These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ORE Battleship

Author
Elch Annages
Rising Storm.
#121 - 2014-01-29 21:36:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Elch Annages
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Elch Annages wrote:

I think if this Battleship idea is implemented it will end up after balancing as both bad at mining and combat because you will either have to sacrifice your firepower or your yield to make it work.


which will hopefully be balanced by not having to dock up every time someone who isnt blue turns up. u said so urself, u dnt take a barge out in WH space unless its dominated by ur buddies. and with a battleship option like this you can still take that barge out during these times.

but a battleship option like this might allow u to continue mining without the overwhelming presence of allies. which is indeed a better option than not mining at all.


As it was said before when mining in dangerous areas the hitpoints won't help you much when you get jumped by enemies.
If it has greater firepower i guess you'll have to sacrifice some yield.
Well then question remains if your ship is balanced enough to be able to fend of attackers even the smallest and continue mining.

Even if you're be able to kill a battleship with this ( which i very much doubt ) and I assume that the BS will be yielding much less then hulk and If regular battleship hull is taken in account.
You find out that you'll have to sit for hours and hours just to make this boat pay for itself in case you get destroyed during the operation. And the time on grid just increases chances of being destroyed by bigger ship or outnumbered.
I'm not saying it's entirely unusable for certain situation I'm just saying that in this case mining in high sec with exhumer if the better choice of mining because you don't risk that much isk and you have to mine for much shorter time to earn enough money to buy a new one if you lose it.

That's why i think fast, high yielding ship is better then the one which is doing dps.
Edwin McAlister
Empire Hooligans
#122 - 2014-01-29 21:38:02 UTC
Elch Annages wrote:

To the Battleship:
As for the battleship, when you have such boat it will be not effective in high-sec, that is clear.
I think if this Battleship idea is implemented it will end up after balancing as both bad at mining and combat because you will either have to sacrifice your firepower or your yield to make it work.


the deployable structure thingie that lets you swap modules out when ever..... battle ship fit for mining does decent yield... aggressors arrive on scene and you refit to offensive capability... terminate or drive off aggressor... switch back to max yield
Inspiration
#123 - 2014-01-29 21:44:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Inspiration
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Inspiration wrote:
...I just like to point out that EFT yield numbers are theoretical peak and cannot be compared to each other at all.

Yield peak over time will in practice never be achieved simply due to asteroid ore contents never perfectly aligning with a multiple of what a harvester takes in one cycle. This misalignment effect is most noticeable with large yield per cycle ships like the skiff and to a lesser extent also with a Hulk. A ship with regular miners with an even smaller yield per cycle is less affected.

Do not underestimate this effect, it is really large in practice.

Sadly, we are unable to compare actual ships in the game itself, but the versions found in EFT, which are about as precise as we can manage outside the game.

Since we are roughly comparing EFT ships to other EFT ships, the flaws cancel out as being present on both sides of the comparison.

It's even worse with DPS, since falloff issues create wild false impressions in some cases.


No, the flaws do no cancel each other out as they are dependent on two factors:

1. The ORE contents of an asteroid in the game (is not the infinite rock that EFT assumes)
2. The amount of ore each cycle takes form a rock (is different from ship to ship)

Without infinite rocks size, the numbers EFT projects will always fall out of line with in-game numbers. These flaws cannot cancel each-other out because some ships are affected much more then others. This makes comparing a tricky business. You have to properly interpret the resulting numbers with some cold hard logic as the numbers do not speak for them self.

It is different with ICE mining, there each ship always takes 1 block per harvester and only the cycle time changes.

If EFT would use an actual set of ore field scans and assumes a player let each cycle run its course x% of the time, it would come much closer to an actual estimate that makes sense. Changing crystals would then change the projected m3 yield as some asteroids are statistically blessed with more m3 ORE then others. Scordite is low m3, Plagiclose is high m3 for example.

Even the ore you mine is thus a factor, and to a lesser extent even where you mine it! The peak numbers for barges and exhumes mean actually very little, making it hard to debate .

I am serious!

Elch Annages
Rising Storm.
#124 - 2014-01-29 21:48:32 UTC
Edwin McAlister wrote:
Elch Annages wrote:

To the Battleship:
As for the battleship, when you have such boat it will be not effective in high-sec, that is clear.
I think if this Battleship idea is implemented it will end up after balancing as both bad at mining and combat because you will either have to sacrifice your firepower or your yield to make it work.


the deployable structure thingie that lets you swap modules out when ever..... battle ship fit for mining does decent yield... aggressors arrive on scene and you refit to offensive capability... terminate or drive off aggressor... switch back to max yield


This could work, i quite like it.
Or as bait in wormhole if you have more of them it would be great, if they could be spider tanked for example.
But if you're mining because you want to make ISK there are better solutions.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#125 - 2014-01-29 22:03:41 UTC
Inspiration wrote:
No, the flaws do no cancel each other out as they are dependent on two factors:

1. The ORE contents of an asteroid in the game (is not the infinite rock that EFT assumes)
2. The amount of ore each cycle takes form a rock (is different from ship to ship)

Without infinite rocks size, the numbers EFT projects will always fall out of line with in-game numbers. These flaws cannot cancel each-other out because some ships are affected much more then others. This makes comparing a tricky business. You have to properly interpret the resulting numbers with some cold hard logic as the numbers do not speak for them self.

You can certainly say these things, but in my opinion, we must recall that we are on the drawing board here, so to speak.

The moment we throw in real game variables, you also throw in independent pilot reactions to these circumstances.

So, what you have left is the need for a controlled environment, where affecting variables are canceled out for the sake of unbiased comparisons.
Myself, I stick to harvesters using T2 veld crystals in the recent comparisons, so they were comparing veld to veld.

Both ships are eating away at infinite asteroids, knowing that this won't happen in real game, but also knowing that the comparison becomes biased if you include uneven details that favor one ship over another.

Of course it is flawed.
But we accept minor flaws to acknowledge the aspects being compared, rather than outside details which cloud the results.

The real point, is that we are looking at potential. Noone seriously expects in game results to match, but they reasonably expect a rough approximation that a Hulk has higher yield than a Mackinaw, just like EFT expects it to.

Ultimately, we are guessing.
EFT at least makes it an educated guess, and not quite as wild as it might be otherwise.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#126 - 2014-01-29 22:06:36 UTC
Elch Annages wrote:
Edwin McAlister wrote:
Elch Annages wrote:

To the Battleship:
As for the battleship, when you have such boat it will be not effective in high-sec, that is clear.
I think if this Battleship idea is implemented it will end up after balancing as both bad at mining and combat because you will either have to sacrifice your firepower or your yield to make it work.


the deployable structure thingie that lets you swap modules out when ever..... battle ship fit for mining does decent yield... aggressors arrive on scene and you refit to offensive capability... terminate or drive off aggressor... switch back to max yield


This could work, i quite like it.
Or as bait in wormhole if you have more of them it would be great, if they could be spider tanked for example.
But if you're mining because you want to make ISK there are better solutions.

I think that you are correct here, (underlined), and that this is precisely the point being made.

This ship, like the Venture, is a compromise of the more ideal yield a Hulk offers, or the capacity a Mackinaw provides.

You lose the better results in exchange for better fighting ability, and for some of us that is a trade off worth making.
Elch Annages
Rising Storm.
#127 - 2014-01-29 22:19:39 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Elch Annages wrote:
Edwin McAlister wrote:
Elch Annages wrote:

To the Battleship:
As for the battleship, when you have such boat it will be not effective in high-sec, that is clear.
I think if this Battleship idea is implemented it will end up after balancing as both bad at mining and combat because you will either have to sacrifice your firepower or your yield to make it work.


the deployable structure thingie that lets you swap modules out when ever..... battle ship fit for mining does decent yield... aggressors arrive on scene and you refit to offensive capability... terminate or drive off aggressor... switch back to max yield


This could work, i quite like it.
Or as bait in wormhole if you have more of them it would be great, if they could be spider tanked for example.
But if you're mining because you want to make ISK there are better solutions.

I think that you are correct here, (underlined), and that this is precisely the point being made.

This ship, like the Venture, is a compromise of the more ideal yield a Hulk offers, or the capacity a Mackinaw provides.

You lose the better results in exchange for better fighting ability, and for some of us that is a trade off worth making.


Okay then, I hope CCP will make something you like guys.
James Nikolas Tesla
Tesla Holdings
#128 - 2014-01-29 22:42:12 UTC
There is a lot of discussion about this. More than I expected because I thought I was going to get trolled out of the forums.
But anyway, I have been reading the comments and I like some of the skepticism about its capabilities of how well it can take on other ships and my response to that is it comes down to the pilot more than anything. I've seen a Megathron outnumbered 7-1 with battlecruisers take on all of them and live. I've seen several videos of an Iteron V take on and destroy several different ships.
My point, however scattered and off topic, is if the ship isn't OP then it will be used how the pilot sees fit.

CODE is just a bunch of pirates; smart, organized pirates. It doesn't help to rage at them because that is exactly what they want. Dust yourself off and get back on your feet, you don't even have to talk to them.

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#129 - 2014-01-30 00:29:28 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
well another way of looking at this is from a different direction.
The issue is not so much Just creating a new barge, but more one of creating a new play style around mining.

The New Nestor, is struggling to find a role, It is a low mass battleship which gives it advantages in wormholes. Otherwise, not so much separates it from other ships. Admittedly it had potential, but that got lost somewhere.......Sad

However.P

It could, with good mining bonuses and a ore hold, possibly utilising the ship hangar, that never made it to production, It could contain an ore hauling industrial and carry mining barges to site.

The pretty super warp ring thingy masks the mass of it's contents...

The Remote repair reps Mining barges in the fleet. Give it a significant range to prevent ship bunching.

Provides DPS to defend against WH attacks assisting the fleet to defend From other players and clear C4/C5/C6 Rats.

Deploy into Hostile system, mine,reload ships, extract and profit.

Great tool and great Target too, just not a soft one. Give it some staying power.

Would make a new Wormhole play style and opportunity, But for null where it can be dropped on with overwhelming force, not so much.

Paint it in ore livery, and you have just what you need for wormhole mining.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

James Nikolas Tesla
Tesla Holdings
#130 - 2014-01-30 02:00:43 UTC
That's a pretty cool idea.

CODE is just a bunch of pirates; smart, organized pirates. It doesn't help to rage at them because that is exactly what they want. Dust yourself off and get back on your feet, you don't even have to talk to them.

Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#131 - 2014-01-30 07:07:15 UTC
James Nikolas Tesla wrote:
That's a pretty cool idea.


which one?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#132 - 2014-01-30 14:33:00 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
well another way of looking at this is from a different direction.
The issue is not so much Just creating a new barge, but more one of creating a new play style around mining.

The New Nestor, is struggling to find a role, It is a low mass battleship which gives it advantages in wormholes. Otherwise, not so much separates it from other ships. Admittedly it had potential, but that got lost somewhere.......Sad

However.P

It could, with good mining bonuses and a ore hold, possibly utilising the ship hangar, that never made it to production, It could contain an ore hauling industrial and carry mining barges to site....

Clipped here to keep wall of text minimized as possible.

My take on this idea here, is that you have come up with an alternative to the Orca for fleet use.

That might be cool, but considering the LP grind to get one, and the existence of the current Orca already, I am not sure it will be used much.

My view of a mining BS is something not needing a fleet to find a role at all. (Most fleets can provide support already, making the anticipated lower yield a sticking point here)

I think the point of serious DPS present in a mining vessel will offer the option to tough it out at the belt, rather than head for cover, when a hostile appears.
Especially when miners are on their own for combat support.
James Nikolas Tesla
Tesla Holdings
#133 - 2014-01-30 19:18:07 UTC
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:
James Nikolas Tesla wrote:
That's a pretty cool idea.


which one?

The guy above me in that post. But I'm not sure about the ship hangar for the Nestor, the hull would need to be bigger.

CODE is just a bunch of pirates; smart, organized pirates. It doesn't help to rage at them because that is exactly what they want. Dust yourself off and get back on your feet, you don't even have to talk to them.

Jukio Saisima
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
Sending Thots And Players
#134 - 2014-01-31 18:08:43 UTC
Test 3. How many times you have to write in this Thread to pos something?
James Nikolas Tesla
Tesla Holdings
#135 - 2014-01-31 18:41:43 UTC
Uh, you can post anything that is on topic. You don't have to write in the thread more than once to post. ?????

CODE is just a bunch of pirates; smart, organized pirates. It doesn't help to rage at them because that is exactly what they want. Dust yourself off and get back on your feet, you don't even have to talk to them.

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#136 - 2014-01-31 19:55:12 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
well another way of looking at this is from a different direction.
The issue is not so much Just creating a new barge, but more one of creating a new play style around mining.

The New Nestor, is struggling to find a role, It is a low mass battleship which gives it advantages in wormholes. Otherwise, not so much separates it from other ships. Admittedly it had potential, but that got lost somewhere.......Sad

However.P

It could, with good mining bonuses and a ore hold, possibly utilising the ship hangar, that never made it to production, It could contain an ore hauling industrial and carry mining barges to site....

Clipped here to keep wall of text minimized as possible.

My take on this idea here, is that you have come up with an alternative to the Orca for fleet use.

That might be cool, but considering the LP grind to get one, and the existence of the current Orca already, I am not sure it will be used much.

My view of a mining BS is something not needing a fleet to find a role at all. (Most fleets can provide support already, making the anticipated lower yield a sticking point here)

I think the point of serious DPS present in a mining vessel will offer the option to tough it out at the belt, rather than head for cover, when a hostile appears.
Especially when miners are on their own for combat support.



Yup the advantage is the low mass,a mining fleet can go from wormhole to wormhole without collapsing them.
and Gives lots of room for emerging gameplay.
Really a true wormhole tool HS and null not so much.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Jukio Saisima
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
Sending Thots And Players
#137 - 2014-02-01 00:48:07 UTC
James Nikolas Tesla wrote:
Uh, you can post anything that is on topic. You don't have to write in the thread more than once to post. ?????


Usually no. But this time yes. Forum dont like me today lol. Didnt save the damn thing so maybe later again.


Jukio Saisima
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
Sending Thots And Players
#138 - 2014-02-06 18:59:04 UTC
Interesting idea.

But to be honest... why do you need mining battleship?

High sec:

Taking in to account concord respond time and battleship lock time to small targets (like big number of destroyers) ... your dps is pointless. By the time concord will land on the field, you will barely lock them, let alone apply dps on small fast moving target that are orbiting under you BS level guns. You need tank. You have that on Procurer and Skiff.

Low / Null / WH :

Slow moving mining BS with long align time will not help you much. Even if you have standard BS level of tank and DPS. 100k ehp tank and 1000 + dps is pointless. Solo cruiser can take you down without ewar to support you.

What you do need is fast align time, and as much EWAR as possible. Neuts, ECM...

So what do you need is some form of ORE T3 or T2 cruiser.

And of course that is not easy to design.

I dont mine, but I do use Venture a lot. As a cheap low/null/wh transport and as PVP frig. My CEO is using it as his favorite pvp ship. It has gtfo ability from a long point and scram if you need to disengage. And it can mount solid dps. So it is used from everyone, not just miners.

It will be the same with cruiser/BS.

But I do like idea of ORE T2 or T3 cruiser.

My 2 cents.

LP

Jukio
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#139 - 2014-02-06 19:14:07 UTC
Jukio Saisima wrote:
Low / Null / WH :

Slow moving mining BS with long align time will not help you much. Even if you have standard BS level of tank and DPS. 100k ehp tank and 1000 + dps is pointless. Solo cruiser can take you down without ewar to support you.

What you do need is fast align time, and as much EWAR as possible. Neuts, ECM...

The Venture is already the GTFO solution, I would expect everyone to already acknowledge.

There is no solid stand your ground and fight option, however.

Consider this: many null alliances have enough defensive posture to severely limit what ships can penetrate their territory, and actually become a threat to mining interests.
Larger groups tend to be easily spotted, and subsequently reported in time to warn assets.
Smaller groups, or even soloists, tend to rely on either their own immediate DPS or a cyno with which to bring in short term fleet assistance.

As anyone can reasonably expect to avoid a larger group well enough to make encountering them consensual only, they are really not worth consideration here, in my opinion.

That leaves smaller groups, possibly cyno assisted.
I would like to see a BS hull capable of inflicting enough DPS, and enough tank to survive long enough to deliver it, so that they could stay on the field.
I feel safe in suggesting that both potential sides in such a fight would like to see a fight happen.

Running is already an option. There is no good reason for it to be the only one, however.
Jukio Saisima
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
Sending Thots And Players
#140 - 2014-02-06 19:34:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Jukio Saisima
Nikk Narrel wrote:

I would like to see a BS hull capable of inflicting enough DPS, and enough tank to survive long enough to deliver it, so that they could stay on the field.
I feel safe in suggesting that both potential sides in such a fight would like to see a fight happen.

Running is already an option. There is no good reason for it to be the only one, however.


I understand what are you trying to point out. And I agree with you up to a point, but…

T2 cruiser hull can do that.

Battleship would need similar bonuses to tank and dps as regular T1 BS to be effective. So we are talking mid slots for webs, sebos and scrams, big tank, tracking bonuses for guns or drones...

So what you need then is battleship with ability on the level with: Domi, Mega .. plus bonus to to mining amount and cargo. We both know that ship like that will be used to do all but mining at the end.

That is the problem in my opinion.

Venture can gtfo yes, but will be engaged from most passing frigs in system (that is why it is so popular for PVP). T2 or T3 cruiser can stay there for much longer. You will need to engage it with something more.

But as I said, even this will be used as bait.

So if there is no solid reason to make this thing ... and I dont see one.. you know how CCP works.

LP

Jukio