| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Omani
   |
Posted - 2004.02.26 12:18:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 12:26:18
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 12:22:10
Well we all know the problem of ore thieves, but I don't think we can blame them: they just have the possibility to do that. For one: why do jettisonned cans have a capacity of 275000m¦? That just doesn't make sense... Certainly not if you see how small this can is compared to a huge secure container, let alone the giant secure container.
Two: why can a container have more volume inside then the volume of the total container itself? For example, the large standard container has a capacity of 780m¦ altough the can itself only has a volume of 650m¦. I dunno about you guys but i'm using these to increase the cargo size of my indy (when using these cans I can increase my capacity to 11584m¦ instead of 9654m¦). I never thought containers were the new replacements of cargo expanders...
Three: Why does an assembled container have the same volume as an unassembled container? Doesn't make sense either because an assembled container has room inside, while a unassembled one has not (a container is built up by 6 metal plates assembled together, no?).
A suggestion:
- Keep the unassembled volume of the containers now, but higher the volume of an assembled container (up to about 25000m¦ for the giant secure container for example so what it contains can still be transported by an Iteron V with cargo expanders). Then they're useful.
- Make the volume of an assembled can as large or a bit larger then the volume it can contain. That makes sense.
- Assembled cans can not be carried in a ship. Assembling happens when jettissoning (or anchoring?) the can into space and disassembling when scooping it up (or unanchoring?). Containers should be only 'scoopable' when they're empty. (Maybe let containers still be assembled in hangars until we get our own directories in our personal hangars so we can still put things together)
- Lower the capacity of jettisonable cans to about 300m¦ (if multiple items drop on a npc or pc it should be dropped in multiple cans - unless all items fit in 1 can ofcourse, the 300m¦ is in case a heavy drone drops) The 275000m¦ just is err...
|
Vel Kyri
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 12:29:00 -
[2]
i like that idea..
even making "jettison cans" have a lower volume - maybe make the volume of jettison can <= ship cargo hold. <shrug>
great idea!
-----
|
alar1c
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 13:50:00 -
[3]
 Quote:
i like that idea..
even making "jettison cans" have a lower volume - maybe make the volume of jettison can <= ship cargo hold. <shrug>
great idea!
Well, that idea would KILL the mining industry!
My corp mate and I regularly mine to jettison cans and then haul. If they were the size of just your cargo hold, that would mean 100's of cans before someone went for a hauler. (if hey could get out with all those cans around )
Al
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 14:37:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 14:38:16
That's the whole point; you'll have to use giant secure containers for example.
A) Then containers will be usefull
B) You don't need to worry about ore thieves
C) Adresses the issue of strip mining in high sec belts
I see a fix of two major problems here 
|
csebal
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 14:43:00 -
[5]
Edited by: csebal on 26/02/2004 14:44:41
Quote:
Quote:
i like that idea..
even making "jettison cans" have a lower volume - maybe make the volume of jettison can <= ship cargo hold. <shrug>
great idea!
Well, that idea would KILL the mining industry!
My corp mate and I regularly mine to jettison cans and then haul. If they were the size of just your cargo hold, that would mean 100's of cans before someone went for a hauler. (if hey could get out with all those cans around)
Al
That would mean, you would have to dump two giant cans before you start to mine.
nuff said.
btw: i second the original idea, cans need some love, as they are abolsutely useless for mining rightnow... i could fill abt 10 of the biggest ones myself, under an hour or so.
Make normal cans (anchored) a lot larger, and drop the timer on jettisoned cans to abt 15 mins, or make them smaller, like 1000-2000m3 or even 300-500 as the omani suggested.
EDIT: by the way, jet cans are only 27.500m3 not 275.000... ;)
-------------
This post is nothing more than my personal opinion. It does not represent the official standpoint of Fountain Alliance, or the HUN Corporation in any way.
------------- |
Vel Kyri
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 15:02:00 -
[6]
Yep.. your point is great Oman like i said before..
boost the "purchased" cans - make them tiny when dissasembled (and make them collapsible when empty in space) so you can carry 5-6 or them in a ship. take them to a field, open them up and anchor, then start mining.
make jetisson cans tiny so that ppl will be forced to use the purchased cans (both version)...
this way if someone steals your ore, it is SOLELY your fault for buying an UNSECURE can rather than the secure version.
-----
|
Elrathias
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 15:19:00 -
[7]
if u make jettison cans smaller, remember to make all modules 1m3 large. otherwise a full ship and ammo to all its modules will take up way more than a jettisoncan.
think before act. (that way the caldari bs's wouldnt have hybrid bonuses.."
--------------------------
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 15:45:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 15:46:36
Quote:
if u make jettison cans smaller, remember to make all modules 1m3 large. otherwise a full ship and ammo to all its modules will take up way more than a jettisoncan.
think before act. (that way the caldari bs's wouldnt have hybrid bonuses.."
Like I said: if for example a PC BS is destroyed, the undestroyed modules, weapons and ammo would be divided over multiple cans. Or do it like Vel Kyri suggests and make a jettisoned can as large as the cargohold of your ship.
|
cypriss
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:04:00 -
[9]
Quote:
B) You don't need to worry about ore thieves
don't be such a carebear and mine in lower sec space. then you don't have to worry about ore thieves.
you guys want everything low risk and easy, why don't you just ask ccp for an allowance?
standard cans are useless. secure cans are good the way they are. you want more security then you have to put up with inconvenience you want convenience then you have to put up with risk. can't have your cake and eat it too.
think of it this way. how secure could a can be if it can be assembled and disassembled in space that easy? on the other hand, a jettisoned can can be collapsable to fit in cargo hold and expand to the space it does but with the drawback of not being secure.
cans are fine the way they are, and they make sence. suck it up and mine where tyou can defend your cans yourself.
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:16:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 16:25:14
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 16:23:31
Quote:
Quote:
B) You don't need to worry about ore thieves
don't be such a carebear and mine in lower sec space. then you don't have to worry about ore thieves.
you guys want everything low risk and easy, why don't you just ask ccp for an allowance?
standard cans are useless. secure cans are good the way they are. you want more security then you have to put up with inconvenience you want convenience then you have to put up with risk. can't have your cake and eat it too.
think of it this way. how secure could a can be if it can be assembled and disassembled in space that easy? on the other hand, a jettisoned can can be collapsable to fit in cargo hold and expand to the space it does but with the drawback of not being secure.
cans are fine the way they are, and they make sence. suck it up and mine where tyou can defend your cans yourself.
It's not about being a carebear, it's being about having a choice to use secure containers and being able to defend yourself against ore thieves. And I dunno what you're talking about, but an ore thief can plunder your cans in high sec as well as low sec and atm you don't have anything to not let that happen.
Plus it's a bit more work for miners themselves because they have to move once in a while to put ore in the secure cans when an asteroid is depleted. That way nobody can strip mine as fast as they can now which is a good thing. Atm secure containers are gathering dust because:
- you have to set them up first (takes an indy to do that)
- people have to move instead of just popping it out in a small 27500m¦
- the space in a secure container is rather nihil
It's the third that's making 'em useless. Those 27500m¦ cans are just too convenient and I believe that CCP never intended them to be a way to strip mine.
Anyway ore thieving isn't a way to play the game, it's griefing. The game mechanics just allow it now because there isn't an alternative. I don't believe in the tagging system either because it'll just end in a tag ****fest - because there isn't an objective system to check if the tag's legit or not. I'm just giving an alternative and giving use to cans which now gather dust.
|
Belzavior
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:30:00 -
[11]
Another option I suggested much earlier is the ability to link Cans together to form one larger can. In this way you wouldn't have a billion cans anchored in space but just the one a person is mining too. It also takes just as much work as moving all those seperate cans to the location.
