These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EON #028 - The Future Of Mining
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#21 - 2012-06-21 12:59:21 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Q. Any hope of the Orca ever getting one or two utility high-slots added?

Once the gang links are in, there is no room for a tractorbeam or two, and that really is a crime. An extra mid-slot for a scanner would be nice too, as a reasonably tanked Orca needs all the current slots.


Sounds like there's room to take the scanner bonus away from the Command ship and hand those over to an ORE "covert ops": rather than a weapon bonus, give it a boost to survey scanner range. So the scout hunts down the mining sites, scans the rocks, determines if it's suitable for the fleet.

Then the command ship (Orca) arrives, the hulks arrive, and perhaps a Noctis for long range tractor beams.

So in addition to ships, I'd like to hear any ideas about moving mining to the dungeon system/grav sites.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#22 - 2012-06-21 14:24:10 UTC
The Orca is a confused ship at the moment:

(1) Who wastes a mid slot with a survey scanner? The extra shield mod is more useful
(2) Would prefer shield transfer bonus over survey scan bonus (for 0.0)
(3) Ore bay should be an ore bay, not a tiny cargo extension
(4) Should be able to carry 3 Hulks, not 2 as at present
Dave Stark
#23 - 2012-06-21 14:43:17 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
The Orca is a confused ship at the moment:

(1) Who wastes a mid slot with a survey scanner? The extra shield mod is more useful
(2) Would prefer shield transfer bonus over survey scan bonus (for 0.0)
(3) Ore bay should be an ore bay, not a tiny cargo extension
(4) Should be able to carry 3 Hulks, not 2 as at present


in regards to (4), it should be able to hold 1 of each exhumer, minimum.
Celgar Thurn
Department 10
#24 - 2012-06-21 14:46:06 UTC
Very nice to see someone from EON magazine asking for viewpoints within the EVE forums. I don't think I have seen anyone from EON in the forums before. Smile I recently splashed out on a four issue subscription of EON magazine and found issue 27 a very good read indeed. *shameless plug* Oops

Onto the matter in question several people have already mentioned space for a tractor beam on the Orca. Most orca pilots would like to have a tractor beam but they would also like to have the three mining links. Alternatively in these dangerous times skills permitting they would drop the mining cpu link and put the shield resists link on in its place. On large mining ops a tractor beam would potentially be very useful to haul jet cans in and clear rat wrecks as well. If CCP dropped their current mining plan and just added a specific high slot on the Orca to only be used for a tractor beam that would be very nice Smile

I have a number of issues with the latest dev blog that covers mining vessels:

1) The skill requirement reduction is nothing more than dumbing down of EVE Online. EVE is renouned for its complexity and steep learning curve. Infact this is one of EVE's most appealing assets. A game for adults and mature people and it should stay like that.

2) I am completely in favour of more 'eye candy' as long as is not detrimental to the game or slow down the mechanics. But the new ORE mining frigate looks more like an Interbus ship than something from ORE. Mining vessels should be industrial looking - grimy even. 'Mining in hostile space' but with 'little to no resilience' therefore the new perceived additional role for this vessel makes no sense whatsoever.

3) Procurer/Skiff. 'capable of having battleship-like EHP'. I can see where this is coming from and why pilots would like a much stronger vessel to mine in nul sec with. But you would still need the logistics and set-up to get the ore/minerals out of nul and into high sec so I don't see the need for this personally.

4) Retriever/Mackinaw. 'second best mining output'. less EHP than the (new) procurer'.

5) Covetor/Hulk. 'identical cargo hold' and 'little to average EHP'. No problem with keeping the cargo hold capacity the same. After all increasing cargo hold capacity is the last thing professional miners want as it reduces mineral prices and therefore profit.The second quote from CCP suggests they want to make Hulks & Covetors weaker and more prone to being ganked than they already are. This is the worst and most worrying aspect of CCP's plan to supposedly make the mining career a more attractive and financially viable option. And it is where the dev blog comes crashing down.
One of the mining dev blogs headline statements is 'Resilience'. It says our mining vessels should have 'proper EHP' and should 'not be one-shot by anything'. Well if they go ahead with this plan then Covetors and Hulks will indeed become closer to reaching 'one-shot' levels of EHP.

The mining dev blog is yet another of the recent dev blogs to be poorly thought out and I hope you can maybe help those involved see the errors in this plan.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#25 - 2012-06-21 15:29:25 UTC
If moon goo is going to come from ring mining, what happens to moon mining?

All the barges and exhumers are going to be redone, some having their yield buffed. Does that mean they are all going to have 3 strips, but different bonuses, or what?

Will the barge that gains a "battleship level tank" be able to mine faster than a battleship? (Presently you can fit a Rokh to mine better than a Retriever, have about as much cargo as a Retriever, and have a tank near 100K EHP.)

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Haffsol
#26 - 2012-06-21 16:27:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Haffsol
is CCP going to hire someone who has at least a fisrt idea about how mining works? Or are they trusting scouts who never posted in S&I in 9 years to do the job?

ah, sorry, I meant _before applying any change_

in this case could they accept my self-nomination as "Chief of Carebearing Bureau"? Always dreamt about going and live in iceland Lol

regards o/
Wille Sanara
No Shoosting
#27 - 2012-06-21 19:21:58 UTC
Question for CCP: How do you plan to prevent mining bots? Especially when you add pretty huge ore bay to some exhumers, like the planned can-size bay for mackinaw?
ashley Eoner
#28 - 2012-06-21 20:39:37 UTC
Wille Sanara wrote:
Question for CCP: How do you plan to prevent mining bots? Especially when you add pretty huge ore bay to some exhumers, like the planned can-size bay for mackinaw?

Yea the huge ore bay is confusing to me as that pretty much encourages botting and afk mining both of which CCP is against.
Jason Xado
Doomheim
#29 - 2012-06-21 21:23:20 UTC
I would really like to see a mining freighter of some sort. I big slow ship with a freighter sized ore hold that could be accessed in space. Let it fit capital tractor beams and I would be on cloud nine.

Just my opinion Smile
Tweetyrw79
Loony Toons Gang
#30 - 2012-06-22 05:14:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tweetyrw79
How about being able to use your mining lasers on ships. Which could instead of damage the hp or take off shields, overheat the modules of the ship they are targeting.

Mining in low sec can be quite dangerous if not fleeted with a bunch of ships garding, and if there is no battles the ones garding might get bored and go on a killing spree.

Just a little more offence for my hulk please.

also how about more submarine warfare, if I'm on the back side of a big asteroid totally powered off and the other ship can't visualy see me I shouldn't be on his overview. IMO.
Valravin
Polaris Security Solutions
#31 - 2012-06-22 10:26:09 UTC
Celgar Thurn wrote:
1) The skill requirement reduction is nothing more than dumbing down of EVE Online. EVE is renouned for its complexity and steep learning curve. Infact this is one of EVE's most appealing assets. A game for adults and mature people and it should stay like that.


They don't mention the support skills, only Mining Barge, due to the inherent ridiculousness of training a month to fly a Covetor and then a day or two more for a Hulk. There's nothing in the blog to indicate that it's their intention to strip out Astrogeology etc. at all. In fact they're more likely to add a skill, as they mention wanting ORE Mining frigate to IV to be a prerequisite as well.
Dave Stark
#32 - 2012-06-22 10:28:52 UTC
Valravin wrote:
Celgar Thurn wrote:
1) The skill requirement reduction is nothing more than dumbing down of EVE Online. EVE is renouned for its complexity and steep learning curve. Infact this is one of EVE's most appealing assets. A game for adults and mature people and it should stay like that.


They don't mention the support skills, only Mining Barge, due to the inherent ridiculousness of training a month to fly a Covetor and then a day or two more for a Hulk. There's nothing in the blog to indicate that it's their intention to strip out Astrogeology etc. at all. In fact they're more likely to add a skill, as they mention wanting ORE Mining frigate to IV to be a prerequisite as well.


not to mention adding a skill to a skill queue contributes nothing to the learning curve to this game so it's hardly dumbing down at all.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#33 - 2012-06-22 13:34:08 UTC
Omnishi wrote:
With the planned changes to the exhumers, will they keep there current hull bonuses...(i.e: Macks bonus to ice mining..ect)...

If they won't be keeping those bonuses, can we expect new ore ships for those roles in the future?

Any chance of a t2 version of the new mining frig, and if so whats the intended purpose it?

A t2 mining frigate might make a good gas harvester.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#34 - 2012-06-22 13:38:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Bugsy VanHalen
Zifrian wrote:
I'd like to know if they are even remotely considering capital mining ships that you can fit strips to or if they are shooting the idea down for good. I know people hate the idea but I love it. :)

If not a capital mining ship a capital mining laser that can be fitted on a dread??
Chribba would that not be sweet on the Veldnaught?
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#35 - 2012-06-22 13:42:40 UTC
MinorFreak wrote:
i think the most important question is: since ore holds cannot be modified by cargo modules/rigs, therefore will the hulk continue to be the largest total ore capacity ship out there? I'm assuming my 10k m3+ ice mining hulk will still be my bread and butter...i'd like to be wrong and see them come out with the AFK3000 O.R.E. barge - alas somehow i doubt it.

I get the impression the HULK will have a 6,000m3 ore hold equal to its unmodified cargohold. and will probably have its cargohold reduced to a small bay for mods and crystals. But I could be wrong.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#36 - 2012-06-22 13:52:00 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:


Q. Any hope getting more types of mining drones?

Medium and heavy seem logical. Perhaps limited to the specialized drone mining ship, if necessary.

This would be sweet. they added small and medium web drones we should also have med and large mining drones.

Tau Cabalander wrote:
Q. Any hope of the Orca ever getting one or two utility high-slots added?

Once the gang links are in, there is no room for a tractorbeam or two, and that really is a crime. An extra mid-slot for a scanner would be nice too, as a reasonably tanked Orca needs all the current slots.


I always run a tractor beam instead of the mining capacitor boost but often drop the range boost for a cloak, Since ORCA's are so slow it is much easier to just cloak up than try to warp off when something you do not like shows up on D-scan.

It would be really nice to fit all three mining ganglinks as well as a tractor beam and cloak or two tractor beams. or possibly a couple shield or capacitor transfer arrays depending on the situation.
Dave Stark
#37 - 2012-06-22 14:03:49 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
MinorFreak wrote:
i think the most important question is: since ore holds cannot be modified by cargo modules/rigs, therefore will the hulk continue to be the largest total ore capacity ship out there? I'm assuming my 10k m3+ ice mining hulk will still be my bread and butter...i'd like to be wrong and see them come out with the AFK3000 O.R.E. barge - alas somehow i doubt it.

I get the impression the HULK will have a 6,000m3 ore hold equal to its unmodified cargohold. and will probably have its cargohold reduced to a small bay for mods and crystals. But I could be wrong.


hulk has 8k cargo not 6k
Dataa
LightBender Mining and Research Corp
#38 - 2012-06-22 14:47:11 UTC
Has any thought gone into ship agility /speed.

My freighter is faster than my hulks .. and align times are horrible for ships of thier size . Imo they should align something like a cruiser sized ship.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-06-22 20:29:13 UTC

  1. Will CCP add new minerals along with new non-passive ways to mine them. There is room for a lot more variety in minerals.

  2. Will CCP do something with the alloy, making it useful as a material instead of just the unrefined ore locker it used to be? I would like to see metalurgy become a more active and important process.

  3. Comment on the current state of "risk" in null sec vs high sec risk. Seems to me the risk is about the same though slightly different in nature.

  4. What is the reasoning for not reducing the size of containers when they are repackaged...even though they are mostly air inside?

  5. Is there anything you can do to make insurance on expensive mining vessels less of a joke?

  - 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]
Emma Royd
Maddled Gommerils
#40 - 2012-06-23 09:56:24 UTC
Some randomness in mining would be an idea, have the standard asteroids, but introduce a 'Mystery' rock where you don't know what minerals you're going to get until it's refined.

Also, make it possible to mine ice in things other than barges / exhumers by introducing a miner for it and reducing the lump size but increasing the quantity needed for refining, eg instead of being 1,000 m3 and needing 1 lump, make it 50m3 and need 20 units to refine.

Give the rorqual some love, reduce the time taken to compress ice. On the other hand, if they get rid of off grid boosting then it needs a dreadnought type tank when in deployed mode, it costs more than a dread so needs the ability to defend itself against subcaps proper