellers of Trit...and 50 of 600K+ Zydrine sellers....
ie: BOOST VELD AND SCORDITE INCOME RATES Boost MID RANGE (by a little) Keep Highs.
|
Vincent Law
Elite Storm Enterprises Storm Armada
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 12:44:00 -
[330]
Edited by: Vincent Law on 15/08/2007 12:44:26
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Come kali 3 when we will look to add in new low sec methods of mining and the demand for low end ore switches to local suppliers, alongside the compressed ore secondary market that will mature through time to a good future where empires can be built in null sec from the materials near them.
This secondary market will probably be run by the same macro miners that choose to farm ice and ore in highsec already.
I'm sure absolutely no one will be willing to manage the compression process of a full load of veldspar (see Apocalytica Insomnia's post) and as a result will turn to the market as a source of their compressed low-ends.
Everyone prepare to see fleets of Rorquals sitting in lowsec poses compressing these minerals to cater to those of us that don't have the time to run the time sink that eve is becoming.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |