These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Expanded Orehold
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
A'Tolkar
Carlson's Raiders
#1 - 2014-06-29 22:00:03 UTC
Would offer similar, if not identical bonuses to ore hold as the Expanded Cargohold series of modules. Hull HP penalties would be greater. Perhaps 50% greater. May as well add Orehold Optimization rigs as well. I kind of miss miners having the opportunity to nerf their own tank by fitting hella expanded cargoholds :)
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2014-06-29 22:13:14 UTC
They have Ore Holds specifically to prevent expanding their useful capacity.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#3 - 2014-06-29 22:13:22 UTC
+1 waiting for a long time for this, probably has been mentioned before.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#4 - 2014-06-29 22:33:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
I am aware of that, it doesn't hurt to revisit past decisions and discuss further options that have been dismissed before the last patches.

Basically you will sacrifice yield, harvesting speed and tank for the option of being able to stay longer on grid, which usually works against you too in most cases.

Multiboxer and fleets do not gain anything because they usually fly around with freighters and designated haulers, freighters don't have an ore hold to expand to begin with. The only people profiting would be solo players, small gang ops and the lucky guy with nobody hostile in local.

I am all for that. Especially with the latest and near future changes, there should not be any reason against bringing this discussion up again.
GreenSeed
#5 - 2014-06-30 01:09:04 UTC
whats this obsession with staying in grid? a warp speed boost would be much better, no need to buff the align time. or maybe deployable ore silo so a solo player can stay on grid much longer while having something to undock for and fight for, should hostiles pop in local. perhaps even *gasp* use a Hulk. Shocked


(this time deployables with a 15 minute reinforce timer please...)
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#6 - 2014-06-30 06:43:04 UTC
I leave Eve for a few days to take a short break and come back to the forums expecting anything to change? Silly me.

Look, since this seems to still come up alot, CCP gave the ships that have ore holds with set ore capacity TO BALANCE THEM. Giving them a module that allows a ship with an ore hold a means to expand their capacity completely and utterly defeats the whole point of ore holds...no matter how you slice it. You'd be better off just simply saying "I hate ore holds and would like for CCP to remove them and give those ships back their old cargo holds."

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#7 - 2014-06-30 09:46:16 UTC
I acknowledge previous balance issues, but with the ore compression changes everything changes now. Ore can be transported much better now whole pre refined, which gives a lot of options after being mined. This improves hauling via haulers and freighters but the miners are left behind.

We are asking to balance out this new created gap between the 'big' users and fleets and solo miners. Actually we are not even asking that, we are just asking about the option to balance it out ourselves if needed/wanted.

I for instance still do not understand the level bonus of the orca to increase cargo hold instead of ore hold.

Pre compressed or is missing an option an we are asking for that option in regards to miner and small hauler.

This should be discussed further with an eye towards the compression changes.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#8 - 2014-06-30 14:04:42 UTC
as long as u dont mind the inevitable nerf to current ore holds that would come with this.

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
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#9 - 2014-06-30 15:05:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Fer'isam K'ahn
That could be discussed of course, though I don't really see the need for all the obvious drawbacks. I personally wouldn't use it, except some strange situation I haven't thought about yet maybe. But I do think the option should be available.
To counter mega haulers, I would restrict it to mining barges/exhumer (maybe orca) only, like strip miners etc. That way it keeps being difficult to fit and has a lot of negative consequences to do so, like I said earlier, less yield, less tank due to lost slots, rigs, cpu, pg etc... and time on grid (which can be perceived 20% positive or 80% negative).

It already comes with a price, we are not just adding ore hold.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#10 - 2014-06-30 15:33:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
im trying hard not to rant because typical miner mentality is, frankly, shocking.

but barges used to have typical bays which u could choose to expand. it was changed because miners wouldnt do anything but expand their bays and then **** on the forums over how they had no tank on their barges.

almost a decade later, CCP give barges separate ore bays AND improved tanks across the entire profession. thus removing the tank vs capacity choice and miners everywhere rejoiced because now they got both tank and capacity.

giving them that choice back will just lead to waves of whining, trust me. dnt do it.

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
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#11 - 2014-06-30 15:48:18 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
im trying hard not to rant because typical miner mentality is, frankly, shocking.

but barges used to have typical bays which u could choose to expand. it was changed because miners wouldnt do anything but expand their bays and then **** on the forums over how they had no tank on their barges.

almost a decade later, CCP give barges separate ore bays AND improved tanks across the entire profession. thus removing the tank vs capacity choice and miners everywhere rejoiced because now they got both tank and capacity.

giving them that choice back will just lead to waves of whining, trust me. dnt do it.

This

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#12 - 2014-06-30 15:57:54 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
im trying hard not to rant because typical miner mentality is, frankly, shocking.

but barges used to have typical bays which u could choose to expand. it was changed because miners wouldnt do anything but expand their bays and then **** on the forums over how they had no tank on their barges.

almost a decade later, CCP give barges separate ore bays AND improved tanks across the entire profession. thus removing the tank vs capacity choice and miners everywhere rejoiced because now they got both tank and capacity.

giving them that choice back will just lead to waves of whining, trust me. dnt do it.

But then... you see, what happens is
Daichi Yamato wrote:
CCP give barges separate ore bays AND improved tanks across the entire profession. thus removing the tank vs capacity choice and miners everywhere rejoiced because now they got both tank and capacity.


Which sounds successful to me.

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 ?