These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Mining Barges and Exhumers

First post First post First post
Author
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#301 - 2014-04-09 18:37:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
FaulEnza N00bist wrote:
Zakarumit CZ wrote:
I really hope this isnt an April fools joke, as those changes seems actually very well thought and could bring in a lot of additional fun and pvp into low sec and wormholes.


For gods sake and 1000 times more: WHY???
Let the miner do their mining (they love it, do it, need it, whatever), its necessary to the economy.
Ganking a miner isn't PvP, it's bullshit. They are easy prey for kids with no balls to engage a real opponent.
Force them to PvP and you will end in a silent room.... that sounds fun Roll


You are playing the wrong game. Miners will never be exempt from pvp in this pvp focused game.


No one is asking for miners to be exempt from pvp in this pvp game. Ganking a mining barge is however so one sided as fail the pvp test.

A clue is in the name (player vs player).

With the exception of the procurer/skiff a mining barge has no real tank and mobility and no easy way to avoid a gank or even fight back. Therefore there's no player vs player contest here.

Up the tank on all of the barges and allow some offensive weapons to be added to the hulls and you might have a point. However I predict that if mining barges could fight back, be tougher or move/align faster than they wouldn't get ganked.

This says more about the nature of gankers than it does about miners.

Gankers are the game's real carebears...

Edit: If I undock in a mining barge I am taking a real risk that someone may blow me up. If you and your pals undock in a squad of catalysts and visit a belt with the intention of ganking, what do you risk exactly?

******* carebears flying cats...


I dont want to turn this into a gankers vs bears thread, my arguments are to do with making the other barges viable and not having just two barges being used by near everyone.

In answer to you, the gank cats risk getting attacked by anyone and are ironically, profitable to gank. PvP is player vs player, it doesn't matter how one sided it is, it is still pvp. You might not like it but others do. Now, realistically, the only threat a high sec miner will ever face is from said gankers.


I have no problem with being under attack from undock. This is my final word on this subject as others have rightly said that this is turning into a miners vs bears thread when we should be concentrating on feedback about the ship balancing to the devs.

Gank cats do not risk getting attacked by anyone, this is a straw man argument as unless your squad is under war dec, participating in faction warfare or are criminally flagged they are not at any more risk of attack until they begin the gank, at which point it's too late.

I'm all for pvp but lets make it fairer. Lets see barges that can fight back. How about a bigger drone bay and better bandwidth for a proc or a bonus to ewar lets get creative with these mining barges and pull a rabbit out of the hat. I'm not advocating invincibility for barges, but the thrill of pvp comes from killing things that can threaten you. If that's not the case you might as well turn your guns on a belt rat as opposed to a mining barge.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#302 - 2014-04-09 18:43:08 UTC
FaulEnza N00bist wrote:
Zakarumit CZ wrote:
I really hope this isnt an April fools joke, as those changes seems actually very well thought and could bring in a lot of additional fun and pvp into low sec and wormholes.


For gods sake and 1000 times more: WHY???
Let the miner do their mining (they love it, do it, need it, whatever), its necessary to the economy.
Ganking a miner isn't PvP, it's bullshit. They are easy prey for kids with no balls to engage a real opponent.
Force them to PvP and you will end in a silent room.... that sounds fun Roll



This is a PVP game. Player VS Player, What the barges need in this modern day of combat are more teeth on the barges. Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses. Keep them so that the Barges will mine all day But have the ability to Defend themselves. Increase the Lock time on some of them but buff there survivability. This way there is actual PVP involved when ganks occur.
Potions Master
GearBunny
#303 - 2014-04-09 21:33:18 UTC
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:

This is a PVP game. Player VS Player, What the barges need in this modern day of combat are more teeth on the barges. Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses. Keep them so that the Barges will mine all day But have the ability to Defend themselves. Increase the Lock time on some of them but buff there survivability. This way there is actual PVP involved when ganks occur.


Could add another tech 2 line of barges: Battle Barges. Not as much yield as their Exhumer cousins, but designed with pvp in mind. (Or you could add another tech 3 line with some of the subsystems allowing for combat options...)

Given some of the really big rocks out there, maybe the Rorqual needs to be upgraded to mount capital strip miners? It's defense and agility would need to be improved a lot, before people risked it in the belts though... (I think you'd also have to remove industrial mode or something, just let it have max boosts right out of the box... or industrial siege mode could turn the Rorq into a mini-tower with a small force field (half a small tower maybe? I suggest it use strontium and have a short reinforcement timer so that reinforcements could come and help?) that other ships could hide in. The ultimate turtle mode... Heck, something like that might be useful in regular pvp fights too, unless weapons couldn't fire out of it, only mining lasers...)

Just random thoughts I've had, maybe someone else can come up with better.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#304 - 2014-04-09 21:38:09 UTC
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses.


Remember this is a game of supposed decisions and trade-offs.

I'd have no issue with the procurer/skiff actually being able to defend itself for real, so long as it lost some of its insane tank in exchange. This would promote actual interaction and reward attentiveness rather than current reliance on an unbreakable tank before omnipotent CONCORD arrives.

The best tool for survivability in this game is awareness. You appear to want something that leaves you functionally immune to the choices of other players while maintaining no awareness, which, is part of the reason miners draw such negative attention to themselves in the first place.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2014-04-09 21:55:34 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses.


Remember this is a game of supposed decisions and trade-offs.

I'd have no issue with the procurer/skiff actually being able to defend itself for real, so long as it lost some of its insane tank in exchange. This would promote actual interaction and reward attentiveness rather than current reliance on an unbreakable tank before omnipotent CONCORD arrives.

The best tool for survivability in this game is awareness. You appear to want something that leaves you functionally immune to the choices of other players while maintaining no awareness, which, is part of the reason miners draw such negative attention to themselves in the first place.

If you build an active mechanic, you create active players. If you build a passive mechanic, you get the level of personal investment that you designed for. Fitting a tank still doesn't make you immune to anything. It just raises the bar of success a bit, which is fine. If I'm allowed to tank a BS to be gank resistant, no reason I shouldn't be able to do it with a barge; they don't live in a no PvP bubble and we should probably stop trying to balance them like they do.
Markku Laaksonen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#306 - 2014-04-10 00:47:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Markku Laaksonen
Good fellows, it appears to be that perhaps this update draws a bit less attention than say the Pirate Faction Cruiser update.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#307 - 2014-04-10 04:13:59 UTC
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:



This is a PVP game. Player VS Player, What the barges need in this modern day of combat are more teeth on the barges. Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses. Keep them so that the Barges will mine all day But have the ability to Defend themselves. Increase the Lock time on some of them but buff there survivability. This way there is actual PVP involved when ganks occur.

Barges don't need more free tank. They need actual cruiser level fittings & slot layouts. hardcap the number of strip miners if you have to. Then you can actually make some choices & trade offs with Mining Barges, rather than the current extremely limited fitting options & ways to fit them.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#308 - 2014-04-10 04:47:07 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses.


Remember this is a game of supposed decisions and trade-offs.

I'd have no issue with the procurer/skiff actually being able to defend itself for real, so long as it lost some of its insane tank in exchange. This would promote actual interaction and reward attentiveness rather than current reliance on an unbreakable tank before omnipotent CONCORD arrives.

The best tool for survivability in this game is awareness. You appear to want something that leaves you functionally immune to the choices of other players while maintaining no awareness, which, is part of the reason miners draw such negative attention to themselves in the first place.

If you build an active mechanic, you create active players. If you build a passive mechanic, you get the level of personal investment that you designed for. Fitting a tank still doesn't make you immune to anything. It just raises the bar of success a bit, which is fine. If I'm allowed to tank a BS to be gank resistant, no reason I shouldn't be able to do it with a barge; they don't live in a no PvP bubble and we should probably stop trying to balance them like they do.


I have nothing againt people being able to fit a good tank but they should have to make sacrifices. The issue with the mack is that its base tank is too high, it should be the same as the hulk. These ships all have different roles but right now the mac and ret have too much overlap on the others. Hence why almost all miners are in them.
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#309 - 2014-04-10 11:46:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
Raise the tank on them and buff there drone bonuses.


Remember this is a game of supposed decisions and trade-offs.

I'd have no issue with the procurer/skiff actually being able to defend itself for real, so long as it lost some of its insane tank in exchange. This would promote actual interaction and reward attentiveness rather than current reliance on an unbreakable tank before omnipotent CONCORD arrives.

The best tool for survivability in this game is awareness. You appear to want something that leaves you functionally immune to the choices of other players while maintaining no awareness, which, is part of the reason miners draw such negative attention to themselves in the first place.

If you build an active mechanic, you create active players. If you build a passive mechanic, you get the level of personal investment that you designed for. Fitting a tank still doesn't make you immune to anything. It just raises the bar of success a bit, which is fine. If I'm allowed to tank a BS to be gank resistant, no reason I shouldn't be able to do it with a barge; they don't live in a no PvP bubble and we should probably stop trying to balance them like they do.


I have nothing againt people being able to fit a good tank but they should have to make sacrifices. The issue with the mack is that its base tank is too high, it should be the same as the hulk. These ships all have different roles but right now the mac and ret have too much overlap on the others. Hence why almost all miners are in them.

I have to agree with this. The mack and ret are just a little bit too tough. Perhaps lower the numbers a little more to make the skiff/proc better by comparison.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#310 - 2014-04-10 12:25:23 UTC
No level of fittings on a barge or exhumer will stop a determined gank, they will just bring x more dessies to apply dps in time. The barges only hope would be if the fittings allowed a better set of escape assisting modules to be fitted. The only drivers to stop ganks is the cost of the dessies versus the value of the kill. Making more expensive barges/exhumers will simply make them more tempting targets with the same nil chance of survival against competent gankers (though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
Jagoff Haverford
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#311 - 2014-04-10 12:42:10 UTC
Galphii wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I have nothing againt people being able to fit a good tank but they should have to make sacrifices. The issue with the mack is that its base tank is too high, it should be the same as the hulk. These ships all have different roles but right now the mac and ret have too much overlap on the others. Hence why almost all miners are in them.

I have to agree with this. The mack and ret are just a little bit too tough. Perhaps lower the numbers a little more to make the skiff/proc better by comparison.

If you are only thinking about gank protection, making the Mackinaw/Retriever tank equal to the Hulk/Covetor may make sense. But don't forget that they also need to be able to withstand a null sec rat spawn as well, which could produce 3-4 battleships of DPS.

In null sec mining, profit hinges on being able to stay in the belt instead of warping away from it. This is true regardless of the reason that you are forced to warp away, whether that's a rat spawn, not having the right mining crystal, a full ore hold, or a neutral interceptor one jump out. Gathering more ore per minute is somewhat helpful, but only if you can actually stay in the belt to use that capacity.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#312 - 2014-04-10 13:17:37 UTC  |  Edited by: asteroidjas
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but when are you going to adjust the Survey scanner range on the exhumers? Its sorta outdated now with T2 links and now range bonus on Hulk.

Also, are Mining drones going to get any love since they are getting nerfed by the Interfacing skill?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#313 - 2014-04-10 13:19:35 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
No level of fittings on a barge or exhumer will stop a determined gank, they will just bring x more dessies to apply dps in time. The barges only hope would be if the fittings allowed a better set of escape assisting modules to be fitted. The only drivers to stop ganks is the cost of the dessies versus the value of the kill. Making more expensive barges/exhumers will simply make them more tempting targets with the same nil chance of survival against competent gankers (though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).


The value in ganking a barge only comes from the mods. The hulk, if I recall, has the same base tank as many t2 cruisers and if you fit a T2 tank its not going to be anywhere near profitable to gank. Even the pre buff hulk was on par with heavy assault ships with its base tank. Macks would be just fine with the hulks base tank.

Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#314 - 2014-04-10 13:30:49 UTC
Markku Laaksonen wrote:
Good fellows, it appears to be that perhaps this update draws a bit less attention than say the Pirate Faction Cruiser update.

What did you expect? This is a mining thread, not a yarr thread. Nobody cares about us miners until the price of $MINERAL_X shoots through the roof and the cost of their ships goes up in response. At which point CCP lays off the bots until things settle down and we're back in the same spot we started in.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#315 - 2014-04-10 13:33:59 UTC
Atum wrote:
Markku Laaksonen wrote:
Good fellows, it appears to be that perhaps this update draws a bit less attention than say the Pirate Faction Cruiser update.

What did you expect? This is a mining thread, not a yarr thread. Nobody cares about us miners until the price of $MINERAL_X shoots through the roof and the cost of their ships goes up in response. At which point CCP lays off the bots until things settle down and we're back in the same spot we started in.


Having all the sperg posters in the other threads is a good thing. We might get the barge balance right this time.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#316 - 2014-04-10 13:52:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Atum wrote:
Markku Laaksonen wrote:
Good fellows, it appears to be that perhaps this update draws a bit less attention than say the Pirate Faction Cruiser update.

What did you expect? This is a mining thread, not a yarr thread. Nobody cares about us miners until the price of $MINERAL_X shoots through the roof and the cost of their ships goes up in response. At which point CCP lays off the bots until things settle down and we're back in the same spot we started in.


Having all the sperg posters in the other threads is a good thing. We might get the barge balance right this time.

I realize you're a Goon, but you're taking this to a whole new level of delusional Blink
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#317 - 2014-04-10 15:02:33 UTC
Atum wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Atum wrote:
Markku Laaksonen wrote:
Good fellows, it appears to be that perhaps this update draws a bit less attention than say the Pirate Faction Cruiser update.

What did you expect? This is a mining thread, not a yarr thread. Nobody cares about us miners until the price of $MINERAL_X shoots through the roof and the cost of their ships goes up in response. At which point CCP lays off the bots until things settle down and we're back in the same spot we started in.


Having all the sperg posters in the other threads is a good thing. We might get the barge balance right this time.

I realize you're a Goon, but you're taking this to a whole new level of delusional Blink


You didnt see the thread the last time they did this. 90% of it was nothing but grr goons and other gems.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#318 - 2014-04-10 15:28:12 UTC
I increasingly like the idea that the Hulk's advantage would be versatility. The Skiff and the Mack are good at exactly one thing each (well, two, if you rig them for ice mining). If the Hulk's advantage was slots and fitting room, then they could become a lot more compelling. Heck, you could even give them turret hardpoints for, uh, gas mining. ;-)

Sure, you couldn't get a Skiff's tank regardless, but maybe you could choose between meh yield and a Mack tank or easily-best-in-class yield and an assault frigate tank. Or go average on both and fit for mobility and agility, or fit for DPS and turn them into tolerably good turret-and-drone boats.

Skiff: Max tank, and DPS. Mack: Max hold, and good yield. Hulk: Max customization, with the option of max yield.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#319 - 2014-04-10 16:04:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
No level of fittings on a barge or exhumer will stop a determined gank, they will just bring x more dessies to apply dps in time. The barges only hope would be if the fittings allowed a better set of escape assisting modules to be fitted. The only drivers to stop ganks is the cost of the dessies versus the value of the kill. Making more expensive barges/exhumers will simply make them more tempting targets with the same nil chance of survival against competent gankers (though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).


The value in ganking a barge only comes from the mods. The hulk, if I recall, has the same base tank as many t2 cruisers and if you fit a T2 tank its not going to be anywhere near profitable to gank. Even the pre buff hulk was on par with heavy assault ships with its base tank. Macks would be just fine with the hulks base tank.

You compare exhumers to cruisers, as if exhumers were not far more predictable and easier to locate.

Perhaps you had not noticed, but the ability to locate a target is a factor in it's balance. This has precedent in the covert line of craft having reduced capability in PvP, in exchange for being harder to locate and having more discretion with encounters as a result.

When you use an exhumer as intended, in a belt full of rocks, your location is not difficult to guess, and you become an easy target to both locate and organize against.
This has significant impact on the game play value of the craft, and as a result has been balanced by increasing tank where the craft are more likely to be expected operating solo.

The hulk is notably less tanked, because it is NOT intended to be solo to the same degree a mack or skiff would be. There is the correlation you seemed to imply did not exist, this ease of finding in a vulnerable circumstance.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#320 - 2014-04-10 16:35:22 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
The hulk is notably less tanked, because it is NOT intended to be solo to the same degree a mack or skiff would be.

Could someone please point out to me where and why the "Hulks are not intended to be solo / Hulks are only meant for fleets" meme got started?