These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[September] Mining Barge and Exhumer tweaks

First post
Author
Alexis Ford
Good Names All Gone
#81 - 2016-08-23 13:49:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexis Ford
I also do not understand why these change of Highslots seemed neccesary.

Skiff always was the miningcrystal saver (especially in 0.0)
Hulk smashed the crystals like his green angry MC namesake

Also i liked the "Lonely Skiff lance" and the "Hulk Discoqueen"

Of course there will be some new fitting options for bait Skiff / Procurer.
But setting this asside ... i cant find a real reason

Except someone forgot the different amounts of Highslots during creating the new design ? *scnr*
https://youtu.be/nhTD1G36vvA?t=11m20s
Punky260
Kriegsmarinewerft
Goonswarm Federation
#82 - 2016-08-23 14:19:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Punky260
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Removal of strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses


EDIT: forget it, I'm bad :D
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2016-08-23 14:56:40 UTC
I don't know if this got answered or not, but definitely would like some extra cap regen on the skiff if it has the new strip miner.

I could honestly go with some extra CPU insteadl, which would also give me an option to fit for cap if needed. Either way works.
Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2016-08-23 15:13:11 UTC
Hulk gets about 10% more yield thanks to the third low.

You detailed how much volume of ore was mined by what ships. What about ice?

A signature :o

Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#85 - 2016-08-23 16:12:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Rapscallion Jones
I was really hoping the disparity in hold sizes of the mining frigates vs the barges/exhumers would finally be addressed. It makes no sense that frigate class vessels have an ore hold comparable in size to cruiser class vessels. I'm not calling for anything earth-shattering, just something a little less immersion breaking.

Perhaps along the lines of either a 5000 m3 nerf to the frigates or a 5000 m3 buff to the barges/exhumers.

This: municipal dump truck vs. this: mining dump truck
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#86 - 2016-08-23 16:35:28 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Thread full of angry miners, honestly who's shocked.


Grath, baby. Sweetheart. Jewel.


It's time to update your sig.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Grath Telkin
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
#87 - 2016-08-23 16:57:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Malcanis wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Thread full of angry miners, honestly who's shocked.


Grath, baby. Sweetheart. Jewel.


It's time to update your sig.



Not until somebody else is more wrong than you, thats the rule. The mong before you actually sent me a mail that said "finally" when i took his wrongness down.

Dont worry though, I've got some rubes lined up right now spouting some terrible wrong crap, there might be a light at the end of the tunnel

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2016-08-23 17:11:56 UTC
Grognard Commissar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


[quote=FT Cold]

increase the probability of profitable ganking under ideal conditions.
.

i think we got enough of that already.


Under the correct circumstances it is possible to make a profit ganking barges, however is is absolutely minimal and not the primary motivation for gankers. I think it would fit the central themes of EVE better to shift that from trolling to reasons of economics.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#89 - 2016-08-23 17:24:40 UTC
FT Cold wrote:
Grognard Commissar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


[quote=FT Cold]

increase the probability of profitable ganking under ideal conditions.
.

i think we got enough of that already.


Under the correct circumstances it is possible to make a profit ganking barges, however is is absolutely minimal and not the primary motivation for gankers. I think it would fit the central themes of EVE better to shift that from trolling to reasons of economics.


A hellstorm of outrage is heading your way. I'm getting abuse just for asking for the skiff to get its tank from actually fitting the ship rather than having CCP bake it into the hull.
Bridget Baptist
Worthless Carebears
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#90 - 2016-08-23 17:48:35 UTC
I notice that you have intended to keep the yield of the skiff the same, however due to the fact there will be 2 ice miners running at half the speed, you have increased the hold fill time by one half cycle with then new system . Because it has a odd number of blocks of ice that will fit into it.
Thanx
BB
Mercer Nen
Summicron Holdings
#91 - 2016-08-23 17:56:21 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
This pass on the barges allowed the art team to fulfill a long-standing request from the game design team...


Any chance of adding some interesting gameplay to mining in the near future? Something more than just ship balancing?

Just trying to add to the not so vocal majority that is hoping for something new and interesting for individual players. I know you're looking for feedback on these changes, but as good as the new visuals are, mining gameplay is absolute purgatory. Aside from development resources, time, finances, pre-existing priorities, and ambition, there's no reason why it can't be more interesting.
Rockstede
30plus
Goonswarm Federation
#92 - 2016-08-23 17:58:02 UTC
I have to agree with the majority here, I can't find a logical reason for most of the changes that you intend. Furthermore the barges are now all basically different variations of the same model which is a net loss imo.

The hulk having 3 miners chewing rocks was a special thing and in a full fleet, a sight to behold.


These changes are unecessary.
FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2016-08-23 18:06:35 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Cold
baltec1 wrote:
FT Cold wrote:
Grognard Commissar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


[quote=FT Cold]

increase the probability of profitable ganking under ideal conditions.
.

i think we got enough of that already.


Under the correct circumstances it is possible to make a profit ganking barges, however is is absolutely minimal and not the primary motivation for gankers. I think it would fit the central themes of EVE better to shift that from trolling to reasons of economics.


A hellstorm of outrage is heading your way. I'm getting abuse just for asking for the skiff to get its tank from actually fitting the ship rather than having CCP bake it into the hull.


I made a similar recommendation earlier in the post. Players should be encouraged to have to think, make choices, and be punished or rewarded for how much effort they put in. We just had an affirmation of this by CCP, so let the outrage flow.
xXxNIMRODxXx
ChemiKals
Goonswarm Federation
#94 - 2016-08-23 18:06:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Hulk:
Changed skill bonus for the skill Mining Barge: 2% (was 4%) reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration per level
New role bonus: 25% reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration and activation cost
-1 highslot
+1 lowslot
-5 PWG
-40 CPU

We're very interested in your feedback and welcome you to try out the new stats (and new ship models) on SISI.
Thanks!


I don't know about the rest of the ships, but the hulk, with 3 MLUs, would not be able to fit the same tank as of now, while trying to keep a similar maxed out yield.

Specifically:
we don't know yet the changes in full to the Rorqual (which has a key role for mining boost in null) as of now, testing on SiSi is quite useless as a comparison for this matter, so I'll stick to a Hulk boosted from an Orca (granted you won't change the boost bonuses on this one too):
The cycle goes down to 69.9 which is lower than a Hulk boosted from a Rorqual (70.4), shorter cycle, but less yield because of the changes to strip miners and ship's hull. Unless you try to fit 3 MLUs but still, more than 1000 m3 less yield compared to what we have now, and it turns out it can't keep the same modules it can use now as tank. But not by much, just very few units of CPU missing.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, Fozzie, I can show you the incriminated fit, but even if I can care a bit less about the just a bit less yield, i would rather like to be able to avoid flushing money on different modules and less tank.


Cade Windstalker
#95 - 2016-08-23 18:08:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Kueyen wrote:
sorry for singling you out, but...
Stralisemiai wrote:
Exciting changes - thank you for the information.
There is no way I could come up with a mechanical implementation of having 2 stripminers on every barge or exhumer that could be *less* exciting than this. For a few days, something vaguely interesting was visible on Singularity: a 25% role bonus to yield for the Retriever and the Mackinaw. Now, those vessels have NO role bonus. None. Feel free to read that as "this ship has no role".


This is pretty demonstrably false, as singled out in CCP Fozzie's original post:

Quote:
Unsurprisingly the Retriever and Mackinaw are still on top (unchanged from the last time we presented these stats) due to the very high value placed on ore bay capacity among a solid chunk of miners.


Just because something doesn't have a role bonus doesn't mean it doesn't have a role. They could just as easily throw in "500% bonus to ore hold capacity" but that would be ridiculous and meaningless.

Kueyen wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
ORE Strip Miner: +30% volume mined per cycle, -10 CPU
The ORE Ice Harvester has a cycle time identical to the T2 Ice Harvester; A T2 Strip Miner with T2 crystals has a yield of 16.667% that of a T1 Stripminer. This new Ore Strip Miner, at 4% better than a T1 Strip Miner, will be going as unused as the old one. Not that any semi-intelligent human being would ever fit any on the death traps that is any non-Skiff/Procurer miner, of course, nor would they turn the latter two into gank magnets by fitting them on those...


Your assumption of what people will or won't fit is pretty hilarious. Just go have a look at the killboards, people will fit all sorts of things.

It's also worth noting that the Faction Strip Miners will multiply through with other bonuses. They'll never be better than T2 with T2 crystals, but they're easier to fit and less skill intensive to train, which gives them their own niche. IMO they shouldn't be better than T2, that just creates a bad situation where you have to buy the really expensive stuff to be efficient. It's the same reason Faction and even Officer guns generally aren't as good as T2 overall.
xXxNIMRODxXx
ChemiKals
Goonswarm Federation
#96 - 2016-08-23 19:16:47 UTC
HarlyQ wrote:
Amarisen Gream wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Anoron Secheh wrote:
What about changes to the Rorqual and Orca?


Changes to the Rorqual and Orca are currently planned for November (rather than September for these mining barge changes). We'll be discussing those more as we get a bit closer.



You're killing me Fozzie. the Orca and the Rorqual are what I wanna hear about.

Could you at least tease us with the Orca? please. pretty please.

Didnt you know the orca is being completely ignored. I mean why care about a crappy ore hold crappy cargo crappy agility i mean its just a crappy ship and no one should ever bother flying it. Unless they give it an ore hold of 2million m3.


If you don't know what to do and how to use the ships, just stfu ignorant. I'm actually concerned about the Orca's changes, as I use it as a mainstay in my fleets.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#97 - 2016-08-23 19:22:52 UTC
Elenahina wrote:

I'd actually be curious to see stats on which type of ore is mined most in what space. I'd be willing to bet that most of the "lowsec" ores actually get mined in nullsec because, frankly, it's safer.


That's mostly part of the problem.
There's enough of each type of space for some of the systems in them to remain safe for a little time.

There is already regional deviation on ore availability (i.e. Pyroxeres & Omber).
There is already a security rating deviation on ore availability (i.e. Mercoxit, etc.).

Extending those 2 concepts to the entire ore range will then make each regional security rating important to the production chain.
Low sec and it's unique ores will then become a resource that is needed by nul & hi sec entities.

Yes it's forcing content.
Yes it's increasing complexity.
But it does make lo-sec both useful and a place to need to be at.


tl/dr
Split ores into 3 group.
nul-sec only
lo-sec only
hi-sec only
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#98 - 2016-08-23 20:26:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Gunrunner1775
currently on Test

Hulk (no boosts, but i dont know of many hulks operateing with out orca support, so here is the raw unboosted stats from test)
TANK FIT
High-2x strip miner II w/ T2 crystals
Med- 1x Invul field II, 1x Kin hardener II, 1x thermal harder II, 1x medium shield extender
Low- 1x damage control, 1x power diagnostics, 1x reactor control unit (i needed the reactor control to fit the shield extender)
Rigs= 2x shield extender II's

Shields = 5670 52/79/84/76 (fitting window shows 21k effective hitpoints vs omni)

yield = 1230 (x2) m3 / 103.3 seconds ( 24.28 m3/second - 87,423 / hour)

100% cap stable, no issues with cap

(again, no boosts)

Makinaw (no boosts) (note, its exact same fit as the hulk)
TANK FIT
High-2x strip miner II w/ T2 crystals
Med- 1x Invul field II, 1x Kin hardener II, 1x thermal harder II, 1x medium shield extender
Low- 1x damage control, 1x reactor control unit II, 1xpower diagnostics II
Rigs= 2x shield extender II's

Shields = 6281 51/79/84/76 (fitting window shows 24,973 ehp vs omni)

yield = 1230 (x2) m3 / 145.8 seconds ( 16.87 m3/ second - 60,740 m3 / hour)

100% cap stable, no issues

Skiff
High-2x strip miner II w/ T2 crystals
Med- 2x Invul field II, 1x Kin hardener II, 1x thermal harder II, 1x medium shield extender
Low- 1x damage control, 2x MLU IIs (did not need any cpu or pg stuff, and with my skills, had the room to fit 2x MLU's on it instead
Rigs= 2x shield extender II's

Shields = 16,425 64/82/87/82 (fitting window shows 72,986 vs omni)

Yield = 1462 (2x) / 145.8 seconds ( 20.05 m3/second - 72,197 m3/hour)

100% cap stable, no issues


ice mineing
exact same load outs, just swaped for ice harvesters (did not use the ice rig) (and swaped for ice miner upgrades on skiff)
(note, all are 100% cap stable, no issues)
Hulk = 2x bricks of ice / 86.1 seconds = 83 bricks of ice per hour
Makinaw = 2 bricks / 121.5 seconds = 59 bricks of ice per hour
Skiff = 2 bricks 100.6 seconds = 71 bricks per hour


summary

-skiff did not have any cpu/pg issues and thus did not have to fit any such modules in low slot to retain acceptable tank, thus was able to fit 2x mining laser upgrades instead of power grid and or cpu upgrades

new changes show a massive discrepency between the Mackinaw and the Skiff
- recomend that Mackinaw be given slight boost in cpu/pg to be able to drop the PDU/PGU in low slot for 2 mining laser upgrades
at which point then it would have to sacrifice tank (loss of dmg control, and change in mid slots) to add 3rd mining laser upgrade thus maintaining some equality with the skiff

now players can choose between cargo or tank but have roughly equal yield
xXxNIMRODxXx
ChemiKals
Goonswarm Federation
#99 - 2016-08-23 20:29:02 UTC
Kalido Raddi wrote:
I think you've overdone it on the reduction to the Hulk's CPU. I understand you want to make the fit "tight", but you've actually made it impossible.

Also, could you please implement a reduction in Mining Crystal damage for the Hulk?

a reduction on cap usage, if that's not already in place, I can barely keep my cap with a SMALL <----- shield booster and arkonor crystals....
PLUS why on earth does changing crystals suck your cap?
Numerus Muvila
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#100 - 2016-08-23 20:44:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Numerus Muvila
This new Hulk is not good at all i have no Ore hold and that littel tank i had you take away for 8k m³ more in 1h?

Right now i have this Stats with zero Boost and 5% Imp

3684m³ 122,4sec 108352,94m³


With 3 mlu´s ,5%imp and zero Boost i have this stats

3328m³ 103,3sec 115980,63m³

thats are 7627,69m³ more but i have to turn off 1 midslot and noway i can turn him on.

I already a papertank why you have to **** the hulk more?

Skiff has Tank
Mack has Orehold
Hulk has ?

#givemycpuback