Then perhaps have a way to Tug the large barge around (tractor beams or a tug ship) Of course the Tug would be a very slow ship and not effiecient for long hauls. (thinking a warp speed of 1au/s, and maybe a base speed of 120m/s but with a penalty based on the weight of the barge.)
But lets face it, untill there is an option to make normal cans at least as efficient as the Jettison cans, all we're going to see is belts with 40x more anchored cans, and whom knows the problems thats gonna cause.
|
Sqalevon
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:46:00 -
[12]
I love the idea of having cans that are small in cargo ( but useless ) and large when anchored
I love the idea of smaller jetisonned cans ( maximum of 1K = still useless for mining )
I love the idea of making all buyable containers larger
I dont like the idea of shorter time for jetisonned cargo containers, remember the loot hunters, though 1 hours SHARP should be a good idea ( some cans last for 8 hours while they should only last 1, 1 hour sharp should be nice :) )
|
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:47:00 -
[13]
I like the idea about unassembled cans taking much less room than when assembled. An IteronV can at most have 5 giant/huge containers... running from empire space to 0.0 space with 5 unassembled cans at a time.... not worth it!
¼©¼
a history |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 16:48:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Avon on 26/02/2004 16:49:21
Quote:
Anyway ore thieving isn't a way to play the game, it's griefing. The game mechanics just allow it now because there isn't an alternative.
Yap yap.
And by the same reasoning mining to jet cans is exploiting, your point?
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:05:00 -
[15]
I feel that secrue cans shold not have more space than what they take up.
Ie if the CAN takes 500m3 to hold it, it shoudl not have 580m3 space inside.
I think the small, med, large, huge cans should be resized. to something like 200m3, 600m3, 3500 m3 8000m3, maybe even 10000m3. Thus most cargo carrioers could pickup and deply the 10km3 cans.
This would also uncluter all of the belets and cause less lag. If i could anchor a pair of 10km3 cans i could mine while my friend hauls. I woudln't have to stack 10 of the current huge cans at 3500m3 around the belt which people almost never pickup. Thus causes more lag, clutter, and database use.
-BT
|
cypriss
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:22:00 -
[16]
Quote:
And I dunno what you're talking about, but an ore thief can plunder your cans in high sec as well as low sec and atm you don't have anything to not let that happen.
there are things you can do about it.
a) in high sec, use secure cans. an inconvenience but no risk mining.
b) in low sec, use drones and/or guns. an ore theif isn't going to hurt you unless he is in an indy, and let me tell you. a few heavy drones will rip an indy a new hole. problems solved.
p.s. ore theft IS part of the game, and mechanics allow for it and allow defence against it (read above 2 points)
wht you are asking for is to be able to mine in complete safety AND convenience. you sir are a carebear.
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:26:00 -
[17]
M'kay let's be objective for a sec.
High sec space (1.0): everything against interstellar law should be either punished by the game mechanics (in this case CONCORD and turrets) or be impossible.
Low sec space (0.0): everything is allowed.
Ore thieving is against interstellar law, I think we can all agree on that. But it isn't punished, nor is it impossible in 1.0 systems. Any alt can steal ore and not get a sec status hit, people who shoot the thief though do get killed by CONCORD and do get a sec hit. So we agree there IS a problem here?
Using this container idea makes it impossible to steal ore; problem fixed. If you still want to cut the logistics of your enemy you kill the miners themselves. By mining in high sec space you already make a trade-off because these ore are a lot less worth then the high-end ores in 0.0, so it should be only interesting for starters (which always has been the intention). This new way of looking at cans fixes the strip mining part - but doesn't make it impossible to mine for trit either - and secures everybody against ore thieves.
Quote:
Edited by: Avon on 26/02/2004 16:49:21
Quote:
Anyway ore thieving isn't a way to play the game, it's griefing. The game mechanics just allow it now because there isn't an alternative.
Yap yap.
And by the same reasoning mining to jet cans is exploiting, your point?
That's what this whole idea is about too...
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:34:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 17:43:18
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 17:35:53
Quote:
Quote:
And I dunno what you're talking about, but an ore thief can plunder your cans in high sec as well as low sec and atm you don't have anything to not let that happen.
there are things you can do about it.
a) in high sec, use secure cans. an inconvenience but no risk mining.
b) in low sec, use drones and/or guns. an ore theif isn't going to hurt you unless he is in an indy, and let me tell you. a few heavy drones will rip an indy a new hole. problems solved.
p.s. ore theft IS part of the game, and mechanics allow for it and allow defence against it (read above 2 points)
wht you are asking for is to be able to mine in complete safety AND convenience. you sir are a carebear.
Let's not stick labels on eachother will we?
a) Starters (or noobies if you like) are mining in high sec space for new and better frigates and you expect them to buy 300k isk secure containers?
b) read my previous post
And the devs are talking about tagging ore thieves, but imo this will be much more effictive (said this before), plus it fixes other issues (like only being able to carry 5 giant container in an Iteron V for example). It's not like we'll be missing a part of the game if ore thieving will be impossible...
Let's get back on topic please, it shouldn't be the next rant about ore thieves anyway.
|
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:36:00 -
[19]
Remove all cans. If you want to jettison a small jettison can, you must self destruct your carebear mining boat.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:44:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 17:57:15
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 17:45:15
Quote:
Remove all cans. If you want to jettison a small jettison can, you must self destruct your carebear mining boat.
Another constructive post by Skillz \o/
BTW: thought you liked PvP? Ore thieving is actully the total opposite of PvP (since you can't shoot the thief  )... i'd think twice before saying things.
|
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:57:00 -
[21]
Well sorry if I'm dismayed by these 'Ore theif' and 'Mining can' threads.
What you want to do is to lower the revenue of people that takes a risk by jettisoning a drop can in secure space. Now you don't like that so why don't you like use a macro and think you're cool?
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 17:58:00 -
[22]
Quote:
Ore thieving is against interstellar law, I think we can all agree on that
Nope.
Miners steal the empires resources, ripping up lovely asteroids for their own personal profit, and then dump it overboard.
Fortunately some enviromentally minded people are gracious enough to give up their time to clear up the mess.
Look up jettison in a dictionary.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 18:04:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Omani on 26/02/2004 18:07:47
Quote:
Well sorry if I'm dismayed by these 'Ore theif' and 'Mining can' threads.
What you want to do is to lower the revenue of people that takes a risk by jettisoning a drop can in secure space. Now you don't like that so why don't you like use a macro and think you're cool?
Now that's an argument  But I'll counter it by saying:
You'll have to be a damn nifty programmer to write a macro which searches for asteroids, starts mining it, gets back to the container to drop it off and go back to the miner spot again.
Imo it'll be just as hard to mine then as it'll be now, the only difference is that ther won't be any ore thieves. Shoot the miners; there's your PvP.
Anyway i'd better didn't mention this ore thieve thingie at the beginning at post, never encountered one. Just thought about giving these secure and standard container a use (because, be honest: who uses 'em atm?) and then, as a side-effect, it also tackled this ore thieve 'problem' I keep hearing every day in the forums, so I thought I might add that too. 
|
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 18:09:00 -
[24]
Quote:
Quote:
Ore thieving is against interstellar law, I think we can all agree on that
Nope.
Miners steal the empires resources, ripping up lovely asteroids for their own personal profit, and then dump it overboard.
Fortunately some enviromentally minded people are gracious enough to give up their time to clear up the mess.
Look up jettison in a dictionary.
lol  Well most corps do pick up there own ore afterwards, otherwise: call greenpeace!
|
Wraeththu
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 18:59:00 -
[25]
Jettisoned cans should just be the size of whatever gears inside them (or multiple cans if it's a lot), and with no capacity for someone to add to a can once it's been jettisoned.
And while I can mine to keep pace, I think it should be removed and is a pox on the economy and team aspect of the game.
I don't see why they're spending all this dev time and resources for security, and criminal flags, and all that crap. Just ditch can mining. They should have done it back in may/june when the ramifications of it became apparent.
--
TomB: End the speed-race. 1 propulsion mod allowed, make turrets affect ship attributes like +speed/+ab speed +agil for progressivly smaller/lighter turrets, -speed/-ab speed -agil for long-range. |
LoxyRider
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 19:15:00 -
[26]
For once stay on topic guys. Im in the same corp as Omani and we havent had a ore thief for months, its certainly not a personal issue against that.
The point is to make a use for these secure cans. This is to bring a slightly more organised side to mining, help players in 0.5 upwards protect their assets and bring the logic of the containers back to some sort of reality (yeah its a game i know :p).
Atm the secure cans are not usable. Even the largest is tiny compared to the jettisoned cans, meaning to use them you a) need loads in a belt (causing lag, and a pain in the neck) and b) at 300k each i believe it would cost loads.
Omani suggestions work really well to fix this.
Quote:
Keep the unassembled volume of the containers now, but higher the volume of an assembled container (up to about 25000m¦ for the giant secure container for example so what it contains can still be transported by an Iteron V with cargo expanders). Then they're useful.
- Simple, if uve seen these things in space they r massive, 25,000m3 is a good amount for them to hold.
Quote:
Make the volume of an assembled can as large or a bit larger then the volume it can contain.
- I cant see why they hold more then they occupy atm, neat for haulers, but doesnt make much sense.
Quote:
Assembled cans can not be carried in a ship. Assembling happens when jettissoning (or anchoring?) the can into space and disassembling when scooping it up (or unanchoring?). Containers should be only 'scoopable' when they're empty.
- Very good idea, allows u to carry several large containers out in one trip without increaseing a indy's cargo space. Solves that problem.
Quote:
Lower the capacity of jettisonable cans to about 300m¦ (if multiple items drop on a npc or pc it should be dropped in multiple cans - unless all items fit in 1 can ofcourse, the 300m¦ is in case a heavy drone drops)
- A little harsh, 1000m¦ seems a resonable amount to me.
This is all to bring some logic to the way cans work, increase the use of secure cans and give a little help to the people who suffer from ore thiefs.
If you dont agree with it then post a suggestion, i cant see anyone apart from the ore thieves themselves who wouldnt want to see some change like this, and they can go to hell  .
-----
Eris Discordia; I think the proper term is <3
|
shivan
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 19:47:00 -
[27]
Erm dont know if u have ever read the news, but about 3-4 months ago when they where first released it was explained why they have a highrt volume inside than the total volume outside.
***Science bit***
It is because of plank bubble generation technology. This bubble generation causes a small but stable rift in sub-space, this makes the internale volume greater than the total external volume. Even tho this rift is stable within its own right, you cannot however place one plank bubble within another, as this would cuse a sub-space chain reaction and mean the end of the univirse. Its what the news said at the time. Enjoy.
---------------------------------------
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Omani
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 19:50:00 -
[28]
Quote:
Erm dont know if u have ever read the news, but about 3-4 months ago when they where first released it was explained why they have a highrt volume inside than the total volume outside.
***Science bit***
It is because of plank bubble generation technology. This bubble generation causes a small but stable rift in sub-space, this makes the internale volume greater than the total external volume. Even tho this rift is stable within its own right, you cannot however place one plank bubble within another, as this would cuse a sub-space chain reaction and mean the end of the univirse. Its what the news said at the time. Enjoy.
Still doesn't make the containers more useful though
|
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2004.02.26 20:56:00 -
[29]
Does shipping things in containers make them less or more likely to survive a ships destruction? If confirmed less they do serve a purpose.
Convert Stations
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |