These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Ship balancing summer update

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#581 - 2012-06-16 10:51:54 UTC
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
THIS IS A BAD IDEA. I know the whole point is to group up and play with others, and I often do for missions and such. However, when it comes to mining, more often then not (95% of the time), I find myself mining on my alt alone in her Hulk. No Orca support (cause my Hulk pilot is the Orca pilot), and therefor I fit cargo expanders to minimize the amount of times I need to return to the station to empty.
…so don't use the Hulk. It will be the wrong tool for the job. What you'll want is a Mackinaw or a Retriever — the two solo mining ships.

Quote:
If we've grown accustomed to mining solo with the hulk, are you saying that you don't want us mining alone anymore?
No, they're saying that you shouldn't be using the Hulk any more. If that comes with a reduction in yield then, surprise, group play is being rewarded, which is a rather common thing in EVE.
Mal Nina
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#582 - 2012-06-16 13:10:17 UTC
From the care bear WH dweller industrialist.

Additions:
Gas mining ship and or gas mining strip miners. The easy solution might be to simply make mining barges and exhumers have a bonus to gas, ice, and ore. Then create a gas strip harvester. The strip harvester combined with the ship should do better than the current 5 gas harvesters IIs at some level of proficiency. I do believe there should be a training effort to get this level so it’s worth having the skill. Having spent 2 hours with 3 people in a C540 cloud yesterday I would like something that brings down that time Big smile.

Gas compression BPOs for the rorqual. Make the ore holds in all ships be able to hold gas as well as ice and ore. Let the silos in a polymer processing array be able to work directly from compressed gas. For example, a silo only holds 20 hours’ worth of C540 for a reaction, by using compressed gas it could hold xx hours’ worth. For those of us running arrays this is a big deal.

off gas... how about finally giving us a Tech II orca? Tech II rorqual? Tech II noctis? There is lots of room to have some real fun in development of these ships to their ultimate design. Smile
Joseph O'Neil
Sanctum Within
#583 - 2012-06-16 13:20:09 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
THIS IS A BAD IDEA. I know the whole point is to group up and play with others, and I often do for missions and such. However, when it comes to mining, more often then not (95% of the time), I find myself mining on my alt alone in her Hulk. No Orca support (cause my Hulk pilot is the Orca pilot), and therefor I fit cargo expanders to minimize the amount of times I need to return to the station to empty.
…so don't use the Hulk. It will be the wrong tool for the job. What you'll want is a Mackinaw or a Retriever — the two solo mining ships.

Quote:
If we've grown accustomed to mining solo with the hulk, are you saying that you don't want us mining alone anymore?
No, they're saying that you shouldn't be using the Hulk any more. If that comes with a reduction in yield then, surprise, group play is being rewarded, which is a rather common thing in EVE.


I can understand the whole group play being rewarded, and tbh, if it were up to me, I'd always mine in a group. But the reality is that some people don't have that luxury. And from everything I've read, this just looks like a nerf to solo mining more then rewarding group play. Mining in a group is already better, what with there being the mining fleet bonuses available. Not to mention the mining links and the possibility of Orca support.

If we're forced to sell our Hulks to buy a Mackinaw, then fine. More isk in my pocket as the latter costs less to begin with. But what I'm concerned about is the amount of ore yield currently possible when mining solo with the Hulk. Unless we see a considerable buff to the amount the Mackinaw can pull in, I highly doubt this is going to be a very appreciated change for some people. Until we see some numbers on the matter, these concerns will remain an issue.

On a side note, I don't see how the smaller ship between the Hulk and the Mackinaw, the smaller being the latter, is to be the one with much larger amount of storage space. It just doesn't seem realistic. I know I know. "It's a game."

And what of Ice mining? Is this change going to force mining fleets to move from the lesser expensive ship (and therefor a smaller loss if ganked) to the more expensive ship for their Ice mining ops? At the moment, the Mackinaw's role is that of an Ice mining ship. NOT the solo miner's ship.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#584 - 2012-06-16 13:28:05 UTC
Read through the first few pages but can't see spending time to read over 30 pages.


Quote:
ship balancing summer update
reported by CCP Ytterbium | 2012.06.14 12:59:14

Navitas, Bantam, Burst: long range offensive platforms. The Navitas is being overhauled as a drone boat, a role currently lacking among tech 1 small hulls. The Bantam will replace the Merlin as the long range dedicated Caldari sniper. Finally, the Burst still is bit blurry at the moment – considered roles are mobile artillery platform, drone boat or a mix of both.
-
-
Barge in on me
Changing the mining frigates to have combat roles made us realize that we need something to replace them.
-
-
As a result we thus get:
New ORE frig: we want this ship to replace current mining frigates as low barrier of entry vessel, but also fulfill high-end gameplay expectations by providing a very mobile platform for mining in hostile space. Lowest mining output, decent ore bay, little to no resilience.
-
-
Before we forget, part of what players now call “tiericide” is to look at skill requirements. We are not pleased with how they work specifically with this ship class, since the Hulk is currently only a few hours away from the Covetor in terms of skill training. That is why, after the change, all tech 1 mining barges will now only require the Mining Barge Skill at level 1.

We will most likely add the new ORE frigate skill at 4 as a Mining Barge nested prerequisite though, but remember our motto: if you could fly it before, you can fly it now.


You forgot to include the Amarr mining Frigate - Tormentor.

Also just exactly how does the ORE Frigate provide a mobile platform for mining in hostile space when it has little to no resilience? Talk about a statement that contradicts itself.

Anyway, I'm not a Mining Pilot even though I do have mining skills. I trained those up for whenever that 'once in a blue moon' need arises for when I have to do a bit of mining.

During my 4 years of playing this game, I've never had the need or wanted to train up Mining Barge skills. I still have my Burst and Scythe ships set up with max fit and still use them for the occasional mining whenever it's required. They work just fine for players like me who rarely ever need to do any mining. I have Frigate 5 and Cruiser 5 trained which, when coupled with the Burst and Scythe bonus along with my mining skills and ship fits, was all I ever needed.

Now you're saying I will no longer be able to use those ships for the occasional mining that I rarely ever do and now I will have to buy and train up new skills as well as buy and fit up new ships just to do a little mining every once in a while when needed.

I really don't see how this even remotely benefits players like me. You're basically forcing players to paint a target on their backs by having to get into a Mining Barge as well as making them spend extra ISK and waste time to train up new skills and buy / fit up new ships which they will rarely ever use.

If this is your idea of balancing, then players like me are basically the skinny little kid sitting on a see-saw stuck up in the air due to a fat big kid sitting on the other end of the see-saw. This skinny little kid is not a happy camper at all.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Joseph O'Neil
Sanctum Within
#585 - 2012-06-16 13:29:09 UTC
Varg Krugar wrote:
with the upcoming barge changes, please look at the ore transport capacity of a rorqual/orca stuffed with mining barges. if the barge sizes stay the same and you can put the same amount of currently smaller barges with the then bigger ore bays into the rorqual, the amount of ore transported will go up, possibly beyond what was intended.

sorry if this has already been adressed in this thread.

My guess is that they intend on making it impossible for barges with ore in their bays to be stored in the rorqual/orca, much like it is already. This shouldn't be an issue.
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#586 - 2012-06-16 13:33:24 UTC
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
THIS IS A BAD IDEA. I know the whole point is to group up and play with others, and I often do for missions and such. However, when it comes to mining, more often then not (95% of the time), I find myself mining on my alt alone in her Hulk. No Orca support (cause my Hulk pilot is the Orca pilot), and therefor I fit cargo expanders to minimize the amount of times I need to return to the station to empty.
…so don't use the Hulk. It will be the wrong tool for the job. What you'll want is a Mackinaw or a Retriever — the two solo mining ships.

Quote:
If we've grown accustomed to mining solo with the hulk, are you saying that you don't want us mining alone anymore?
No, they're saying that you shouldn't be using the Hulk any more. If that comes with a reduction in yield then, surprise, group play is being rewarded, which is a rather common thing in EVE.


I can understand the whole group play being rewarded, and tbh, if it were up to me, I'd always mine in a group. But the reality is that some people don't have that luxury. And from everything I've read, this just looks like a nerf to solo mining more then rewarding group play. Mining in a group is already better, what with there being the mining fleet bonuses available. Not to mention the mining links and the possibility of Orca support.

If we're forced to sell our Hulks to buy a Mackinaw, then fine. More isk in my pocket as the latter costs less to begin with. But what I'm concerned about is the amount of ore yield currently possible when mining solo with the Hulk. Unless we see a considerable buff to the amount the Mackinaw can pull in, I highly doubt this is going to be a very appreciated change for some people. Until we see some numbers on the matter, these concerns will remain an issue.

On a side note, I don't see how the smaller ship between the Hulk and the Mackinaw, the smaller being the latter, is to be the one with much larger amount of storage space. It just doesn't seem realistic. I know I know. "It's a game."

And what of Ice mining? Is this change going to force mining fleets to move from the lesser expensive ship (and therefor a smaller loss if ganked) to the more expensive ship for their Ice mining ops? At the moment, the Mackinaw's role is that of an Ice mining ship. NOT the solo miner's ship.



please read the dev blog again to answer your question concerning the future mackinaw yield and check also ccp ytterbiums clarification post a few pages back to answer your question to exhumer specialisation.
all that has been answered already. multiple times.
if you are too lazy: mack and retriever will get a significant yield boost and mack will stay the dedicated ice mining boat.


and why should solo mining be nearly as effective as group mining? there is absolutely no reason.
when your corp maties do not want to mine with you, look for a better mining corp. simple as that.
apart from that, you still can mine solo with your hulk. noone will stop you from that. you just have to deal with the trade offs.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#587 - 2012-06-16 13:35:07 UTC
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
Varg Krugar wrote:
with the upcoming barge changes, please look at the ore transport capacity of a rorqual/orca stuffed with mining barges. if the barge sizes stay the same and you can put the same amount of currently smaller barges with the then bigger ore bays into the rorqual, the amount of ore transported will go up, possibly beyond what was intended.

sorry if this has already been adressed in this thread.

My guess is that they intend on making it impossible for barges with ore in their bays to be stored in the rorqual/orca, much like it is already. This shouldn't be an issue.


Not a big issue, but somewhat annoying, especially if you have an orca pilot who doesn't fly exhumers.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#588 - 2012-06-16 13:39:54 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Read through the first few pages but can't see spending time to read over 30 pages.


Quote:
ship balancing summer update
reported by CCP Ytterbium | 2012.06.14 12:59:14

Navitas, Bantam, Burst: long range offensive platforms. The Navitas is being overhauled as a drone boat, a role currently lacking among tech 1 small hulls. The Bantam will replace the Merlin as the long range dedicated Caldari sniper. Finally, the Burst still is bit blurry at the moment – considered roles are mobile artillery platform, drone boat or a mix of both.
-
-
Barge in on me
Changing the mining frigates to have combat roles made us realize that we need something to replace them.
-
-
As a result we thus get:
New ORE frig: we want this ship to replace current mining frigates as low barrier of entry vessel, but also fulfill high-end gameplay expectations by providing a very mobile platform for mining in hostile space. Lowest mining output, decent ore bay, little to no resilience.
-
-
Before we forget, part of what players now call “tiericide” is to look at skill requirements. We are not pleased with how they work specifically with this ship class, since the Hulk is currently only a few hours away from the Covetor in terms of skill training. That is why, after the change, all tech 1 mining barges will now only require the Mining Barge Skill at level 1.

We will most likely add the new ORE frigate skill at 4 as a Mining Barge nested prerequisite though, but remember our motto: if you could fly it before, you can fly it now.


You forgot to include the Amarr mining Frigate - Tormentor.

Also just exactly how does the ORE Frigate provide a mobile platform for mining in hostile space when it has little to no resilience? Talk about a statement that contradicts itself.

Anyway, I'm not a Mining Pilot even though I do have mining skills. I trained those up for whenever that 'once in a blue moon' need arises for when I have to do a bit of mining.

During my 4 years of playing this game, I've never had the need or wanted to train up Mining Barge skills. I still have my Burst and Scythe ships set up with max fit and still use them for the occasional mining whenever it's required. They work just fine for players like me who rarely ever need to do any mining. I have Frigate 5 and Cruiser 5 trained which, when coupled with the Burst and Scythe bonus along with my mining skills and ship fits, was all I ever needed.

Now you're saying I will no longer be able to use those ships for the occasional mining that I rarely ever do and now I will have to buy and train up new skills as well as buy and fit up new ships just to do a little mining every once in a while when needed.

I really don't see how this even remotely benefits players like me. You're basically forcing players to paint a target on their backs by having to get into a Mining Barge as well as making them spend extra ISK and waste time to train up new skills and buy / fit up new ships which they will rarely ever use.

If this is your idea of balancing, then players like me are basically the skinny little kid sitting on a see-saw stuck up in the air due to a fat big kid sitting on the other end of the see-saw. This skinny little kid is not a happy camper at all.


tormentor isn't a mining frig anymore since quite some time now. so he did not forget it.

as for the rest, please read the blog again it is all in there. barges will not be that of an easy target anymore and
it is quite ignorant of you to depict the proposed as bad, just because they interfere with your once in a month mining.
Lili Lu
#589 - 2012-06-16 13:42:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
None ofthe Above wrote:
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:
Lili Lu wrote:
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:
Spergelord Lol

I will endeavor to find what pleases you.


Popular =/= overpowered, nor yet unbalanced. Gee, the fact that a ship is forgiving to fly and easy to get into, easier to fit for a newbie than many others, that couldn't possibly have a thing to do with popularity, now could it. Roll


Would you two just get a room? The kinky hate-sex games are getting a bit tiresome.

Honestly largely agree with Tarryn here, but wish he hadn't started out calling people fools, that's a sure way to have a less than productive conversation.

Its a valid point that common heavily used things do not mean overpowered.

Are clothes over powered since everyone uses them? Doorknobs?

Drake is an example of a ship that works, much like the Rifter is. It should be largely left alone in the rebalance, IMHO.

So of course it's ok to have one "ship that works." Everyone should roll or train Caldari right? And ffs, overpowered has different meanings. Is it so hard not to always interpret it as meaning "it kills everything else"? Of course drakes aren't that. But for the isk, for the sp, for the range of roles it can fill, for the range of other ship classes requiring more isk or sp with which it is able to compete or best, YES it is OP.

So how do you propose to balance that situation? Would you buff all the other battlecruisers? What does that do to the utility of Cruisers? Especially now that CCP is trying to buff them up so they are not just a wave as you fly by on the train to BC. To my mind it's a simple matter to cut the hp of the tier 2 back to the same as the tier 1 and deal with the slots and bonuses later during the comprehensive balancing.

Also, btw, it's not just null sec drake blobs. You should remember people have alts and other accounts. Blink Drakes are everywhere, in every kind of pve and pvp. This is why the stats are so skewed so heavily to them. The stats would not be so if more ships "worked" as you say, like they do. But everything can't be buffed and accomplish balance.
Joseph O'Neil
Sanctum Within
#590 - 2012-06-16 13:52:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Joseph O'Neil
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Joseph O'Neil wrote:
THIS IS A BAD IDEA. I know the whole point is to group up and play with others, and I often do for missions and such. However, when it comes to mining, more often then not (95% of the time), I find myself mining on my alt alone in her Hulk. No Orca support (cause my Hulk pilot is the Orca pilot), and therefor I fit cargo expanders to minimize the amount of times I need to return to the station to empty.
…so don't use the Hulk. It will be the wrong tool for the job. What you'll want is a Mackinaw or a Retriever — the two solo mining ships.

Quote:
If we've grown accustomed to mining solo with the hulk, are you saying that you don't want us mining alone anymore?
No, they're saying that you shouldn't be using the Hulk any more. If that comes with a reduction in yield then, surprise, group play is being rewarded, which is a rather common thing in EVE.


I can understand the whole group play being rewarded, and tbh, if it were up to me, I'd always mine in a group. But the reality is that some people don't have that luxury. And from everything I've read, this just looks like a nerf to solo mining more then rewarding group play. Mining in a group is already better, what with there being the mining fleet bonuses available. Not to mention the mining links and the possibility of Orca support.

If we're forced to sell our Hulks to buy a Mackinaw, then fine. More isk in my pocket as the latter costs less to begin with. But what I'm concerned about is the amount of ore yield currently possible when mining solo with the Hulk. Unless we see a considerable buff to the amount the Mackinaw can pull in, I highly doubt this is going to be a very appreciated change for some people. Until we see some numbers on the matter, these concerns will remain an issue.

On a side note, I don't see how the smaller ship between the Hulk and the Mackinaw, the smaller being the latter, is to be the one with much larger amount of storage space. It just doesn't seem realistic. I know I know. "It's a game."

And what of Ice mining? Is this change going to force mining fleets to move from the lesser expensive ship (and therefor a smaller loss if ganked) to the more expensive ship for their Ice mining ops? At the moment, the Mackinaw's role is that of an Ice mining ship. NOT the solo miner's ship.



please read the dev blog again to answer your question concerning the future mackinaw yield and check also ccp ytterbiums clarification post a few pages back to answer your question to exhumer specialisation.
all that has been answered already. multiple times.
if you are too lazy: mack and retriever will get a significant yield boost and mack will stay the dedicated ice mining boat.


and why should solo mining be nearly as effective as group mining? there is absolutely no reason.
when your corp maties do not want to mine with you, look for a better mining corp. simple as that.
apart from that, you still can mine solo with your hulk. noone will stop you from that. you just have to deal with the trade offs.


I DID read the Dev blog and Ytterbium's post. Sure they said the Mackinaw will get a boost, when in what world does plan is to increase all barge mining output to be within an acceptable margin of the Hulk answer my concerns?
And when did I say that solo mining should be as effective as group mining? Next time carefully read a post before commenting on it.

Here CCP, something to consider:

Mining solo usually means using cargo extenders in the low slots. Mining in a group usually means using the mining upgrades instead. Use this when looking into just how much mining output each ship should have.

Edit: To clarify on my Ice mining/Mackinaw comment:

CCP, If the Mackinaw is to remain the Ice mining ship, but the Hulk is the fleet mining ship, then what are Ice mining fleets supposed to be flying?
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#591 - 2012-06-16 14:37:30 UTC
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
tormentor isn't a mining frig anymore since quite some time now. so he did not forget it.

as for the rest, please read the blog again it is all in there. barges will not be that of an easy target anymore and
it is quite ignorant of you to depict the proposed as bad, just because they interfere with your once in a month mining.

Ignorant huh? I have every right to voice my opinion about this change and how it affects me. I'm a paying customer and a member of this community and quite frankly I don't care what you think, my post was for CCP.

If the Tormentor has been changed already, then what mining ship is now being given to new players doing the Amarr Career Agent missions? Also, someone forgot to update the Evelopedia. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tormentor

As for reading the blog, I already read it 3 times before I posted.

By the way, who you trying to fool? What's the matter, don't have enough targets available for Suicide Ganking? I don't know what game you're playing but in Eve, all Mining Barges are nothing more than a giant bulls-eye waiting for overpowered Destroyers and T3 Battlecruisers to strike it.

This change is basically forcing non industrial players like me to buy 2 new skills and train them up as well as buy and fly ships that we don't want just to do a little mining on the side whenever it's needed.


'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#592 - 2012-06-16 14:53:56 UTC
I like the changes, especially those affecting barges/exhumers.

Looks like, especially in comparison to the "almighty" and linear Hulk, mining vessels are getting a hell of a boost. Now, not all training roads lead a miner to the Hulk, but instead there will be decisions to be made.

Very nicely done, CCP.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Lili Lu
#593 - 2012-06-16 15:37:23 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
If the Tormentor has been changed already, then what mining ship is now being given to new players doing the Amarr Career Agent missions? Also, someone forgot to update the Evelopedia. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tormentor

Apparently the answer is it doesn't matter. You're just an idiot, see, if it does. You see that your character will lag behind for a week or two til it trains mining cruiser and mining drones for the Arbitrator, doesn't matter. You stupidly rolled a new amarr indusrialist character. Much like the 3 charisma Achura days. Who cares about a long period of imbalance in character generation and advancement?

As for the wiki, it's been like that forever. Low priority update for that. It's not like new players would go there for any information.

And so it goes ~ . . .
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#594 - 2012-06-16 16:16:34 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
mining vessels are getting a hell of a boost. Now, not all training roads lead a miner to the Hulk, but instead there will be decisions to be made.

Very nicely done, CCP.

You´re VERY wrong und this is completely UNNICELY done by CCP!

Hulk will stay the "almighty" mining ship because it still will have the best mining yield.
Which is kinda important to a shipclass whose MAIN reason for existence is
M I N I N G !


It is completely irrelevant how miniscule an EHP boost a mining ship gets as the gankers will just upgrade the destroyer/Tornado hordes.


Quoting again my buried post on this whole fiasco as it´s lost in this sea of CCP griefer groupies that don´t understand mining.
Which is a bit mind boggling on it´s own. Shocked
ivar R'dhak wrote:
Here´s my take on the super-duper miner revamp.

Quote:
As a result we thus get:

New ORE frig: we want this ship to be obsolete after a week of gametime.
To the designer who came up with the cool design? Sux to be him.

Procurer/Skiff: primarily made to be ignored. As mining yield is the only thing that counts on a möthaeffin´ mining ship and EHP is worth cräp when the gankers just upgrade from two destroyers to two Tornados.

Retriever/Mackinaw: made for cheap bots and/or watching Game of Thrones/PÖrn while "you" mine.

Covetor/hulk: is almost identical to the current broken state. Just that now you can have a fit that stands up to better belt rats. And have to micromanage it more because no one was using this thing without cargo rig expanders.
yay



First of all CCP, can mining is an EMERGENT GAMEPLAY!
Effin´get it already and don´t try to kill it every time you have a new brainwave by sprint committee.

Then I´d actually like to congratulate you on the ore-bay. It´s a good idea and should´ve been implemented a week after you learned how to do it to Rorquals. I forgot, how many years ago was that again?



Here´s my take on a proper Exhumers revamp:

That "super-hardy" EHP you´re planing for the SKIFF? Double it then give it to ALL THE THINGS.

Those quaint and "oh so" obsoleteRoll roles the different Exhumers have, is actually the MAIN thing they should keep.
In fact make it even more pronounced.

Apart from the Skiff, it´s main trick of dodging space-rock farts is a bit weak. Give it a proper ore hold and warp core stabs to finally become the ninja miner that some people supposedly are dreaming of.


As for your new and already obsolete(especially with skill revamps) mining frig, PLEASE don´t give us another useless skill to train for. Just make the damn thing use the Barge skill on lvl1, set the other barges at 2, 3 & 4 and for all I care give them all those nifty ideas you have cooked up.

BTW how about a dedicated gas cloud miner?
I heard you´re making a new mining ship that could use a Tech2 variant?


Tl;dr Proper T2 Mining ships? Where?
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#595 - 2012-06-16 16:36:13 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
tormentor isn't a mining frig anymore since quite some time now. so he did not forget it.

as for the rest, please read the blog again it is all in there. barges will not be that of an easy target anymore and
it is quite ignorant of you to depict the proposed as bad, just because they interfere with your once in a month mining.

Ignorant huh? I have every right to voice my opinion about this change and how it affects me. I'm a paying customer and a member of this community and quite frankly I don't care what you think, my post was for CCP.

If the Tormentor has been changed already, then what mining ship is now being given to new players doing the Amarr Career Agent missions? Also, someone forgot to update the Evelopedia. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tormentor

As for reading the blog, I already read it 3 times before I posted.

By the way, who you trying to fool? What's the matter, don't have enough targets available for Suicide Ganking? I don't know what game you're playing but in Eve, all Mining Barges are nothing more than a giant bulls-eye waiting for overpowered Destroyers and T3 Battlecruisers to strike it.

This change is basically forcing non industrial players like me to buy 2 new skills and train them up as well as buy and fly ships that we don't want just to do a little mining on the side whenever it's needed.



me the suicide ganker.. right :)
well yes, use your right to voice your opinion. thats what a forum is good for. but maybe make it in a constructive way?
im sorry to repeat it, but as you wrote it, it was ignorant of the majority of miners, who do use barges and strip miners.
a constructive proposal from your side would be:
"why implement an entirely new skill for just one frig? why not make it depend on the already existing ore industrial skill?"
in this way you would also benefit with the noctis.
anyway,when you have trained mining skills for mining lasers and a frig/ cruiser fitting, the step into an ore frig is maybe 8h worth of training, when a ore frig skill is needed.

Joseph O'Neil wrote:


I DID read the Dev blog and Ytterbium's post. Sure they said the Mackinaw will get a boost, when in what world does plan is to increase all barge mining output to be within an acceptable margin of the Hulk answer my concerns?
And when did I say that solo mining should be as effective as group mining? Next time carefully read a post before commenting on it.

Here CCP, something to consider:

Mining solo usually means using cargo extenders in the low slots. Mining in a group usually means using the mining upgrades instead. Use this when looking into just how much mining output each ship should have.

Edit: To clarify on my Ice mining/Mackinaw comment:

CCP, If the Mackinaw is to remain the Ice mining ship, but the Hulk is the fleet mining ship, then what are Ice mining fleets supposed to be flying?



given the time table of ccp ytterbium, the sentence you quoted is all you can ask for. if the details would be clear, one could already implement the stuff or better test it out on sisi.
concerning mining fleet vs solo mining i might have wrote something different then i ment. you wanted to emphazise, solo mining should yield as much as it does now, which you do not see happening given the proposed changes?
i still think, solo mining in a hulk is way too effective. the difference in a fully skilled hulk solo and a fully skilled hulk in a mining ops could be bigger. teamplay should pay out big time, as there is more needed to do so. not only skill-wise but also on the personal level. trust, division of labor...
on the other hand the hulk may just be way too good.
after working with a hulk as it is now, any changes which level the field of competence need adjustment from the player side.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#596 - 2012-06-16 17:11:52 UTC
ivar R'dhak wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
mining vessels are getting a hell of a boost. Now, not all training roads lead a miner to the Hulk, but instead there will be decisions to be made.

Very nicely done, CCP.

You´re VERY wrong und this is completely UNNICELY done by CCP!

Hulk will stay the "almighty" mining ship because it still will have the best mining yield.
Which is kinda important to a shipclass whose MAIN reason for existence is
M I N I N G !

I have to disagree. The barges won't be left that far behind in terms of mining yield, at least that is how I'm reading the changes. Yes, the Hulk will still be the king of mining yields, but by how much? Being able to sacrifice a little yield™ for a BS-tank to me, at least, is quite reasonable. In any case I think miners have real choices to make, instead of hopping on a Hulk which has only ever offered better yield. In other words, as it is now, better mining ship (or higher tier/class) meant mostlyl only higher yield. But with these new changes they offer a mix of yield, tank, and storage.

You want to still fly a Hulk? By all means do. But don't down-play being able to semi-AFK mine in hi sec on a Procurer with yields that won't be devastatingly lower than that of a Hulk.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Imryn Xaran
Coherent Light Enterprises
#597 - 2012-06-16 17:25:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Imryn Xaran wrote:
What I would like to know is how do any of these changes improve mining ops in hi sec?
1. No need (or point) to ruin your Hulk with cargo expanders → more reason to tank → easier to protect.
2. No need to use the Hulk to begin with, but rather go for one of the larger-tank/larger-cargo models → easier to survive.
3. Less loot → more expensive ganks → easier to become a worthless target.
4. More utility in cheaper ships → more expensive ganks and cheaper losses → easier to become a worthless target and easier to just write of any incidental loss.

Quote:
no matter how well organised your op is in high sec miners still have to run like little girls every time a lone dessy shows up on d-scan.
Good news: you never had to run from a lone destroyer to begin with, and there's even less need to do so after this change. If you had to run before, it's because you broke your Hulk, not because the game is broken. With this change, the Hulk (which can already withstand multiple destroyers and even a tier-3 BC or two) will be the weakest ship in the fleet. If you cannot wrap your head around how much this has improved your ability to protect yourself, then trust me: the game was never the problem — it was you, all along.

Non-broken game is now even less broken. Very good job, CCP.


The point of organising a mining op is to allow miners to rig their barges for max yield. You seem to think that even when they take the time and trouble to organise a mining op high sec miners should still have to compromise mining yield to gain defence.

Miners in low and null don't have to make these compromises - they can mine in absolute 100% safety when they are in an organised op. Miners in high sec (the so called "safer" region of space) are vulnerable no matter how well orgaised they are. Effectively there is no point at all to orgaising mining ops in high sec because there is no gain in effiency (you have to use a sub-optimal barge with a sub-optimal fit) and no way to improve security. In fact, a high sec mining op is less safe than solo mining because a concentrated group of barges attracts gankers. I am sick and tired of hearing about the EVE "sandbox" when it is blatantly obvious that CCP has an agenda to force players to play in certain ways and in certain areas.

What happened to encouraging group play and just how "non-broken" does that sound to you?
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#598 - 2012-06-16 17:31:19 UTC  |  Edited by: ivar R'dhak
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Being able to sacrifice a little yield™ for a BS-tank to me, at least, is quite reasonable.

Re-read my post.
A minor EHP boost(to BS levels) is irrelevant for a shipclass that is by default a punching ball to anything with a gun.
zerokmatrix
Federation Mission Acedemy
#599 - 2012-06-16 17:48:11 UTC
Dear CCP,
Wow 30 pages of comments in 24 hours, anyone would think this is a thread about the unified inventory :P

Looking forward to the changes proposed, especially excited about the mining frigate, I hope it will be fun to use for ninja mining.

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that maybe before you introduce a new destroyer, in addition to the frigates we already have, you instead "promote" one of each races frigates to destroyer or more likely, scrap one of each races frigates in favour of a new destroyer.

I support this Idea 100%.

The frigate class is already the largest buy far and there are some frigates you never see outside the starter systems. I am sure each race could stand to lose at least one.

What happened to the salvaging drones BTW?

Regards,
zerokmatrix

PS.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#600 - 2012-06-16 17:59:18 UTC
ivar R'dhak wrote:
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
Being able to sacrifice a little yield™ for a BS-tank to me, at least, is quite reasonable.

Re-read my post.
A minor EHP boost(to BS levels) is irrelevant for a shipclass that is by default a punching ball to anything with a gun.


So keep using the Hulk if you think tripling or quadrupling your ships EHP won't help.

(It will help)

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016