These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Initial mining barge changes are on the test server
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kiwis23
Kiwis Corp
#141 - 2012-07-25 09:37:56 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:


If it weren't an AFK activity, fewer people would do it (maybe), prices would rise(maybe), and Income would rise to compensate.

The maybes are if the people currently doing it AFK quit in any significant numbers.

The Pay is now entirely driven by miners. Your wage is determined by the aggregate supply the miners produce and the aggregate demand of manufacturing. CCP can't do anything more to change miner's income (more yield would suppress prices, resulting in the same income but with more hauling to do).



And yet they did by removing gun mining from drones and removing meta 0 items from missions instantly reducing mineral ammount gained from shooting guns.
What need more is LP nerfing so LP farming would not give such huge rewards. Also nerfing BS bounty a bit... getting paid 1 million+ for 5-6 groups of missiles is too much...
Pipa Porto
#142 - 2012-07-25 11:03:32 UTC
Kiwis23 wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


If it weren't an AFK activity, fewer people would do it (maybe), prices would rise(maybe), and Income would rise to compensate.

The maybes are if the people currently doing it AFK quit in any significant numbers.

The Pay is now entirely driven by miners. Your wage is determined by the aggregate supply the miners produce and the aggregate demand of manufacturing. CCP can't do anything more to change miner's income (more yield would suppress prices, resulting in the same income but with more hauling to do).



And yet they did by removing gun mining from drones and removing meta 0 items from missions instantly reducing mineral ammount gained from shooting guns.
What need more is LP nerfing so LP farming would not give such huge rewards. Also nerfing BS bounty a bit... getting paid 1 million+ for 5-6 groups of missiles is too much...


LP and Isk are the same as Ore. Their only value is in what they buy. If you hadn't noticed, T1 items are a lot more expensive then they used to be, and Mission runners have seen no increase in their nominal income, which means that their real income has declined at the same time that Miners real income has increased.

If miners are unhappy with their pay, a strike will very effectively raise miners incomes (at least, until the strike is over).

Mining Income is currently driven by Miners. CCP fixed the problems that were making that not so. There's nothing more they can do to significantly affect Mining Income. What you're asking for fewer miners, but you don't want mining to take any more effort (mining taking more effort is really the only likely way to get miners to quit).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#143 - 2012-07-25 11:10:26 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
CCP fixed the problems that were making that not so. There's nothing more they can do to significantly affect Mining Income.


Apart from, say, buffing mining ships to the point where you can have your max yield and a 30k EHP tank too.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Dave Stark
#144 - 2012-07-25 11:13:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
never mind me, sandwich > proof reading.
Pipa Porto
#145 - 2012-07-25 11:21:11 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
CCP fixed the problems that were making that not so. There's nothing more they can do to significantly affect Mining Income.


Apart from, say, buffing mining ships to the point where you can have your max yield and a 30k EHP tank too.


Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.

Used to not be true of mining ships because the highest yield mining ship in the game was a Sentry Carrier, but since that's no longer true, mining income is controlled by the supply of mining vs the demands of ship building.

Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#146 - 2012-07-25 11:33:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
Pipa Porto wrote:
Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.


Exactly.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?


It's like you are reading my mind.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Dave Stark
#147 - 2012-07-25 11:42:10 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.


Exactly.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?


It's like you are reading my mind.


mining ships have 1 purpose. mining. combat ships do not, you have ewar, you have high alpha, you have tacklers etc. you're comparing apples to oranges.
Pipa Porto
#148 - 2012-07-25 11:42:55 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.


Exactly.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?


It's like you are reading my mind.


I don't follow.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Tassian Marrix
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#149 - 2012-07-25 11:43:10 UTC
Dominika Brumarova wrote:
Pisov viet wrote:
Some of the changes are good (Procurer/Skiff's HP, Retriever/Mackinaw's cargo hold, the mining yield buff for both ship lines and the mercoxit and Ice rigs). But the unilateral buff of mining barge and exhumers EHP is a terrible thing to do.

Not only is it devaluating the Skiff buff (why bother with it when a hulk can easily reach over 40k EHP?), but it is also making the life of afk-miners and bots much easier, all while not adressing the structural issues of the mining profession: boring, poor and lacking improvement.

What the game need is not brick-tanked barge able to survive to multiple suicide tornadoes. These always existed, they're battleships (and now, skiffs). a 25000m3 ore hold is an amusing gimmick, but ultimately reward peoples who play eve afk.

Your regular miner, that poor **** who was paying attention, who had friends with him, who knew what the hell he was doing, will be left untouched by these changes. His hulk's yield will remain the same, and even going into big scary low/nullsec wont improve his condition much. In the current (and, apparently, future) state, he's still a poor **** who play a role so un-challenging that a bot can fill it, and be just as efficient as he is.

Mining dont need a 100k EHP mining barge, nor a barge able to mine 30 minutes without requiring a single click, mining need a ship, or a mechanism, that makes a human better than a script.



The best post in whole topic. Pure truth!



But it is not all truth. Mining did need a ship that could effectively haul for itself and it did need a ship with a solid tank. Now that we will be getting those they can work to fix the second problem of mining being a super boring activity.
Pipa Porto
#150 - 2012-07-25 11:47:46 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.


Exactly.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?


It's like you are reading my mind.


mining ships have 1 purpose. mining. combat ships do not, you have ewar, you have high alpha, you have tacklers etc. you're comparing apples to oranges.


Compare it to Ratting ships then. Ratting ships have one purpose. To kill red Crosses. They have to sacrifice DPS for Range/Tracking and Tank. The balance between the two is something that they have to figure out.

PVP boats have one purpose: To get the other guy dead. They have to sacrifice some things that make them effective at that in order to stay alive doing so.
One shining example. Falcons can be plated or not. Plated falcons survive better, unplated falcons do their job better. Falcons have only one purpose. To jam the enemy.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave Stark
#151 - 2012-07-25 11:55:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Higher yield -> Lower mineral prices -> More hauling effort for the same amount of ISK.


Exactly.

Pipa Porto wrote:
Buffing mining ships like you suggest removes any element of decision making. Everybody else has to compromise something for something else when they fit their ships. Why should miners be special?


It's like you are reading my mind.


mining ships have 1 purpose. mining. combat ships do not, you have ewar, you have high alpha, you have tacklers etc. you're comparing apples to oranges.


Compare it to Ratting ships then. Ratting ships have one purpose. To kill red Crosses. They have to sacrifice DPS for Range/Tracking and Tank. The balance between the two is something that they have to figure out.

PVP boats have one purpose: To get the other guy dead. They have to sacrifice some things that make them effective at that in order to stay alive doing so.
One shining example. Falcons can be plated or not. Plated falcons survive better, unplated falcons do their job better. Falcons have only one purpose. To jam the enemy.


granted, i still don't see the issue with a 30k ehp mining ship with max yield though.

if we could kill a carrier in 30 seconds with a meta fit mael then there'd be tears galore on here. all ccp have done is stopped that happening on a smaller scale. destroyers vs exhumers.

if people want to cry about having to put in real effort to ganking an expensive t2 ship then i'll laugh at them as they laughed at miners. if we were getting 100k ehp skiffs mining more than hulks then yeah you'd have a point. however they don't.

edit; besides when picking between yield, tank, and cargo we have to pick entirely different ships which costs more than a few modules costs.
Pipa Porto
#152 - 2012-07-25 12:09:22 UTC
Dave stark wrote:

granted, i still don't see the issue with a 30k ehp mining ship with max yield though.

if we could kill a carrier in 30 seconds with a meta fit mael then there'd be tears galore on here. all ccp have done is stopped that happening on a smaller scale. destroyers vs exhumers.

if people want to cry about having to put in real effort to ganking an expensive t2 ship then i'll laugh at them as they laughed at miners. if we were getting 100k ehp skiffs mining more than hulks then yeah you'd have a point. however they don't.

edit; besides when picking between yield, tank, and cargo we have to pick entirely different ships which costs more than a few modules costs.


That's what miners get for whining when they could have just learned to tank their Hulks.

A Carrier is a Logistics ship without maneuverability. Of course it's tanky. It has to be. It's designed for Combat. A Hulk isn't designed to be a brick, it's designed to mine in a convenient manner. You want a brick miner, the Rokh's your toy.

A Hulk can be tanked enough that it can't be profitably ganked. If the gankers bring outside help (GSF bounties) to change that, and the Hulk pilot brings outside help (Blap Nado, RR, ECM), the gankers still lose at making a profit.

Price is not a balancing factor the way miners seem to think it is.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=11888211

This 100b ratting ship got killed by a gang worth not more than 4-5b Isk. And that gang didn't lose anything significant.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#153 - 2012-07-25 12:09:53 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
granted, i still don't see the issue with a 30k ehp mining ship with max yield though.


Current mining ISK/hr is based on people fielding max-tanked exhumers, sacrificing yield. The people who are not prepared to sacrifice yield for tank either get blown up, or do something else in the meantime. Thus there is less competition, thus the time spent mining is worth more ISK/hr.

The perpetual Hulkageddon is good for my income, because the predators are thinning out the prey. The predators are making the surviving prey more valuable. It's evolution in action: the people who aren't good enough to survive a gank, are removed from the pool.

All of these ships could use an nerf to the point where the Hulk is unchanged except for the ice harvesting bonus, with the others brought down in proportion. As you pointed out, we'd all love being able to run around in 200k EHP maelstroms that can still deal maximum DPS. That's what this buff has done to mining ships.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Tassian Marrix
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#154 - 2012-07-25 12:36:44 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

A Hulk can be tanked enough that it can't be profitably ganked.


If only this were true.
Haffsol
#155 - 2012-07-25 12:49:47 UTC
I think the only problem (oh well you would say "whining") about mining barges was the cost:gankability ratio, meaning that a 300 mil hull couldn't be killed by a couple of 2 weeks old toons in a 3 mil worth ships _in high sec_

I agree that some miners deserve it, no doubt, since fitting a 1.6 billion hulk with ore strip miners and cargohold expanders is just horrible, but anyway the equation was unbalanced. Now CCP apparently did what was to be done, giving barges roles and more ehp so that they can't be ganked in such a rdicule way as it was before.

Imho the hulk hadn't the deserved treatment tho, since its role hasn't changed at all. Yeah it's the king of yield, but well.... the buff received by the others make them way preferable in almost every situation, be it a skiff or a mack or even a covetor...... they could fit the same "role" as the hulk by a fair 90% of the yield doubling the ehp. And they cost less.

So, even if I personally think having a decent amount of ehp for the hulk is indeed a great and nice change, I still see things like the hulk lost his role in real everyday space life
Traedar
InterStellar Trading Syndicate
#156 - 2012-07-25 14:11:24 UTC
There are a couple things I keep seeing that I would like to clear up.

The mining barge is a mining ship. The Rokh is not a mining ship. The Rokh is a railgun sniping platform that conveniently has enough low slots, turret hardpoints and CPU to be the best non-barge mining ship in the game. Anyone who says a miner should use a Rokh to have a tanked mining vessel has never tried serious mining in either a barge or Rokh or both.

Anyone who assumes that the Hulk is getting shafted because the other barges are getting buffed underestimates how mind-numbingly boring mining can be. There is more to mining than ISK per hour, m3 yield per hour, hauling time. It is a boring task that yields so-so ISK/hour but can be more rewarding in a group. Coincidentally, group mining is what the Hulk and Orca are made for.

Also I would like to point out, AFK mining capabilities of the Procurer and Retriever hulls will have far greater effect on ice mining since you don't have to switch targets very often while ice mining. I think AFK mining options will be more limited for ore mining.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#157 - 2012-07-25 14:23:26 UTC
Traedar wrote:

Also I would like to point out, AFK mining capabilities of the Procurer and Retriever hulls will have far greater effect on ice mining since you don't have to switch targets very often while ice mining. I think AFK mining options will be more limited for ore mining.



Unless you're doing The Spod, to flip a belt. Big smile

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Dave Stark
#158 - 2012-07-25 14:35:03 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:

granted, i still don't see the issue with a 30k ehp mining ship with max yield though.

if we could kill a carrier in 30 seconds with a meta fit mael then there'd be tears galore on here. all ccp have done is stopped that happening on a smaller scale. destroyers vs exhumers.

if people want to cry about having to put in real effort to ganking an expensive t2 ship then i'll laugh at them as they laughed at miners. if we were getting 100k ehp skiffs mining more than hulks then yeah you'd have a point. however they don't.

edit; besides when picking between yield, tank, and cargo we have to pick entirely different ships which costs more than a few modules costs.


That's what miners get for whining when they could have just learned to tank their Hulks.

A Carrier is a Logistics ship without maneuverability. Of course it's tanky. It has to be. It's designed for Combat. A Hulk isn't designed to be a brick, it's designed to mine in a convenient manner. You want a brick miner, the Rokh's your toy.

A Hulk can be tanked enough that it can't be profitably ganked. If the gankers bring outside help (GSF bounties) to change that, and the Hulk pilot brings outside help (Blap Nado, RR, ECM), the gankers still lose at making a profit.

Price is not a balancing factor the way miners seem to think it is.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=11888211

This 100b ratting ship got killed by a gang worth not more than 4-5b Isk. And that gang didn't lose anything significant.


that link doesn't work, so i can't really comment. if it's some moron in a faction fit tengu not paying attention to local in a 0.0 system then it's really not a valid argument since we're talking about empire space. in 0.0 a lone rifter can kill anything if some dumb bastard is just sitting there afk for long enough.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-07-25 15:15:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Pipa Porto wrote:
Price is not a balancing factor the way miners seem to think it is.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=11888211

This 100b ratting ship got killed by a gang worth not more than 4-5b Isk. And that gang didn't lose anything significant.


Titan + SC = very expensive loss.
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#160 - 2012-07-25 15:29:44 UTC
I posted some of my initial testing results in the SiSi feedback forum here.