These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#541 - 2014-04-27 17:16:38 UTC
Dave Stark is right, the Skiff is a battle barge with 2 tanking bonuses and a full flight of bonuses medium drones.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#542 - 2014-04-27 19:55:26 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:


it shouldn't have the worst tank, rather than it not having the worst ore hold. besides, a small ore hold promotes fleet use, a small tank doesn't.
every cargo module in the game reduces a ship's ehp. cargo expanders reduce hull hp, cargo rigs reduce armour hp etc.
it follows that logic that the hulk should have more tank than the mackinaw.

Combined with it's yield having the same ore hold as the skiff means it still takes less time to fill than the skiff. Someone can do the maths if they really care.
But either will make me happy from a design view for now. And we can see if equal in one aspect is enough to make all three barges see diverse use.
Dave stark
#543 - 2014-04-27 21:06:59 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


it shouldn't have the worst tank, rather than it not having the worst ore hold. besides, a small ore hold promotes fleet use, a small tank doesn't.
every cargo module in the game reduces a ship's ehp. cargo expanders reduce hull hp, cargo rigs reduce armour hp etc.
it follows that logic that the hulk should have more tank than the mackinaw.

Combined with it's yield having the same ore hold as the skiff means it still takes less time to fill than the skiff. Someone can do the maths if they really care.
But either will make me happy from a design view for now. And we can see if equal in one aspect is enough to make all three barges see diverse use.


yes, but retaining a paper thin tank means it's practically useless since it ends up as a wreck rather than actually mining asteroids. something a fleet won't change.

on the other hand, a fleet will alleviate the issues generated by a small cargo capacity.
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#544 - 2014-04-27 21:29:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Quote:
"n practice we underestimated the value that players would put in the isk/effort advantage of the Retriever and the Mackinaw, leading to a less diverse mining landscape than we would have liked.

Translation: "just as many of you suggested in the beginning, we nerfed the hulk too much."

That's all you realty need to fix.

  - 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]

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#545 - 2014-04-27 21:48:31 UTC
Quote:
The scan resolution on the Retriever and Mackinaw is being reduced by 17%, and the Procurer and Skiff reduced by 33%. This is partially to provide a small lock speed advantage to the Covetor/Hulk, and partially to ensure that the Procurer and Skiff avoid becoming too powerful in combat. The scan resolution on all barges remains exceptionally good, comparable to destroyers and frigates.

I don't like this. You don't make the hulk better by nerfing everything else; that's the same stupid logic liberals use when they tax the rich ungodly amounts instead of helping the poor get better jobs - "the poor are too poor, let's penalize the rich to make things better". Instead, you are nerfing miners in general. Improve the hulk! No one was complaining that it takes too long to lock Retrievers and Mackinaws. -1

  - 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]

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#546 - 2014-04-27 23:29:59 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
Quote:
The scan resolution on the Retriever and Mackinaw is being reduced by 17%, and the Procurer and Skiff reduced by 33%. This is partially to provide a small lock speed advantage to the Covetor/Hulk, and partially to ensure that the Procurer and Skiff avoid becoming too powerful in combat. The scan resolution on all barges remains exceptionally good, comparable to destroyers and frigates.

I don't like this. You don't make the hulk better by nerfing everything else; that's the same stupid logic liberals use when they tax the rich ungodly amounts instead of helping the poor get better jobs - "the poor are too poor, let's penalize the rich to make things better". Instead, you are nerfing miners in general. Improve the hulk! No one was complaining that it takes too long to lock Retrievers and Mackinaws. -1

The reason behind not buffing lower stat ships to the equivalent of the highest performing ones is to avoid power creep.
Fuzz Klush
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#547 - 2014-04-28 07:46:35 UTC
First of all, I didn't read every post up until now, if I repost something already mentioned apologies for that.

I imagine CCP wants miners to bring the ore in to stimulate the economy, but its so tedious and boring right now due to a number of issues.
My intent is to give constructive feedback to CCP on how to improve some issues and make this part of the game more enjoyable.
These are not changes that will result in balance issues, should not affect anything other than reduced "frustration factors" regarding mining and add some fun factor with some incentive to fleet up :)

Let the spice flow!

1) Mining lasers
- Have the ore mined tick faster in, instead like it is now at the end of the cycle, maybe when reaching x m3 or per y sec.
Keep the cap needed to activate the lasers the same as it is now.
Example: When 50 m3 worth of ore is mined from the current cycle transfer it to cargo from the asteroid, or each 10 secs have passed the ore is put in cargo.
This could be adjusted per mining laser if it is deemed a balance thing, but I can for the life of me not think of why...
To lose mining time because you 're mining "an empty/non-existing asteroid" is to me something that if not a game bug, is a really bad game design mechanic...
- If the above is not implemented at least have the mining lasers deactivate upon reaching what is left of an asteroid, in the very least when it is surveyed! With the current technology in-game some onboard coordination between modules have to exist/be possible...
- Re-Start Mining Lasers! Mining Laser deactivated due to a popped asteroid, starts on another asteroid that is locked on.
I know there are pros and cons on this one and opinions on both, I still feel it would remove more frustration than anything else. You still need to keep actively lock on asteroids so you cannot go afk and come back with a full hull.
I'll make a similar suggestion for survey scanners.

2) Survey scanners - Interface update please!
I liked the changes posted early in the thread about survey scanners

Its so damn messy right now, especially in a fleet.
- Continuously scanning! Why is it not possible to have them on at all times?
- Have role bonuses/increase by x% per skill(exhumer and barge) for the Hulk and Covetor survey range.
- An indication above the surveyed asteroids on how much m3 of ore is left in them.
- On the scanner overview what is targeted, like the overview has.
- Indication of what other fleet members are mining/have targeted.
- Some additional bonus for bringing an survey scanner for the miner, to promote a mining setup. 1% per survey skill to mining yield/cycle?

3) Mining in a Fleet!
Something should be improved regarding fleet coordination when mining, here are some suggestions on how fleeting with total strangers could be made a viable option even.

- Have a tab on each pilots mined amount of ore when loaded into an hauler. If it is refined the minerals should replace the ore amount used obviously.
Keeping track of who mines what is next to impossible right now in larger fleets without writing down each amount when hauling, this feels extremely unnecessary and with some game design mechanics this is eliminated and massively improved upon.
- Implement system for Fleet/PUG hauling, where to setup this in Fleet or somewhere else can be up to devs but the idea is quite simple: The hauler cannot dump the ore/mineral into their own hangar, but it is placed in each pilots item hangar. With an pre-agreed upon(definable) cut for the hauler, everyone wins!
- Improved hauling mechanism - Unload cargo to Station
It seems awfully unnecessary to dock to be able to unload cargo...Why not have a new feature for haulers where they can dump their cargo from space, have this option reserved until cargo reaches lets say 5000 m3 (figure can be changed)
- Rorq+Orca's survey scans propagates to the fleet!
- Possible to designate focus targets on asteroids from Rorq+Orca, give bonus to these targets for some incentive for these pilots to stay awake.
Implement focus targets skills: +1 focus target per skill, focus target increase yield/cycle by x% skill, range to set focus targets on asteroids per skill.
- It would be nice for an interface update to the survey scanner when focus targeting, imagine like scanning for anomalies but in the asteroid belt with fleet members showing up along with the asteroids! Rorq+Orca Pilots mark where each pilot should be and what roids to mine by designating targets.

4) Drones and mining
- Mining/combat drones returns to drone bay upon warp initiation. Please, this is so annoying when you forget to do this manually..
- After launching combat drones have them engage a target, its annoying if I am fully locked up on asteroids having to unlock one then lock on a rat firing on me, then engage target instead of them doing this automatically upon being launched in aggressive stance.
- Hauler drones! Mine more ore/h or make fewer trips to stash it. You can now chose!
Hulk and Covetor should not be able to use them. Defeats the purpose of these ships?
Launch them and select what in system station to haul to, this is then saved for quick haul command in drone menu - “Haul to (select station), haul to last station used”
IMO the drones should not be hauling automatically to the station upon returning. They make one trip and stash as much from the ore bay as they can and warp back to where you where and dock in drone bay if you are in drone range. Else they become inactive as if you left other drones.
Cannot use more/other drones (unless you have skill to/drone bandwidth) while they haul, they are effectively in use as other drones.

Hulk/Covetor vs other mining ships
The problem lies with inconvenience.
Hulk/Covetor are just that. Add low tank, along with can flipping and the need to haul with another ship/pilot...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#548 - 2014-04-29 21:22:47 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
you type a lot, and all of it is void of reasons for miners to engage hostiles.

We log into EVE to play a game.

EVE is an MMO.

It is not simply that miners need a reason to engage hostiles.
It is simply that they would no longer have the choice made for them, the reason they avoided hostiles no longer ruling their options.
The hostile would no longer represent certain doom.

Why would they not engage hostiles?
I believe they would adapt, and choose this option.
Perhaps not all of them, but certainly enough would do so.

We adapt, to meet new opportunities, and this certainly would be a great opportunity to play the game.

Why? Because they can.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#549 - 2014-04-29 21:23:40 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Komachi Revorse
Astral Sanctuary - 2nd Division
Astral Sanctuary
#550 - 2014-04-30 00:10:44 UTC
I like the changes to the Procurers, I rely on my tanky barge so it's good to see it getting some love ^_^
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#551 - 2014-04-30 13:22:13 UTC
Here's a spin, and this deserves consideration even if not approval.

Give drones launched from mining barges & exhumers crossover ability.

By that, I mean they can both fight and mine with the same drone.

(These little buggers are mining, but noone said they necessarily had to do so exclusively, we just assumed this detail)

The new ORE class of hybrid drones, T2 requirements in exchange for T1 equivalent fighting AND mining ability.
(T2 mining and T2 fighting would remain exclusive to their respective existing categories.)

As this would be specific to barges and exhumers only, I figure it belongs here in the thread for them.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#552 - 2014-04-30 18:54:30 UTC
I haven't read through all of the replies yet for this issue, but i know it hasn't been addressed on the original post yet.

With the transition from mining yield to cycle duration bonuses wont this also affect the lifetime yield of mining crystals?

By changing yield bonus to cycle duration reduction bonuses you're effectively increasing the number of cycles to obtain the same amount of ore. I am only assuming that the damage done to a mining crystal is a RNG run at the end/stopping of a mining laser cycle.

If i assume that the bonuses on a hulk are additive (-3% cycle time per level =15%) + (-4% cycle time per level =20%) = 35% reduction in cycle time based on ship bonuses. Then you're new cycle time is 65% of the old cycle time.

old cycle time = 180 sec = base yield
new cycle time = 117 sec
180/117 = 153.8% = new yield
So this is a 53.8% increase in yield.

However the amount of ore you get per cycle is the same as the un-bonused cycle so this 153.8% increase in yield is all from mining laser cycles. That means we're having a 53.8% increase in the number of cycles and by this a 53.8% increase in the damage of mining crystals to obtain the same yield as before.

Is there going to be anything done to keep the integrity of the mining crystals?

If you multiply the HP and damage taken on the crystals by 100 or 1000 you can put in another bonus per level to reduce mining crystal damage. This would therefore mitigate the damage increase of the specific bonuses themselves and your crystals would maintain the same integrity across all of the barges/exhumers.

I haven't actually done the cost vs efficiency calculations of the crystals to know how much room there is to play with in their cost efficiency, or if there even is any additional profitability in using them at all right now. But even if they are not profitable to use now, they will be 35% less profitable to use on a hulk after the change.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#553 - 2014-04-30 20:31:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

The Procurer and Skiff remain the tankiest of the barges, and the Skiff gains an extra low slot (bringing its fitted yield up to the same level as the Mackinaw) as well as a new bonus to drone damage and hitpoints. Asking a dedicated PVP ship to defend a mining fleet can often lead to mind numbing boredom for the PVP pilot, so we're providing the option for players to make sacrifices in their mining ships to allow self-defense.

The way this is worded it sounds like the intent of this change is to allow a person to choose a Skiff/Procurer at a loss in yield for the ability to "defend a mining fleet". Is this the intent or is it more of a personal decision to be able to defend yourself as an individual in a mining fleet?

Quote:

The Covetor and Hulk remain the kings of yield, at the expense of tank and ore hold capacity. Their abilities in large scale group mining will be further improved through the addition of a 5% per level bonus to mining laser and ice harvester optimal range, as well as an increase in yield.

"large scale group mining" There are a few issues that detract from a Hulk as a large scale group mining ship. Range is generally not one of them.
Quote:

To ensure that the Covetor and Hulk can make use of their extra mining range in group situations, we are changing the Mining Laser Field Enhancement gang link to apply its range bonus to Survey Scanners in addition to its current function.

We're giving the Hulk and Covetor a bit more yield and agility, and the Hulk is getting slightly more fittings.

Here are the issues with Hulks(and Covetors) in fleets.
1. The tank is so light that they cannot be defended practically.
2. They have the tightest fitting constraints further exacerbating the first issue.(apparently being "slightly" addressed)
3. They (Hulks) are the most expensive of the exhumers.
4. Because of issues 1, 2 and 3 they are the most desirable targets for a hostile fleet because of the likelihood of a successful kill and likelihood of a positive isk effeciency in a fleet trade (if mining fleet is defended).
5. Require most tedium(by far) to operate reducing the ability to multi-box Hulks.
6. Are by far the slowest ship and easiest to catch. (even after the changes they remain the slowest)

Hulks and Covetors have everything working against them. The only time they out shine the other barges is when they're adequately defended with a dedicated hauler. Adequate defense requires a dedicated PvP pilot and because of Issues 1 and 2 also a dedicated logistics pilot as well which renders Hulks generally impractical for fleet mining. And requiring a dedicated hauler renders them impractical for solo mining. Even ninja mining is covered by the venture. There really is no niche for the Hulk as of now.

Instead of balancing around survivability why not balance around defensive capability?
We could bring the base survivability of all of the exhumers/barges to be much closer in line with each other.
The Skiff/Procurer have the defensive capabilities with drones.
The Mackinaw/Retriever could have a bonus to repair drone effectiveness.
The Hulk can once again do it's name justice, being heavily tanked, slow, high yield, no drone bay.

This would create a dynamic and diverse mining fleet.
Hulks would now be viable and desirable for fleet mining but would lose the last shred of solo viablility (drones).
Mackinaws would now have a role to play in a mining fleet. There would be no impact on their solo viability.
Skiffs should lose some solo survivability only to regain it in conjunction with a diverse mining fleet.
Mining fleets would now have greater self sustainability that would scale with size, while the size of the fleet will be soft capped by the size of the resource field. (how many miners can mine 1 high sec belt at a time?)

Would this be a idea worth considering?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#554 - 2014-04-30 20:46:50 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
This would create a dynamic and diverse mining fleet.
Hulks would now be viable and desirable for fleet mining but would lose the last shred of solo viablility (drones).
Mackinaws would now have a role to play in a mining fleet. There would be no impact on their solo viability.
Skiffs should lose some solo survivability only to regain it in conjunction with a diverse mining fleet.
Mining fleets would now have greater self sustainability that would scale with size, while the size of the fleet will be soft capped by the size of the resource field. (how many miners can mine 1 high sec belt at a time?)

Would this be a idea worth considering?

I find this idea of exhumer roles in relation to each other fascinating.

I think we want at least one exhumer kept as a choice for solo play, since this is inevitable for game play.

I really like the idea of the skiff being competent at fighting. I would not want to see it diminished in this role.
Especially for those choosing between not playing or mining solo.

I could see the Mack in a mining logistics role.
Give it a mad bonus for repping drones, and have it prop up the mining fleet. Two of them together could cross rep each other, and the fun begins. Much more than two, and you might actually stabilize the dynamic enough to bring in a Rorqual.

Imagine the mining ships actually able to sustain a realistic defensive posture. It sounds too good to be true.

I would like to see that.
Dave stark
#555 - 2014-05-01 07:29:41 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Here's a spin, and this deserves consideration even if not approval.

Give drones launched from mining barges & exhumers crossover ability.

By that, I mean they can both fight and mine with the same drone.

(These little buggers are mining, but noone said they necessarily had to do so exclusively, we just assumed this detail)

The new ORE class of hybrid drones, T2 requirements in exchange for T1 equivalent fighting AND mining ability.
(T2 mining and T2 fighting would remain exclusive to their respective existing categories.)

As this would be specific to barges and exhumers only, I figure it belongs here in the thread for them.


if they're going to do anything, i'd rather they made harvester drones not suck balls.
Paz Heiwa
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#556 - 2014-05-01 10:59:16 UTC
Err, why would anyone use mack if they can get same yield with skiff?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#557 - 2014-05-01 13:27:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Nikk Narrel
Dave Stark wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Here's a spin, and this deserves consideration even if not approval.

Give drones launched from mining barges & exhumers crossover ability.

By that, I mean they can both fight and mine with the same drone.

(These little buggers are mining, but noone said they necessarily had to do so exclusively, we just assumed this detail)

The new ORE class of hybrid drones, T2 requirements in exchange for T1 equivalent fighting AND mining ability.
(T2 mining and T2 fighting would remain exclusive to their respective existing categories.)

As this would be specific to barges and exhumers only, I figure it belongs here in the thread for them.


if they're going to do anything, i'd rather they made harvester drones not suck balls.

Agreed.

More drone options like my suggestion could also help improve play.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#558 - 2014-05-01 13:28:51 UTC
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Err, why would anyone use mack if they can get same yield with skiff?

With the Mack's superior ore hold, it requires fewer stops to unload / runs with a hauler to pick up.
Paz Heiwa
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#559 - 2014-05-01 16:49:52 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Err, why would anyone use mack if they can get same yield with skiff?

With the Mack's superior ore hold, it requires fewer stops to unload / runs with a hauler to pick up.

Sure but how many miners mine outside the reach of their station? If it is within the same system, you need like 1m to drop off the goods. But thinking about it, why isn't procurer/skiff penalized in ore hold? If you have thick defenses == less space for goods.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#560 - 2014-05-01 17:19:41 UTC
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Paz Heiwa wrote:
Err, why would anyone use mack if they can get same yield with skiff?

With the Mack's superior ore hold, it requires fewer stops to unload / runs with a hauler to pick up.

Sure but how many miners mine outside the reach of their station? If it is within the same system, you need like 1m to drop off the goods. But thinking about it, why isn't procurer/skiff penalized in ore hold? If you have thick defenses == less space for goods.

Not everyone is mining within easy reach of a drop off point, or if they are the more frequent interruptions add up over time.

As to the skiff, compared to the Mack, it is penalized.