These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#841 - 2014-06-05 13:21:37 UTC
marly cortez wrote:
Truth is most miners I know are so secretive about were and when they mine they would be happy if no one ever knew they were online at all, sadly all the decent ice miners have long since quit due to the belt nerf, unwilling to romp around the region chasing after ice belts that someone thought would be another one of those good ideas to allow to deplete, instead they simply log off until the belt respawns again and carry on mining ice in the same system day after day, quietly unnoticed and hoping it stays that way

It would appear that CCP Devs have the idea in there minds that having failed miserably at getting these miners to interact with other players they will now 'Force' them to do so again under the banner of 'Improvements' to the game without ever realizing that the more they try and force players to do something they know is inherently bad for there style of game play, particularly in Null Sec, the more these players will resist it using any means possible again to avoid contact with other players even to the point of just simply not mining at all.


This appears fairly accurate.

I do not know if anyone has yet to understand this, but expecting other players to sacrifice play time simply to guard miners on a routine basis is a failed game mechanic.

Yes, ops can and do happen, just like throwing a party. At these ops, other players donate their time to help, because it is a special event which is not common.
They do not want to do this every time they log in. They do not want to do this so often that the game becomes a part time job where they stare at a screen in case a hostile shows up. Especially considering that their very presence results in hostiles NOT showing up.

Miners need to be seen as self sustaining, self defending, and not needing to rely on others to operate.
Any monkey can jump in a spaceship, and join a large group, so long as the large group exists.

But large groups existing is not a practical foundation for gameplay.
Far too often, if not most of the time for many, the option to have a large group simply does not exist.

I feel the following must be observed and accepted:
Miners, as a result, need a practical option to self defend, without needing to run as the best option.
They need an option to haul ore, which I expect has been covered well enough.
And lastly, they need to be able to use effort with active play, to justify such active play with mining. Not so sure on this count, but I hope it is going right.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Lei Merdeau
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
#842 - 2014-06-05 14:47:02 UTC
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:

The player corps in EvE have proven themselves to be more abusive and more dishonorable to new members than the 'guilds, super-teams, and whatever other organization you want to name them' than just about any other game I've played. Believe me, that is a hard distinction to earn after some of the games I've played.


Some are scams, some are clueless, you need to research and avoid the bad ones.
Quadpush
Doomheim
#843 - 2014-06-05 15:34:28 UTC
Can you tank a hulk vs this https://zkillboard.com/kill/39145482/?
Darkblad
Doomheim
#844 - 2014-06-05 15:55:08 UTC
Quadpush wrote:
Can you tank a hulk vs this https://zkillboard.com/kill/39145482/?
a single catalyst? yes

NPE – ISD – RIP
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#845 - 2014-06-05 15:55:52 UTC
Quadpush wrote:
Can you tank a hulk vs this https://zkillboard.com/kill/39145482/?

According to EFT, using the all level V profile, this ship goes over maximum CPU by about 5.5 points.

Did they have something boosting their CPU, and if so, what cost point was it?
This is a very cost effective fitting except for that possible detail.

[Catalyst, Forum Monster Gank1]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Warp Scrambler I
[empty med slot]

Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I
[empty rig slot]

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#846 - 2014-06-05 18:44:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Marly u can play solo if u want. no one forces u to get into fleets.

but if ppl put the effort and organisation to make friends and form fleets with more specialised ships, why shouldnt they get a higher yield than u? why shouldnt they be more successful than u?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#847 - 2014-06-05 23:13:40 UTC
Lei Merdeau wrote:

Some are scams, some are clueless, you need to research and avoid the bad ones.


Okay. How does one do that?

On a different note now....

I want to say that, as a miner, I like these changes. The ships look good. But I'm not quite getting something and maybe someone can explain it to me.

I'm having trouble justifying the exhumers. On paper, they have great stats. On EFT, I'm generally liking what I'm seeing. Especially the Skiff. But the improvements over the normal "mining barge" counterparts seems rather minimal. At the end of the day, the improved performance of the exhumers just doesn't seem to be enough to justify their cost. Fitting for maximum yield (which yes I know is a bad idea for such expensive ships), it still takes a long, long time to make up the purchase price.

Mind you, I'm not talking about just getting the exhumer to pay for itself. I'm talking about purely the amount of m3 you get over the lesser cousin of each ship. The yield difference between them is best shown between the Coveter and Hulk (especially since I really want to fly a hulk. I'm skilled up for it, but haven't gone for it yet because of my reservations).

Anyway, fitted for max yield, the difference in yield between the Coveter and the Hulk is only in the range of around 258m3/minute (unless I'm fitting wrong. Anybody want to jump in on this?). So taking that minor improvement and seeing how long it takes to make up for the difference in price between the hulls, and you end up with a lot of hours.

But that's fitted for max yield. We all know you wouldn't take a 220m ship and fit it without a tank. So, your yield is likely to be less on the exhumer hull. The good news is that exhumers come with a little natural tank so it makes your life easier, but altogether I'm not really seeing a real need for the hulk. The massive expense of the hull just doesn't seem to come with enough improvements to justify it.

The purpose of the hulk is mainly group mining ops, right? Well why would you field a billion isk worth of exhumers for a very minimal amount of improvement over the same field of the mining barge equivalent (which would still cost less than one exhumer hull)?

As for the Mack, the slightly better yield and larger ore bay, eh, I suppose an argument could be made for it or against it, compared to the expense of the hull. Personally I again don't see enough improvement to justify the exhumer price. Well I shouldn't say that. More accurately it's tempting, but not great enough for me to just jump into buying one.

The skiff, as I said earlier, looks freaking awesome on paper. That one, I'm excited about. The tank on that is definitely enough to justify price, and the ability to manage some defense (even if not great defense) makes it the only vessel I can immediately see as worth the purchase price.

The other two, I need convincing on. Which is why I'm posting here. Can someone explain to me the allure of the two other exhumer hulls? Thanks in advance.

(also, the draft saving is an awesome forum feature. Just sayin')

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#848 - 2014-06-05 23:57:44 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Lei Merdeau wrote:

Some are scams, some are clueless, you need to research and avoid the bad ones.


Okay. How does one do that?

On a different note now....

I want to say that, as a miner, I like these changes. The ships look good. But I'm not quite getting something and maybe someone can explain it to me.

I'm having trouble justifying the exhumers. On paper, they have great stats. On EFT, I'm generally liking what I'm seeing. Especially the Skiff. But the improvements over the normal "mining barge" counterparts seems rather minimal. At the end of the day, the improved performance of the exhumers just doesn't seem to be enough to justify their cost. Fitting for maximum yield (which yes I know is a bad idea for such expensive ships), it still takes a long, long time to make up the purchase price.

Mind you, I'm not talking about just getting the exhumer to pay for itself. I'm talking about purely the amount of m3 you get over the lesser cousin of each ship. The yield difference between them is best shown between the Coveter and Hulk (especially since I really want to fly a hulk. I'm skilled up for it, but haven't gone for it yet because of my reservations).

Anyway, fitted for max yield, the difference in yield between the Coveter and the Hulk is only in the range of around 258m3/minute (unless I'm fitting wrong. Anybody want to jump in on this?). So taking that minor improvement and seeing how long it takes to make up for the difference in price between the hulls, and you end up with a lot of hours.

But that's fitted for max yield. We all know you wouldn't take a 220m ship and fit it without a tank. So, your yield is likely to be less on the exhumer hull. The good news is that exhumers come with a little natural tank so it makes your life easier, but altogether I'm not really seeing a real need for the hulk. The massive expense of the hull just doesn't seem to come with enough improvements to justify it.

The purpose of the hulk is mainly group mining ops, right? Well why would you field a billion isk worth of exhumers for a very minimal amount of improvement over the same field of the mining barge equivalent (which would still cost less than one exhumer hull)?

As for the Mack, the slightly better yield and larger ore bay, eh, I suppose an argument could be made for it or against it, compared to the expense of the hull. Personally I again don't see enough improvement to justify the exhumer price. Well I shouldn't say that. More accurately it's tempting, but not great enough for me to just jump into buying one.

The skiff, as I said earlier, looks freaking awesome on paper. That one, I'm excited about. The tank on that is definitely enough to justify price, and the ability to manage some defense (even if not great defense) makes it the only vessel I can immediately see as worth the purchase price.

The other two, I need convincing on. Which is why I'm posting here. Can someone explain to me the allure of the two other exhumer hulls? Thanks in advance.

(also, the draft saving is an awesome forum feature. Just sayin')

the idea is that as you spend more money on improvement you get diminishing yields from your investment. For those players who are all about having the best numbers and taking advantage of them, see it as a justifiable cost. It's the same way with fitting pve or pvp ships. It's up to the pilot to decide if that 200mil module is worth the extra cost and risk of fitting it to their ship.

I could easily fit a faction point on my interceptor in order to gain a longer point range, however I don't do it because I cant justify the cost for the slight improvement. Earlier today we killed full faction fit armor legion, who was part of a T1 shield cruiser fleet. I could never understand why someone would do that, but some people have decided it is worth the extra cost and risk and do it anyway.

It really all comes down to what the pilot wants most, his ISK or better stats.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#849 - 2014-06-06 00:13:53 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Marly u can play solo if u want. no one forces u to get into fleets.

but if ppl put the effort and organisation to make friends and form fleets with more specialised ships, why shouldnt they get a higher yield than u? why shouldnt they be more successful than u?

They should be, but they're really not.....

It's similar to the problem with solo vs fleet missions. 5 people can do a mission and get 20% of the reward or 1 person can do a mission and get 100% of the reward. There's really no incentive to creating a group.

There is a difference with mining though. If you do have a group of people in a mining fleet, it's up to the people themselves to distribute the earnings evenly and if you have people coming and going the complexity goes through the roof. If everyone just brings the same ships with the same fits and keeps their own ore, then you're basically just a group of solo miners anyways.

So first of all there is no substantial benefits for group mining. And second there is a built in resistance to group mining in the form of the the effort and organization required. So group mining is really counter intuitive the way it is now. And that's not including any PvP assistance you need, that's just a group for mining. (i'm leaving out boosts too because you can solo mine with boosts)

I do agree though that Fleet mining should have some sort of benefit over solo mining. And maybe some sort of way to mitigate the effort required to run a mining fleet. There should be some sort of local synergy for having lots of mining ships around either to mining or defense.

Look at it this way. Since mining fleets are just special occasions (or multiboxers) what are some instances where people actually seek out fleets? Incursions, well the mechanics dictate fleets in this instance, not just by difficulty but also by payout scaling. What else? Well just pvp, to increase your chance of winning engagements. So there's currently only 2 mechanics driving fleet propagation. One gives a boost to income and the other gives a boost to your success in pvp situations. There are no incentives to mining in a fleet, just added effort which only works to de-incentivise them instead. Mining fleets need to have either an increase to individual income or the same individual income with increased defense/survivability for each individual. Using pvp ships in a mining fleet decreases the efficiency of the fleet, just like using mining ships in pvp would decrease the efficiency of a pvp fleet.


I do understand though the current overall concept we're working with. It's sort of like an RTS. (I'll use starcraft as an example) They see mining as like an SCV/Drone/Probe activity where the harvesting unit is mostly defenseless. And you should use your military strength to defend them. The difference, though, lies in where people will lose/gain resources. In an RTS you and your army are directly affected by the loss of your harvesting capability. In EVE however, your corp/alliance(the direct correlation to the player in an RTS) will not be significantly affected by the loss of their harvesting members, and even less affected are the combat members who harvest other resources. Unlike the RTS where harvesting is the sole source of income for your entire army, EVE has many different sources of income, some of which are much more efficient AND convenient. (laser rocks for hours/haul large volumes/refine/sell/collect isk vs kill rat/collect isk) Devs needs to accept that people aren't just "units" of a corp/alliance and as such that ideology towards "harvesting units" doesn't work the same in EVE.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#850 - 2014-06-06 00:29:24 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Marly u can play solo if u want. no one forces u to get into fleets.

but if ppl put the effort and organisation to make friends and form fleets with more specialised ships, why shouldnt they get a higher yield than u? why shouldnt they be more successful than u?

They should be, but they're really not.....

It's similar to the problem with solo vs fleet missions. 5 people can do a mission and get 20% of the reward or 1 person can do a mission and get 100% of the reward. There's really no incentive to creating a group.


are u missing out on the fact that when 5 mission runners group together they can choose dps specialised fits with a logi friend and complete a mission in less than 1/5th of the time? i havent done it myself, but with missions like the blockade u could probably put everyone in ABC's and clear that in a fraction of the time.

and when mining with friends in 10 hulks with one or two alt haulers, u can mine more effectively than 2 guys controlling 5 hulks and a hauler each? not unless they are very skilled multi boxers, in which case, good job! enjoy those rewards.

so having groups allows greater specialisation. Which does tend to yield greater rewards.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#851 - 2014-06-06 00:45:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Marly u can play solo if u want. no one forces u to get into fleets.

but if ppl put the effort and organisation to make friends and form fleets with more specialised ships, why shouldnt they get a higher yield than u? why shouldnt they be more successful than u?

They should be, but they're really not.....

It's similar to the problem with solo vs fleet missions. 5 people can do a mission and get 20% of the reward or 1 person can do a mission and get 100% of the reward. There's really no incentive to creating a group.


are u missing out on the fact that when 5 mission runners group together they can choose dps specialised fits with a logi friend and complete a mission in less than 1/5th of the time? i havent done it myself, but with missions like the blockade u could probably put everyone in ABC's and clear that in a fraction of the time.

and when mining with friends in 10 hulks with one or two alt haulers, u can mine more effectively than 2 guys controlling 5 hulks and a hauler each? not unless they are very skilled multi boxers, in which case, good job! enjoy those rewards.

so having groups allows greater specialisation. Which does tend to yield greater rewards.

pretty much what incursions are. Just super-streamlined missions.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#852 - 2014-06-06 01:07:15 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

I do agree though that Fleet mining should have some sort of benefit over solo mining. And maybe some sort of way to mitigate the effort required to run a mining fleet. There should be some sort of local synergy for having lots of mining ships around either to mining or defense.


Well just as an idea, if you had a large mining fleet, I'd say a 50/50 mix of Hulks and Skiffs might do the job nicely. Skiffs' drone bonuses allow for some decent defense, especially if there's someone coordinating the mining who has a little experience with group combat so he can call out primaries. The hulks benefit the mining yield, the skiffs provide defense without having to provide dedicated PvP ships, and then whatever haulers you need. The problem is I see off the bat is drone control range, so you'd have to make sure your group is relatively nestled together which is akin to the "circling the wagons" defense but hey it worked in the past.

As for making sure people get their fair share of isk from the mining op itself, the foreman could simply keep track of what time people enter the op, and what time people leave. All ore goes back to the corp, divide the isk up between people based on the % of time they were there, and presto. Sure, you'd need to put some work into spreadsheets to do the calculations, but miners (at least I do this) already have spreadsheets to do calculations, so it should be just a small extra step for the foreman to do.

Just saying it's probably not as hard as people think it is.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Smugest Sniper
neko island
Deedspace Consortium
#853 - 2014-06-06 02:32:27 UTC
Popping in again to post more kill mails in Battle Procurer

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23844000
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=23784622
https://zkillboard.com/kill/39331704/

150 DPS with Rorq boosts Twisted

Please you high-sec pubbies whine more about getting ganked when more than half of you do something dumb and don't pay attention to local or properly set standings to key hostile elements.

Yeilds are UP, Cycle time is down, and power is available to those who are willing to weild it.

Learn to Fight and do not Fear the Ganker, Kill him.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#854 - 2014-06-06 02:59:32 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
are u missing out on the fact that when 5 mission runners group together they can choose dps specialised fits with a logi friend and complete a mission in less than 1/5th of the time? i havent done it myself, but with missions like the blockade u could probably put everyone in ABC's and clear that in a fraction of the time.

and when mining with friends in 10 hulks with one or two alt haulers, u can mine more effectively than 2 guys controlling 5 hulks and a hauler each? not unless they are very skilled multi boxers, in which case, good job! enjoy those rewards.

so having groups allows greater specialisation. Which does tend to yield greater rewards.

No, i'm not missing out on that fact. Though running with a logi and dps fit ships in a mission is more efficient, you instead run into the downtime between missions 5x+ as often as solo, which will have a negative impact on the efficiency of fleet missioning. But even without, it's only marginally better at the cost of having to rely on other people to be consistent in their efforts. Though in general if you have 5 guys it'll last about 2 missions before someone has to go afk or they start getting distracted and you end up with 4 guys doing work and doing a 5 way split.

As for mining in fleets.... Well first of all, the multiboxers, well instead of running 5 hulks and a hauler each they'd probably be running 6 Mackinaws. But 10 hulks is still probably better than 12 mackinaw's yield. However they can keep their own ore. When you run a fleet you end up with lots of little issues. Like in your example, do the guys with the hauling alts get the same cut as the guys putting in less effort? If they get compensated for the extra effort, how much? If they always have to haul, how often are they going to offer to do it for the rest of the group when they could just run an extra miner alt and make more? Who gets to hold all the ore? Can you really trust them to give you the proper cut? etc etc...
Rowells wrote:
pretty much what incursions are. Just super-streamlined missions.

Yep why 5man a L4 mission when you can 5man incursion for 10x the profit of an L4 mission for each pilot?
Khan Wrenth wrote:

Well just as an idea, if you had a large mining fleet, I'd say a 50/50 mix of Hulks and Skiffs might do the job nicely. Skiffs' drone bonuses allow for some decent defense, especially if there's someone coordinating the mining who has a little experience with group combat so he can call out primaries. The hulks benefit the mining yield, the skiffs provide defense without having to provide dedicated PvP ships, and then whatever haulers you need. The problem is I see off the bat is drone control range, so you'd have to make sure your group is relatively nestled together which is akin to the "circling the wagons" defense but hey it worked in the past.

As for making sure people get their fair share of isk from the mining op itself, the foreman could simply keep track of what time people enter the op, and what time people leave. All ore goes back to the corp, divide the isk up between people based on the % of time they were there, and presto. Sure, you'd need to put some work into spreadsheets to do the calculations, but miners (at least I do this) already have spreadsheets to do calculations, so it should be just a small extra step for the foreman to do.

Just saying it's probably not as hard as people think it is.

So your saying a fleet of 100 ships? That's a pretty huge fleet of miners..... Well say you attract the attention of a roaming gang of like 20 ships? How long would it take them to clear out your 50 hulks? What if the Hulks are tank fit instead of yield fit, then are they really worth the few % extra yield over a skiff? Who decides who flys a hulk or skiff? Assuming the end result is an even split, then the Hulk is a lot more risk than a Skiff. Do the pilots have to cover the cost of losses or does the fleet/corp? How long would the fleet have to mine to cover the loss of 1 Hulk? (I'm assuming this fleet is in null because 100 mining ships wouldn't be efficient anywhere else.)

As for the fair share.... Keeping track of the activity of 100 pilots is, to put it mildly, daunting. Whos going to keep track of each pilot's entering and leaving and entering again? Who's keeping track of how often/long people are sitting in space with their lasers off(afk)? Who keeps track of the ore? Can you trust them? How do you know the hauler isn't taking a little off the top? How do you know the corp isn't undercutting you?

It makes me really uncomfortable to give someone hours worth of ore with the promise of reimbursement as a % of a collaborative effort, the size of which i don't know. Also, am i being paid the price of ore or minerals? With current mechanics it's worth more to refine your ore and sell the minerals. Though that may change in the future at which time you might just get paid mineral value. Basically it's impossible to know if you're being paid fairly.

As a miner I like to be in control of my own income.
As an EVE player i have a problem with trusting people in general.

Having to trust someone for my income in mining fleets... Yeah, I don't think so.

With all of these issues, is the incentive still there for fleet mining?
INeedMoneh
Locator Services
#855 - 2014-06-06 06:53:49 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
[quote=Daichi Yamato]

Having to trust someone for my income in mining fleets... Yeah, I don't think so.

With all of these issues, is the incentive still there for fleet mining?


Solution: Fleet mine on your own, 33% bonus on orca say, so 3 miners get the 4th free anymore you add is just extra...

With regards to trusting somone, in hisec dont trust anyone, if you join an established corp in null you'll probs find the guys are decent and chill, eve is ment for null and way less risky than you think, especially at present! Take the leap you wont regret it :)
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#856 - 2014-06-06 11:59:51 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

So your saying a fleet of 100 ships? That's a pretty huge fleet of miners.....


Please tell me this is a joke. I know I'm an American and therefore certain little quirks of language aren't necessarily known elsewhere, but you cannot possibly sit here and tell me you don't know that 50/50 is a bit of shorthand for a 50%/50% mix.

The rest of your post after that I would say that yes, EvE does tend to generate trust issues. But if you don't trust your mining op fleet, then why are you there to begin with? Everything else is just details to be sorted out. You know it is a good thing that player organizations in this game are called "corporations" because it makes the analogy spot-on...corporations (real ones) are insanely complex businesses with all of the same trust issues and logistical problems, and probably hundreds more. But people who take the bull by the horns to put in the effort to organize and focus others get rewarded, and those who can perform within these groups are rewarded.

This game is based on that. And it's been working relatively well for a little over a decade now? Yeah, I think the players will be fine. Someone can organize a mining op and make it work. It's probably been done a few hundred thousand times by now. Don't worry about that. If that's not your playstyle, okay! That's perfectly legitimate. It takes all types of players to make EvE go around, after all.

The incentives for me would be a "safety in groups" thing. When you have a corp that can notify you of hostiles or suspicious neutrals a few jumps out, that makes you safer. With a number of ships keeping an eye on local and ready to put a call out, that keeps you safer. When the entire group can primary their drones onto the ganker of choice, that makes you safer. When you have people that can haul for you, so you can dissolve rocks faster as a group, that earns you more isk. When you have people that refine and haul it elsewhere for you, that helps you. When you get paid as a group for all the minerals earned, you don't have to worry as much about hogging the more profitable rocks because they all have to be mined and that makes mining a little less stressful.

That said, currently I am a solo miner, but I do see immense benefit from eventually moving into group mining. Plus, groups tend to have boosters. So in the end, you might end up making a little bit more isk/hour when it is all said and done. Or, you might just about break even or make a little less, without having to refine and haul and sell yourself, so maybe in the long run you're getting more isk for your time. Plus you're mining in a group, a little bit safer if done right.

So I'll say this one more time. Yes, for me and the way I see things, there is incentive to fleet mine. That said, you solo mine, and that is perfectly okay. I just think that group mining is worth a shot :) Plus nothing is stopping you from mining outside of ops for yourself.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#857 - 2014-06-06 12:20:13 UTC
Some of you talk about ops like they are a common, everyday type of experience.

Log in, join an op, be happy.

I hate to break it to you, but for many, if not most, pilots, ops are the exception to the rule. Many small corps can't schedule them more than once a week, assuming they can keep that recurring pace.

It's not that we should have the option to mine solo. For many of us, we should expect solo to be the only option most of the time we play.
Seriously, if we actually expected to always find enough trustworthy players to work with on a regular basis, why would many of us even consider buying that second account?

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#858 - 2014-06-06 14:11:28 UTC
Really, it seems the real limit with multiboxing is the ability of your computer to keep up with many clients. But a pretty decent one should be able to support enough barges to quickly stripmine out any highsec belts you want.

I used to have some newbies trying their hand at mining, but the difference between bonuses and not, as well as having to warp ships about (or hauling account) is an issue for them, not really worth it. And then there's always interceptors about somehow... apparently a combination of uncatchable align times and bubble immunity or something...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Smugest Sniper
neko island
Deedspace Consortium
#859 - 2014-06-06 18:02:32 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Really, it seems the real limit with multiboxing is the ability of your computer to keep up with many clients. But a pretty decent one should be able to support enough barges to quickly stripmine out any highsec belts you want.

I used to have some newbies trying their hand at mining, but the difference between bonuses and not, as well as having to warp ships about (or hauling account) is an issue for them, not really worth it. And then there's always interceptors about somehow... apparently a combination of uncatchable align times and bubble immunity or something...


There is a minor limitation in that you are not supposed to use any 3rd party programs to assist in your mining/gameplay, the big deal that makes **** harder is the shorter your cycle times(now) the much harder it is to maintain a big multi-box fleet.

Mining is a means to an end, it's never something you really want to do as a primary generation activity even when alone, you use it to make items and produce things you need or want to sell. The only exception might be is if you are selling mega and zydrine simply because of the scarcity factor.

Interceptors to a lone miner=not an issue anymore. Skiff/procurer as you can see from my KM's can blap them pretty quickly.

Mining corporations are in general, a front for some kind of manufactuering, they make something and sell it at a mark-up while buying minerals and/or ore from their membership at a marginally reduced rate(5-15%) for the guaranteed income and pay-by-production.

I'd love to see someone institute a system where you track laser hours on field and pay dividends based on final product production. However the data collection, the transitory cost and risk of loss on investment is too scary for people.

More than this, I'd like to see indy corps used as a real tool to seed and support the usage and replacement of ships and fittings in an alliance space. I know Goons initially experimented with this(see Sigma Space Jew Squad) back before Mittens got put in charge and a little during his early time. Though it was ultimately determined that the cost/benefit of local production was fruitless when just having a good logistics chain to cart things in from high-sec as well as to any space used for operations would be far better and more practical as a null alliance.

The tools are there again for this kind of activity but they are largely unused and not feasible when no one will defend their home space unless SBU's are dropped.

Everytime I look at my stay's in Impass, outer ring, catch, venal, cloud ring, and syndicate, the only 3 corporations, not even neccesarily alliances, but Corps, that would undock or reship to fight incoming forces was Black Aces during the 09 days of -A- in impass FR-b1h, occasionally the people I lived with in Outer-cloud ring, and now (some of the time) my current alliance if it's in prime time.

I have roamed unchecked through pretty much all of null-sec save for Solar, and Darkness & Despair controlled territories. The Russians don't **** around when it comes to check-point and border control, probably due to the number of years the Iron curtain was around.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#860 - 2014-06-06 18:23:37 UTC
Erutpar Ambient wrote:

No, i'm not missing out on that fact. Though running with a logi and dps fit ships in a mission is more efficient, you instead run into the downtime between missions 5x+ as often as solo, which will have a negative impact on the efficiency of fleet missioning. But even without, it's only marginally better at the cost of having to rely on other people to be consistent in their efforts. Though in general if you have 5 guys it'll last about 2 missions before someone has to go afk or they start getting distracted and you end up with 4 guys doing work and doing a 5 way split.

As for mining in fleets.... Well first of all, the multiboxers, well instead of running 5 hulks and a hauler each they'd probably be running 6 Mackinaws. But 10 hulks is still probably better than 12 mackinaw's yield. However they can keep their own ore. When you run a fleet you end up with lots of little issues. Like in your example, do the guys with the hauling alts get the same cut as the guys putting in less effort? If they get compensated for the extra effort, how much? If they always have to haul, how often are they going to offer to do it for the rest of the group when they could just run an extra miner alt and make more? Who gets to hold all the ore? Can you really trust them to give you the proper cut? etc etc...


the issues u've pointed out suggest u cant trust the ppl u play with. this does not happen this often with every group of players. Some ppl work together very well, hence null sec, incursion fleets etc.

Erutpar Ambient wrote:

Yep why 5man a L4 mission when you can 5man incursion for 10x the profit of an L4 mission for each pilot?


because u'd make more money. 5x man incursions are poorly paid.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
Some of you talk about ops like they are a common, everyday type of experience.

Log in, join an op, be happy.


wasnt my intention. im aware the vast majority of miners are solo players. from post #516

Quote:
but if the heavy use of macks/retties is just because the vast majority of miners are loners and their alts, then its the nature of how they mine that pushes them into the rettie, not an imbalance between barges.


what im arguing is the rewards are there when the effort is made. and i think its a good thing that there is a significant reward gap between players who work together well and those that work together less well or play solo.

ill point out again i was actually against the rettie yield drop. i dnt think it was warranted. i merely came back to this thread because one guy said my hulk fit was so bad i was clearly an inexperienced miner (lol), and then again when someone doomed and gloomed that their solo life was destroyed in an MMO, when really, the yield drop is quite small, solo mining is still viable and it makes sense to give incentive for group play.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs