These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Question regarding the balancing of ORE Mining Barges
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ivvanna Hump
Yellow Snow Solutions
#1 - 2012-06-14 15:37:49 UTC
I'm not really much of a miner, to be totally honest, but I do have a few close "friends" who operate the occasional mining fleet.

Reading the Dev Blog on balancing of T1 frigates and mining barges, there is talk of creating ore bays in the barges, similar to the ore bay on the Rorqual and these new bays being separate from the cargo holds.

Obviously, in my mind at least, that would mean the cargo bays would be reduced and used to hold things like mining crystals and other non-ore products.

The question is, what happens to all the Hulks and other mining ships that are rigged to the hilt with Cargo Hold Optimization rigs? Will these rigs affect the size of the ore bays as well as the cargo holds, or will hard-core miners be forced to destroy potentially costly rigs and replace them with "Ore Bay Optimizers" or simply use them for tanking their vessels instead of worrying about cargo bay capacity?
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2 - 2012-06-14 16:33:06 UTC
cargohold rigs have never affected the size of ore bays

And i doubt that there will be an option to increase the size of an Ore bay

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#3 - 2012-06-14 16:43:16 UTC
I propose that instead of ore bays, and perhaps as a way to remove all special bays thoughout the game, we have cargohold bonuses for different items.

For example, the new mining ships would have a bonus " 75% reduction in ore volume stored in cargo". The result would be a 5,000 cu m cargo hold would hold 20,000 cu m of ore. Now expanders and rigs would still be useful, but you could not turn a hulk into an iteron 5.

One could imagine this for other ships; have cargo holds that have a bonus for ozone, or ammo, or isotopes, and so on. We would have "Bayicide" and get rid of an entry in the inventory tree.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Grenn Putubi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-06-14 16:45:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Grenn Putubi
Vincent Athena wrote:
I propose that instead of ore bays, and perhaps as a way to remove all special bays thoughout the game, we have cargohold bonuses for different items.

For example, the new mining ships would have a bonus " 75% reduction in ore volume stored in cargo". The result would be a 5,000 cu m cargo hold would hold 20,000 cu m of ore. Now expanders and rigs would still be useful, but you could not turn a hulk into an iteron 5.

One could imagine this for other ships; have cargo holds that have a bonus for ozone, or ammo, or isotopes, and so on. We would have "Bayicide" and get rid of an entry in the inventory tree.


Your idea would require WAY more programming time and bug checking than simply adding a special bay that can only hold certain items. I wouldn't expect them to spend the time on such an involved and complicated adjustment to current mechanics. Especially when the current method of just putting specialized bays on ships does the job perfectly well.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#5 - 2012-06-14 16:52:49 UTC
Im not convinced it would be more programming. It could be less. There are already routines for reducing the CPU or power grid of a module when fit to certain ships, it may be easy to adapt that to certain cargo placed in the hold.

Only a CCP Dev can say for sure which would be easier.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2012-06-14 16:55:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Ivvanna Hump wrote:
I'm not really much of a miner, to be totally honest, but I do have a few close "friends" who operate the occasional mining fleet.

Reading the Dev Blog on balancing of T1 frigates and mining barges, there is talk of creating ore bays in the barges, similar to the ore bay on the Rorqual and these new bays being separate from the cargo holds.

Obviously, in my mind at least, that would mean the cargo bays would be reduced and used to hold things like mining crystals and other non-ore products.

The question is, what happens to all the Hulks and other mining ships that are rigged to the hilt with Cargo Hold Optimization rigs? Will these rigs affect the size of the ore bays as well as the cargo holds, or will hard-core miners be forced to destroy potentially costly rigs and replace them with "Ore Bay Optimizers" or simply use them for tanking their vessels instead of worrying about cargo bay capacity?




you'll have standard cargo as well you can just drag the yield from one bay to another.

what about current exhumer mining bonuses? are they going away or are they going to stay the same? Things like Merxoit and Ice and Gas cry out for specialization... gas harvesting ships need 5 highs . Currently Macks have the highest yield on ice despite having fewer highs.. .. that's my biggest question.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Dave Stark
#7 - 2012-06-14 16:57:07 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:


you'll have standard cargo as well you can just drag the yield from one bay to another.


actually...

Quote:
Autonomy: mining barges should have proper cargo holds so they not always have to rely on jet cans (without turning them into industrials however). That means giving them large, specialized ore bays where all the ore will automatically go into when mining.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2012-06-14 17:02:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Dave stark wrote:
Barbara Nichole wrote:


you'll have standard cargo as well you can just drag the yield from one bay to another.


actually...

Quote:
Autonomy: mining barges should have proper cargo holds so they not always have to rely on jet cans (without turning them into industrials however). That means giving them large, specialized ore bays where all the ore will automatically go into when mining.



Actually, you are not understanding what he's saying there. The orca has a cargo bay and many other bays which include an "ore bay" .. what they are saying is that mining will auto drop ore into the "ore bay" of these ships..not in the general cargo. That does not preclude you from moving the ore manually as the ore bay fills. This is a very common practice for the orca.. and I believe this is where they are going, There will have to be cargo bays, as the hulk and other ships must carry non ore items and only ore will fit in an ore bay.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
#9 - 2012-06-14 17:03:51 UTC
Nothing says CCP can't make the skill level commiserate ore hold volume.
Nothing has been decided.

mxzf
Shovel Bros
#10 - 2012-06-14 17:05:52 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Im not convinced it would be more programming. It could be less. There are already routines for reducing the CPU or power grid of a module when fit to certain ships, it may be easy to adapt that to certain cargo placed in the hold.

Only a CCP Dev can say for sure which would be easier.


As a programmer, I can tell you that adding in a new mechanic to shrink ore in certain cargoholds instead of using the existing ore cargoholds mechanic would be much more difficult. I might not be actually looking at their code, but I do know how coding works and I know that the existing ore bay mechanic would be very simple to add in to certain ships, whereas making ore shrink in certain ships would be a pain.

And, no, the fitting requirements reduction wouldn't really be translatable to modifying the volume of an item in a cargo bay. The subroutine where fitting requirements are set and the spot where cargo volume gets checked are completely unrelated.

@OP. I can see how that might be a bit problematic. However, I would wait and see what CCP ends up doing before panicking too much. The easiest solution might be for CCP to forcibly un-rig all mining barges when the patch rolls out. We'll see what ends up happening though.
Grenn Putubi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2012-06-14 17:10:32 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Im not convinced it would be more programming. It could be less. There are already routines for reducing the CPU or power grid of a module when fit to certain ships, it may be easy to adapt that to certain cargo placed in the hold.

Only a CCP Dev can say for sure which would be easier.


As a programmer myself I can only imagine that those routines for adjusting the fitting costs of modules on ships are very specific and would require substantial rewriting to be applied to anything other than CPU/PG.

On top of that you'd be changing a routine that affects a very small number of objects and is only applied during fitting into a routine that would be affecting every object in the game that could be placed into a cargo hold and would need to be applied every time cargo is moved in or out of your cargo bay.

It may be possible or even easy to alter the routine to achieve the desired result, but the increased load on the servers and clients would likely be unacceptable since the routine to alter the m3 of specific cargo would need to be run far more often than if you simply add a new bay to the ship that can only hold certain items. You go from a check to see if the item is the correct type and some simple addition to see if there's room to a check to see if the item is the correct type, an adjustment of its m3, and the math to see if there's room. Plus you'd be changing the routine from running only when objects enter the specialized bay to run every time anything enters your cargo hold. So not only are you increasing the number of processes, you're increasing the frequency at which they're run.
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#12 - 2012-06-14 17:25:04 UTC
Adding existing stuff to ships in EVE seems to be:
ore bay = 1 / 0
ore bay size = XXX

Compare adding those to hulk's stats versus adding a completely new code to the game.

Anyway on topic; these changes feel exactly what we've been waiting for, more EHP or more yield depending what you need for your mining endeavours.
Dave Stark
#13 - 2012-06-14 17:27:58 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Barbara Nichole wrote:


you'll have standard cargo as well you can just drag the yield from one bay to another.


actually...

Quote:
Autonomy: mining barges should have proper cargo holds so they not always have to rely on jet cans (without turning them into industrials however). That means giving them large, specialized ore bays where all the ore will automatically go into when mining.



Actually, you are not understanding what he's saying there. The orca has a cargo bay and many other bays which include an "ore bay" .. what they are saying is that mining will auto drop ore into the "ore bay" of these ships..not in the general cargo. That does not preclude you from moving the ore manually as the ore bay fills. This is a very common practice for the orca.. and I believe this is where they are going, There will have to be cargo bays, as the hulk and other ships must carry non ore items and only ore will fit in an ore bay.


yes, sorry my ability to read totally failed me there.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#14 - 2012-06-14 19:06:27 UTC
Ivvanna Hump wrote:
I'm not really much of a miner, to be totally honest, but I do have a few close "friends" who operate the occasional mining fleet.

Reading the Dev Blog on balancing of T1 frigates and mining barges, there is talk of creating ore bays in the barges, similar to the ore bay on the Rorqual and these new bays being separate from the cargo holds.

Obviously, in my mind at least, that would mean the cargo bays would be reduced and used to hold things like mining crystals and other non-ore products.

The question is, what happens to all the Hulks and other mining ships that are rigged to the hilt with Cargo Hold Optimization rigs? Will these rigs affect the size of the ore bays as well as the cargo holds, or will hard-core miners be forced to destroy potentially costly rigs and replace them with "Ore Bay Optimizers" or simply use them for tanking their vessels instead of worrying about cargo bay capacity?



1.) There is currently no method to expand the specialized bays of ships: SMB, Fuel Bay, Ore Holds, etc... CCP might add rigs/modules to alter these bays, but I've heard no hint this will happen. Such items have been regularly suggested in F&I forums for years now.

2.) It is moderately likely, that in the patch, CCP will remove the rigs from the ships and put them in your hangar.

3.) Cargo bays WILL be reduced, as CCP does NOT want mining barges competing with industrials for hauling.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2012-06-14 20:58:40 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
I propose that instead of ore bays, and perhaps as a way to remove all special bays thoughout the game, we have cargohold bonuses for different items.

For example, the new mining ships would have a bonus " 75% reduction in ore volume stored in cargo". The result would be a 5,000 cu m cargo hold would hold 20,000 cu m of ore. Now expanders and rigs would still be useful, but you could not turn a hulk into an iteron 5.

One could imagine this for other ships; have cargo holds that have a bonus for ozone, or ammo, or isotopes, and so on. We would have "Bayicide" and get rid of an entry in the inventory tree.



How would this work with ship maintenance bays, or would carriers literally replace everything else overnight?
Kris Anthony
Excavation Genesis
#16 - 2012-06-14 22:37:39 UTC
Anything that will take away from the HULK I am totally against. The hulk needs to be top dog in everything, that from hauling, to yield, to tanking. That is why I did the skills and payed the isk to fly it. To take away from Hulk is very aggravating. A lot of time and isk have gone into my Hulk to make it safe for me to mine. I can make more isk from PVE in high and null sec then I do mining. So, if you take a way my ability mine at the profit level that I'm at now, i will stop mining all together. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, and you think the price of goods is high now. Just wait until miners stop mining altogether because it is no fun losing 300M to 500M isk on ship that will NOT make that in a week. I have 3 characters, 2 are set up for mining in a Hulk and 1 for hauling but if the Hulk gets down graded I will stop mining. Being a easy target for PVP is BS and it does not make sense.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#17 - 2012-06-14 22:48:11 UTC
Kris Anthony wrote:
Anything that will take away from the HULK I am totally against. The hulk needs to be top dog in everything, that from hauling, to yield, to tanking. That is why I did the skills and payed the isk to fly it. To take away from Hulk is very aggravating. A lot of time and isk have gone into my Hulk to make it safe for me to mine. I can make more isk from PVE in high and null sec then I do mining. So, if you take a way my ability mine at the profit level that I'm at now, i will stop mining all together. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, and you think the price of goods is high now. Just wait until miners stop mining altogether because it is no fun losing 300M to 500M isk on ship that will NOT make that in a week. I have 3 characters, 2 are set up for mining in a Hulk and 1 for hauling but if the Hulk gets down graded I will stop mining. Being a easy target for PVP is BS and it does not make sense.


Did you even READ the dev blog???

Would you really have a problem if the nerfed the hulk, but boosted the skiff to mine with roughly the same profitability as the hulk while also giving it a big tank?

You really need to learn to adapt!!!
Rainbow Prism Colorblind
United Electro-Magnetic Federation
Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
#18 - 2012-06-14 23:02:06 UTC
as far I see it with the new orebays.

I like the idea, they are after all ore industrial ships, speliced in handling ore not to fly say tobaco arond.

as far as I have read on th update blogs of the idea it says noting about nerfin hulk, they be still the best isk/hour boat
and i think even the tank will be sligtly buffed, or at lest I wuld hope so.

I myself i looking foward to this shange, and im ure it wuld reduse gcans in belt as well ^^
witch reduses load on servers witch make it better and smoother...
Grenn Putubi
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2012-06-15 01:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Grenn Putubi
Kris Anthony wrote:
Anything that will take away from the HULK I am totally against. The hulk needs to be top dog in everything, that from hauling, to yield, to tanking. That is why I did the skills and payed the isk to fly it. To take away from Hulk is very aggravating. A lot of time and isk have gone into my Hulk to make it safe for me to mine. I can make more isk from PVE in high and null sec then I do mining. So, if you take a way my ability mine at the profit level that I'm at now, i will stop mining all together. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, and you think the price of goods is high now. Just wait until miners stop mining altogether because it is no fun losing 300M to 500M isk on ship that will NOT make that in a week. I have 3 characters, 2 are set up for mining in a Hulk and 1 for hauling but if the Hulk gets down graded I will stop mining. Being a easy target for PVP is BS and it does not make sense.


You clearly didn't read the devblog, or at least didn't understand it.

They're not nerfing the Hulk, they're just buffing the tanks on the Skiff and the Mack so they're more tankable than the Hulk is. Hulk will still be the best yield you'll get, but the Skiff and the Mack will both be more survivable than the Hulk is. They've said they're unhappy with the speed at which a Hulk can die to a destroyer so it may actually be getting a buff.

Your jumping to conclusions after not reading and/or not comprehending the devblog helps nothing.
Ivvanna Hump
Yellow Snow Solutions
#20 - 2012-06-15 17:34:27 UTC
Kris Anthony wrote:
Anything that will take away from the HULK I am totally against. The hulk needs to be top dog in everything, that from hauling, to yield, to tanking. That is why I did the skills and payed the isk to fly it. To take away from Hulk is very aggravating. A lot of time and isk have gone into my Hulk to make it safe for me to mine. I can make more isk from PVE in high and null sec then I do mining. So, if you take a way my ability mine at the profit level that I'm at now, i will stop mining all together. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, and you think the price of goods is high now. Just wait until miners stop mining altogether because it is no fun losing 300M to 500M isk on ship that will NOT make that in a week. I have 3 characters, 2 are set up for mining in a Hulk and 1 for hauling but if the Hulk gets down graded I will stop mining. Being a easy target for PVP is BS and it does not make sense.


The issue is that you are currently an easy target for PVP in that Hulk. High-sec ganking of Hulks happens all the time because they have a very low defensive capability.

The dev blog simply states that the intention is to buff the miners to make them more useful in particular situations AND to set them up with a large ore bay, so that there is not such a dependency on jet-cans for mining operations. Now that's not to say you can't still use your macro miner programs on your two miner characters and have them jet-canning to your hauler account. (BTW - I don't in ANY WAY condone the use of mining macros, but we all know they are common.) The difference is that you will have to jet-can from your ore bay instead of the universal cargo hold and you won't have to jettison as frequently due to the higher capacity of the ore bay.

With the smaller miners, their bonuses will be that they can be fitted to provide better survivability in trade for a lower yield. You can use the more affordable and better tanking ships in null/low-sec while saving your 500 million ISK Hulk for "secure" mining in Empire. With the addition of the new mining frigate, you can even create a whole crew of noob miner characters and set them up on macros too... then you might become profitable since you won't need mad skills to fly them like you do your Hulk.

(now that I've raged on your post a little, do back and read the dev blog and the original post before you go off half-cocked and uninformed.)
12Next page