These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

An Ore Hold Expansion Module is needed to replace Cargohold Expansion Modules on mining ships

Author
Smilingmonk
Nuts and Vindictive
#1 - 2012-09-13 00:19:50 UTC
I recently petitioned to have the cost of my Medium Cargohold Expansion Modules that I had on all my toons Hulks, Macks and other sundry mining ships reimbursed as they were not longer serving the original purpose of expanding their holds so that I could put more ore in them. I have more than a few mining ships across all my toons so the considerable investment in Medium Cargohold Expansion Modules that I had went to ZERO isk overnight.

Here is the reply I received from GM Smiley: "I am afraid we are not reimbursing cargohold rigs on mining ships although we are aware that the mining ship change has reduced their value on mining ships. Nevertheless, they are still performing exactly the function they were designed for."

I beg to differ! They may expand the tiny cargo hold on the new mining ships which are as worthless as **** on a boar hog, but they don't damn sure don't currently perform "exacty the function they were designed for" because if they did, my ore hold would hold more ore in them than after putting them on than they did before they were in there (which was EXACTLY WHY THE MEDIUM CARGOHOLD OPTIMIZATION MODULES WERE PUT ON THE MINING SHIPS TO FRIKKING BEGIN WITH!

Far be me to point out that the stupid cargo holds on the ships now are too small to even fit a shuttle into, for instance if you took a shuttle to pick up an new mining ship you had just purchased and wanted to bring the shuttle back with you, and way to big to hold the number of mining crystals that you would reasonably use during a mining op.

WHAT POSSIBLE REASON COULD THERE BE TO PUT SUCH RELATIVELY EXPENSIVE CARGOHOLD OPTIMIZATION RIGS ON A MINING SHIP TO EXPAND THE CARGO HOLD THAT'S TOO SMALL TO EVEN HOLD A SHUTTLE TO BEGIN WITH????

So, I submit to you that contrary to what GM Smiley says, the cargohold e rigs are NOT performing exactly the function they were designed for or they would have the same affect on the ore carrying capability of the mining ships in Inferno as they did Pre-Inferno.

So, a Ore Hold Expansion Module is needed for the mining ships and those mining ships that have cargohold expansion modules on them should have them automatically convert to the new Ore Hold Expansion Modules upon release to EVE players.

Get working on this will you? :-)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#2 - 2012-09-13 00:22:44 UTC
That would rather defeat the purpose of the new designs.
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#3 - 2012-09-13 00:25:39 UTC
Adapt or Die?

Your ore hold is big enough as it is, if you want a bigger hold, get a friend with an Orca.
serras bang
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-09-13 00:26:58 UTC
Smilingmonk wrote:
I recently petitioned to have the cost of my Medium Cargohold Expansion Modules that I had on all my toons Hulks, Macks and other sundry mining ships reimbursed as they were not longer serving the original purpose of expanding their holds so that I could put more ore in them. I have more than a few mining ships across all my toons so the considerable investment in Medium Cargohold Expansion Modules that I had went to ZERO isk overnight.

Here is the reply I received from GM Smiley: "I am afraid we are not reimbursing cargohold rigs on mining ships although we are aware that the mining ship change has reduced their value on mining ships. Nevertheless, they are still performing exactly the function they were designed for."

I beg to differ! They may expand the tiny cargo hold on the new mining ships which are as worthless as **** on a boar hog, but they don't damn sure don't currently perform "exacty the function they were designed for" because if they did, my ore hold would hold more ore in them than after putting them on than they did before they were in there (which was EXACTLY WHY THE MEDIUM CARGOHOLD OPTIMIZATION MODULES WERE PUT ON THE MINING SHIPS TO FRIKKING BEGIN WITH!

Far be me to point out that the stupid cargo holds on the ships now are too small to even fit a shuttle into, for instance if you took a shuttle to pick up an new mining ship you had just purchased and wanted to bring the shuttle back with you, and way to big to hold the number of mining crystals that you would reasonably use during a mining op.

WHAT POSSIBLE REASON COULD THERE BE TO PUT SUCH RELATIVELY EXPENSIVE CARGOHOLD OPTIMIZATION RIGS ON A MINING SHIP TO EXPAND THE CARGO HOLD THAT'S TOO SMALL TO EVEN HOLD A SHUTTLE TO BEGIN WITH????

So, I submit to you that contrary to what GM Smiley says, the cargohold e rigs are NOT performing exactly the function they were designed for or they would have the same affect on the ore carrying capability of the mining ships in Inferno as they did Pre-Inferno.

So, a Ore Hold Expansion Module is needed for the mining ships and those mining ships that have cargohold expansion modules on them should have them automatically convert to the new Ore Hold Expansion Modules upon release to EVE players.

Get working on this will you? :-)


rig and expanders are there just useless to barges and exhumers now and expanding ore holds wont happen as there working a diff system now adapt and use machs for your solo mining if your coupling a few of them with a orca then the differances to the hulks bays make no differance.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-09-13 00:33:16 UTC
Ohh look another one
I will tell you what I told the others
Step 1: File a petition (you did that)
Step 2: get over it (already been said above)
Step 3: get an orca buddy (again already been said above)
Step 4: can I have your hulks you will probably not want them any more

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#6 - 2012-09-13 00:36:41 UTC
Get a Mackinaw if you want more hold.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-09-13 03:25:05 UTC
Cargo rigging hulks was dumb to begin with, NO SYMPATHY 4 U!
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-09-13 04:27:42 UTC
Sounds great. Let high sec afk ice miners go afk 30 - 40% longer in their Mackinaws. Straight
Shiroh Yatamii
Alexylva Paradox
#9 - 2012-09-13 04:48:56 UTC
I too whine when CCP actually makes my ship useful and thus obsoletes my older fits.
Rock Archiriu
Inter Planetary Productions
#10 - 2012-09-15 11:47:54 UTC
I have to second this one - Thus I do praise the new buffs to the former useless barges and exhumers, and their - back then - Kings and queens, hulk and Mackinaw.

The Cargo-rigs was not fitted for the purpose of bigger cargohold on Exhumers, but with the single purpose to the ability of carrying more Ore.
The new Ore-hold has now solved that part, and that is good. But by doing that, the intented usage of the rigs are now NOT applying to the reason why they where rig'd to said hull's, as mentioned by the Smiling munk.

I have a suggestion to counter the "nerf" of the cargo rigs. Make the Cargo-rigs removable without destroying them.
I don't think it will be that hard to implement, only a few lines of code to "mute" (The code that say 'Destroy' to be removed).

Then the choice will be for the owner, if the rigs are suitable as is, or to replace with other (still destroyable) purpose rigs.

Best Regards
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#11 - 2012-09-15 13:42:57 UTC
Sorry, sucks to be you, but you're gonna lose those rigs. Just like everyone else who ever put rigs on a ship and then had the hull changes make those rigs worthless.
Marcus Ichiro
IchiCorp
#12 - 2012-09-16 00:15:20 UTC
Smilingmonk wrote:
WHAT POSSIBLE REASON COULD THERE BE TO PUT SUCH RELATIVELY EXPENSIVE CARGOHOLD OPTIMIZATION RIGS ON A MINING SHIP TO EXPAND THE CARGO HOLD THAT'S TOO SMALL TO EVEN HOLD A SHUTTLE TO BEGIN WITH????


You tell us, you're the one who did it.
Obsidiana
Atrament Inc.
#13 - 2012-09-16 20:16:44 UTC
The ORE barge change is a nerf/buff to mining.

The rigs made your ship paper thin... thinner, I should say. You should ditch the Hulk, get a Mach, and tank it well. I would say let us have ore bay rigs, but the Mach is what you are looking for. Yes, it mines more slowly, but it also need fewer trips, making up for some of the “on paper” mining speeds.

Btw, the Skiff has about the same ore bay as a Hulk with expanders and rigs, way more speed, and awesome EHP. The time you save getting to rocks and moving around can make up for some of the “on paper” mining speed loss.

Yes, the Hulk got a defensive nerf, but it was a joke before anyway. Its purpose has changed, so if you are using for what it did pre-patch, then you are using it wrong. Yes, mining will be slightly slower, but not as bad as the shorthand math will make it sound.

Btw, I bet you turned a profit on those rigs.
That was a part of CCP’s reasoning.
Logi Rollins
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2012-09-16 20:50:50 UTC
I'm sorry, but I don't have any sympathy for you. If you want to mine in hulks, use an orca for support. Want to solo mine get a mack. If you don't want to adapt, then unsub your accounts and get the **** out.

Chances are, you already made the money back on those expanders. So you can just destroy them, and not feel anything in your wallet. Also don't you want the new ice mining or mercoxit rigs? If so you got to get rid of those cargo expanders!
whaynethepain
#15 - 2012-09-16 23:15:28 UTC
What an interesting new module idea, it could be used in the mining frigs, barges, exhumer and industrial command ships.

After all, the bigger the Piñata, the more fun it is Pirate

Getting you on your feet.

So you've further to fall.

Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#16 - 2012-09-16 23:31:59 UTC
OP: you confuse function with usage.

The function of cargo rigs is to increase cargo size. They still do that.