These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Overheating Ice/Gas/Ore Havesters.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#21 - 2015-05-25 00:13:25 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Deep Nine wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Panty Stocking wrote:
required for my support:

overheating affects RANGE of strip miners only

If you take the time to scout your belts before you start mining, pay attention to your survey scanner, and reposition yourself as you're mining, you'll almost never be out of range of whatever rocks you're into.

You'll only ever have range issues when you have 10+ hulks mining the same belt faster than they can move along it.


What do you suggest?

Suggest you learn more about how the game really works before you promote suggestions that, while you think are helpful, actually make things worse in the long run.


That wasent an answer.
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#22 - 2015-05-25 13:32:46 UTC
Overheating strip/ice/gas harvesters should and could be done via a a ship mode for Exhumers only, perhaps only macks and hulks
A suggested penalty would be a reduction in shield capacity and deactivating shield hardeners.
Benefits would be faster harvesting and/or larger yields at the expense to the defenses.
The exhumers strip mode should include a reduction to heat damage, miners sit for long periods, requiring a break on heat damage.

This gives an added option of risk/reward.
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#23 - 2015-05-25 14:35:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiddoomer
Deep Nine wrote:
Overheating strip/ice/gas harvesters should and could be done via a a ship mode for Exhumers only, perhaps only macks and hulks
A suggested penalty would be a reduction in shield capacity and deactivating shield hardeners.
Benefits would be faster harvesting and/or larger yields at the expense to the defenses.
The exhumers strip mode should include a reduction to heat damage, miners sit for long periods, requiring a break on heat damage.

This gives an added option of risk/reward.


This put miners so much at rish in highsec, besides the fact that hulk and mackinaw are pretty juicy targets by themselves, that I dont see how a mode that remove the pretty meh defenses we have on mackinaw and hulk (skiff is another story) would make miners want to do this at any given time. For remote and deep area of nullsec yes (if guarded against npc by combat ships that is), but these people have been recently already buffed with the ore anomalies tweaks.

Why not make just a mode that lock us (exhumer only) in place for 5/10 minutes (with a 1/2 min unlock time for example) and give a big bonus (let's say half the size of a highsec semi-circular belt) to range (with not or very little bonus (5-10%) to cycle time) ? More range is not needed for mining fleet, because the orca give a big bonus to range already, but a solo/small team of miners could like this way more.

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#24 - 2015-05-25 18:03:44 UTC
Quote:
This put miners so much at rish in highsec, besides the fact that hulk and mackinaw are pretty juicy targets by themselves, that I dont see how a mode that remove the pretty meh defenses we have on mackinaw and hulk (skiff is another story) would make miners want to do this at any given time. For remote and deep area of nullsec yes (if guarded against npc by combat ships that is), but these people have been recently already buffed with the ore anomalies tweaks.

Why not make just a mode that lock us (exhumer only) in place for 5/10 minutes (with a 1/2 min unlock time for example) and give a big bonus (let's say half the size of a highsec semi-circular belt) to range (with not or very little bonus (5-10%) to cycle time) ? More range is not needed for mining fleet, because the orca give a big bonus to range already, but a solo/small team of miners could like this way more.


It's optional, not mandatory. It's a risk reward mechanic.

The locked mode was suggested, similar to what every mode in the game does. The Bonus' were already suggested.

You literally criticized the idea and then suggested the same thing with different specs.
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#25 - 2015-05-25 18:18:24 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
Quote:
This put miners so much at rish in highsec, besides the fact that hulk and mackinaw are pretty juicy targets by themselves, that I dont see how a mode that remove the pretty meh defenses we have on mackinaw and hulk (skiff is another story) would make miners want to do this at any given time. For remote and deep area of nullsec yes (if guarded against npc by combat ships that is), but these people have been recently already buffed with the ore anomalies tweaks.

Why not make just a mode that lock us (exhumer only) in place for 5/10 minutes (with a 1/2 min unlock time for example) and give a big bonus (let's say half the size of a highsec semi-circular belt) to range (with not or very little bonus (5-10%) to cycle time) ? More range is not needed for mining fleet, because the orca give a big bonus to range already, but a solo/small team of miners could like this way more.


It's optional, not mandatory. It's a risk reward mechanic.

The locked mode was suggested, similar to what every mode in the game does. The Bonus' were already suggested.

You literally criticized the idea and then suggested the same thing with different specs.



My mode doesn't negate defenses, nor the range bonus really boost the yield, only convience of moving around. And the fact that the initial idea is way to much of a risk against a too small reward still stands, a ganked exhumer cost 200M to replace, this is a lot of hours spend in a belt completely defenseless with the defenses nerf by overheat or mode.

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”
Iain Cariaba
#26 - 2015-05-25 18:26:58 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Deep Nine wrote:
What do you suggest?

Suggest you learn more about how the game really works before you promote suggestions that, while you think are helpful, actually make things worse in the long run.

That wasent an answer.

Actually, it was.

If you take all your ideas you've posted here in the last few days, and look at them collectively, it is glaringly obvious that you are totally unaware of how the economy in this game, or how economics in general, works. This has been explained to you already, by several different people. You have chosen to blissfully ignore these explanations, blindly going forth as if you know better than those who have spent years learning what you are trying to break.

You want to make more isk. I understand this. However, you are failing to realize that you are playing a game with thousands of other people. The suggestions you have made would certainly improve your income, if you were playing a single player game.

You think that increasing your yield by 30% would correlate to a 30% increase in your income. You need to realize that 30% increase in yield would not just apply to you, but to everyone who uses (insert feature). A 30% increase in ore sounds good to you, because you do not realize what 30% times 10,000 miners would do to the market prices of those ores.
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#27 - 2015-05-25 19:00:49 UTC
I have a idea, that maybe would make everyone happy, something that doesn't really touch yield, nor demand a mode or a new thing, but I don't know if it's possible technically speaking :


  • Strip miners can be overheat on exhumers in a short period of time, let's say 1 min maximum.
  • When strip miners are overheated, they gain a range bonus, to mine up to 20km without links.
  • If the players doesn't stop in the 1 min interval the overheat, the strip miners broke and need to be repaired in station like any overheated module.
  • When the strip miners are not overheated, the heat bar slowly go down to 0% by itself in 5 min interval from 99% overheated.


With that, a careful player while moving in a belt can start catching roids when too far away until he gets close enough or finish a nearly depleted roid that start getting out of range.

Maybe this could have a even shorter overheat period, but give cycle boost instead of range, but as already said upping the yield even slightly could break the market enough to make mining viable only for multiboxers or nullsec players.

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”
Iain Cariaba
#28 - 2015-05-25 20:36:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Iain Cariaba
Kiddoomer wrote:
I have a idea, that maybe would make everyone happy, something that doesn't really touch yield, nor demand a mode or a new thing, but I don't know if it's possible technically speaking :


  • Strip miners can be overheat on exhumers in a short period of time, let's say 1 min maximum.
  • When strip miners are overheated, they gain a range bonus, to mine up to 20km without links.
  • If the players doesn't stop in the 1 min interval the overheat, the strip miners broke and need to be repaired in station like any overheated module.
  • When the strip miners are not overheated, the heat bar slowly go down to 0% by itself in 5 min interval from 99% overheated.


With that, a careful player while moving in a belt can start catching roids when too far away until he gets close enough or finish a nearly depleted roid that start getting out of range.

Maybe this could have a even shorter overheat period, but give cycle boost instead of range, but as already said upping the yield even slightly could break the market enough to make mining viable only for multiboxers or nullsec players.

The thing here is, as pointed out previously, unless you're multi-boxing a fleet of miners, you should hardly ever be out of range of the next rock.

Efficient mining is not sitting in one place while you mine out every asteroid with in range. It is knowing when the rock you're after is going to pop, and moving into range of the next one before it does. Unless they've drastically changed the way asteroids spawn in belts, you should have a couple 10% rocks with a few 5%s scattered around them in a couple locations in the belt, with the normal ones spread throughout the belt. This pretty much allows you to slowly move from one side of a belt to the other while mining one type of ore non-stop.

A little scouting, some planning, and a few well placed bookmarks are all you need to make this suggestion completely pointless.
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
#29 - 2015-05-25 20:54:39 UTC
Ok, I already prepare bookmarks for my belts to be able to warp/move and always stay and range and aligned to a celestial/safespot. But if that range is not a real bonus, I don't see any other way to make the OP idea viable without breaking the market. Guess it's not possible then to make overheat of mining modules a meaningfull choice.

In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen : “Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.”
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#30 - 2015-05-25 22:12:12 UTC
Kiddoomer wrote:
Ok, I already prepare bookmarks for my belts to be able to warp/move and always stay and range and aligned to a celestial/safespot. But if that range is not a real bonus, I don't see any other way to make the OP idea viable without breaking the market. Guess it's not possible then to make overheat of mining modules a meaningfull choice.


It's possible. You misunderstood the entire thread.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#31 - 2015-05-26 02:19:15 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
Kiddoomer wrote:
Ok, I already prepare bookmarks for my belts to be able to warp/move and always stay and range and aligned to a celestial/safespot. But if that range is not a real bonus, I don't see any other way to make the OP idea viable without breaking the market. Guess it's not possible then to make overheat of mining modules a meaningfull choice.


It's possible. You misunderstood the entire thread.


This seems to be a refrain. The burden of communication falls most heavily on the speaker or poster to be clear, concise and unambigous. Telling everyone who reads it differently than you intended that they need to re-read the thread, or that they have misunderstood the thread, etc. probably means you need to clarify the idea, and provide examples of exactly how your idea should work in a live environment. That you see half or more of people who attempt to engage in the discussion misunderstand you should be sending up alarm bells that you aren't communicating effectively.

I'd love to see you clearly elaborate your ideas, because I like many of the core concepts. I would like to like your ideas, but because they are either unclear, or because you try to railroad a single interpretation of ambiguous phrases without clarifying which way it is meant to work. I can't. The dismissal of disagreeing statements, or people who read what you wrote without a direct tap into your intentions, in fact, makes it nearly impossible.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#32 - 2015-05-26 11:39:42 UTC
Quote:
This seems to be a refrain. The burden of communication falls most heavily on the speaker or poster to be clear, concise and unambigous. Telling everyone who reads it differently than you intended that they need to re-read the thread, or that they have misunderstood the thread, etc. probably means you need to clarify the idea, and provide examples of exactly how your idea should work in a live environment. That you see half or more of people who attempt to engage in the discussion misunderstand you should be sending up alarm bells that you aren't communicating effectively.

I'd love to see you clearly elaborate your ideas, because I like many of the core concepts. I would like to like your ideas, but because they are either unclear, or because you try to railroad a single interpretation of ambiguous phrases without clarifying which way it is meant to work. I can't. The dismissal of disagreeing statements, or people who read what you wrote without a direct tap into your intentions, in fact, makes it nearly impossible.


People will read the thread and make up there own mind. It's gotten enough traction for the suggestion to take hold.

You look like a fool.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#33 - 2015-05-26 15:42:02 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:

You look like a fool


Considering the post I made about clear communication has more likes than every post you have made in this thread combined, maybe you should consider that there are other people who agree. You are quickly on the way to the same level of credibility as Dryson.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Iain Cariaba
#34 - 2015-05-26 18:45:10 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Deep Nine wrote:

You look like a fool


Considering the post I made about clear communication has more likes than every post you have made in this thread combined, maybe you should consider that there are other people who agree. You are quickly on the way to the same level of credibility as Dryson.

Nope, he's already reached that level. He's quickly on the way to Gevlon level credibility.
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#35 - 2015-05-26 23:00:58 UTC
Ask your questions, if there are any.

I will answer them in a professional manner.
Deep Nine
Vigilante Carebears
#36 - 2015-05-30 09:23:05 UTC
Quote:
without a direct tap into your intentions, in fact, makes it nearly impossible.


To help improve industry further.
Iain Cariaba
#37 - 2015-05-30 15:28:59 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
Quote:
without a direct tap into your intentions, in fact, makes it nearly impossible.


To help improve industry further.

Yet you post nothing but ideas that will have the end effect of reducing how much money players make in industry.

No, your intention is nothing more than trying to improve your industry. As long as it increases the flow of isk into your wallet, you don't seem to care that your ideas are, in the long run, actually bad for industry.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#38 - 2015-05-30 15:59:23 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
Ask your questions, if there are any.

I will answer them in a professional manner.

How does one finish a cycle before they burn out? At thermo 5, mods would still burn in less than the time it takes for a single cycle to finish without mindlinked boosts and hardwirings unless this also got a special, very low heat/s.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#39 - 2015-05-30 16:59:01 UTC
Deep Nine wrote:
This new feature would be advantages to miners and provide additional income at higher risk to their ships.


Just means you can mine more at higher risk, or less at same risk. Since the high risk is the new default and the volume higher, prices dropping accordingly, you can take risks to get the same ISK/hr or you don't and just lose out.
Talk about a stealth-buff to mining in remote nullsystems with a series of bubblebunkers in between.
Panty Stocking
Doomheim
#40 - 2015-05-30 19:33:20 UTC
yessssss, give those in null more ability to control/destroy markets while still mining in relative safety. there needs to be additional clauses to malcanis law:

1) any changes to mining providing more yield/hr will have a negative effect on the market

2) any changes to mining providing more yield/hr becomes competitively mandatory, mining is a minimax game

3) any mining changes meant to increase risk will have little to no effect to bears in sov space, making clause 1 more pronounced, and reinforcing clause 2

more clauses welcomed from informed individuals. its not just about noobs, in fact the "noob" player description of malcanis' law can easily be replaced by "highsec bears"


Previous page123Next page