These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

What do you think CCP is planning for the barge rework?

Author
Eva Ronuken
Angels Auxiliary Cohort
#1 - 2016-06-21 21:44:16 UTC
So, unfortunately the proposed mining/barge rework was moved from summer to fall.

We know that the rorqual is getting flights of mining "fighters" and some other things that will give it a fresh new role. But CCP is also planning on tweaking the barges to "to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field."

I'm trying to think of ways that would bring mining more inline with the income that the rest of the other professions put out, but I can't think of anything, seeing how ores and mineral prices are tied to the market, and increasing barge efficiency just devalues minerals and keeps income the same.

considering that mining is pretty much the butt of jokes in this game and new players are warned against "falling for the mining meme" I'm curious to what they have planned, or if it at all touches on the risk vs reward of mining.
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#2 - 2016-06-21 23:46:39 UTC
in my observation.. CCP hates it when one particular ship dominates in an area for too long...
almost everyone is useing SKIFFS that i see.. everywere i go..i see skiffs. and a smattering of makinaws (or the T1 versions of those ships)... almost no hulks

simple question, what do you do to bring it more evenly ballanced

its all in the Tank for me.... i dont care if the hulk could mine 10x more then the skiff, i dont care if the makinaw could hold 10x more then the skiff... its all about tank tank tank and more tank... for me that is

i wont even consider a mak or hulk unless its got a lot more tank
Black Pedro
Mine.
#3 - 2016-06-22 10:25:28 UTC
Yeah, at least in highsec there are too many Procurers/Skiffs.

I guess that the Skiff will have its yield cut, or the other two ships will have their yield raised (or both). Alternatively they might drop the tank of the Skiff, but I see that as less likely.

I was hoping there might be whole new types of mining being added with the Drilling Platforms that might result in new sub-specializations for barges/exhumers. Given how little we have heard though, I am now just betting on a slight rebalance of numbers to make the less-tanky ships more attractive.

Perhaps we will know more after the o7 show on Sunday.
Knitram Relik
Atomic Amish
#4 - 2016-06-22 11:10:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Knitram Relik
All the Skiffs in hi-sec is a result of the miner ganking that's been in vogue the past few years. My thoughts are as follows for buffs/nerfs:

Hulks: A little more tank and a reduction in the ORE mined bonus
Macks: Bigger hold, less tank.
Skiffs: Smaller hold. Like 25 % reduction.

Just my 1/50th of a dollar.

I await people telling me I'm wrong and/or an idiot.

"The problem with quotes on the internet is that it's really hard to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#5 - 2016-06-22 11:51:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Gunrunner1775
we know the gankers will scream at any buffing of the tank on any of the ships

i am guessing
-Skiff / Proc - change 5% shield hp bonus per level to 4% shield bonus hp per level ( goes from 25% to 20% at max skill)
change drone damage bonus from 50% to 33% , possibly remove one of the low power slots from the skiff as well

-Hulk/Covetor/Retriver/Mak - possibly reballance CPU/PG to fit a bit more tank

dont think they will tweek with any of the yield bonus's.. as the entire economy would get screwed with up or down

as it stands... a MAX YIELD skiff.. mines more and has more tank then any of the others that are fit for MAX TANK (or the numbers of the yield are so close as to not even be worth looking at any other ship besides the skiff)


or

nurf skiff /proc yield (role bones from 150% to 133%) - keeping same tank and damage output
seriously buff all the other ships tank (by double)

now i have a choice... skiff/proc for dangerous area mining (sneaking into wormholes, perhaps some warp core stabs or warpcore bonus) ... the others for high sec... max cargo for solo mining or max yield for group / fleet mining
Sunwell
Bailiffs
Evictus.
#6 - 2016-06-22 12:04:22 UTC
Knitram Relik wrote:
All the Skiffs in hi-sec is a result of the miner ganking that's been in vogue the past few years. My thoughts are as follows for buffs/nerfs:

Hulks: A little more tank and a reduction in the ORE mined bonus
Macks: Bigger hold, less tank.
Skiffs: Smaller hold. Like 25 % reduction.

Just my 1/50th of a dollar.

I await people telling me I'm wrong and/or an idiot.



I'll have to agree here.
A lot of the HS mining is done AFK - reduce the hold on the skiff and people will be forced to pay more attention.
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#7 - 2016-06-22 12:13:53 UTC
nah, have to disagree on the afk mining

rocks going poof too fast with a well skilled skiff... i cant even get up to refresh my coffee in the morning during a bit of roid mining befor off to do IRL stuff

i dont see as much AFK mining as used to be back in the day.. perhaps ice miners in maks maybe, but the changes to cycle times and size of ice ect.. yea, you gotta be at keyboard for the most part for any ship except the makinaw doing ice mining

for me, it will always come down to tank.. dont care what ship it is

if they nurf the skiff tank to hell and back again...

i will mine roids with a Rokh or some other battleship instead (its been done in the past)
Arianne Kass
NED-Clan
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2016-06-22 13:33:33 UTC
From recent efforts at mining ore in nullsec (Providence):

  • The Hulk is in a good spot as king of yield, but at the risk of having to leave a can behind when reds show up. The ore hold could use a little increase so it reliably holds two cycles with implants and/or mining drones.
  • Mackinaw is good when there is more red traffic in the neighborhood. Yield is the same as a skiff and no need to mine into cans.
  • Although I see many people mining in Skiffs, for me it doesn't work. In theory a couple of skiffs could deal very well with a lone confessor or interceptor. In practice there are more hotdroppers in cloaky nullified T3s than solo small ships, making the Mackinaw the logical choice. The Skiff rules for Mercoxit mining as it fits 3 mining upgrades plus the Mercoxit rig.


Thanks to processor rigs it is possible to fly a max yield, decent tank fit on a Hulk or Mack even with CPU Management IV.
In the ideal case there would be an option to have 3 flights of drones: mining drones, light drones for PvP and medium drones vs belt rats. The Skiff already has a 100 m3 dronebay while the Hulk and Mack have 50 m3. Perhaps increase the dronebay of the Mack to 75 m3 while keeping the Hulk at 50 m3 so max yield comes at a cost.

Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#9 - 2016-06-22 15:46:27 UTC
Skiff/Procurer are the rational choice in highsec - the substantial tank means they are the least likely to be chosen as a gank target and they are fast enough that you are giving up relatively little yield compared to a Mackinaw/Retriever if there is a station/POS/Citadel nearby where you can unload.

In nullsec, the extra tank is little help against a hot drop fleet - fly a T1 barge and insure it.

Eve updates talks about "tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field". No mention of nerfs. With the new structures and capital rebalance demand for minerals seems to be increasing, I would expect CCP might want to attract more players to the profession
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#10 - 2016-06-22 17:38:58 UTC
Do Little wrote:


Eve updates talks about "tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field". No mention of nerfs. With the new structures and capital rebalance demand for minerals seems to be increasing, I would expect CCP might want to attract more players to the profession



that does seem logical

has been a massive increase in the demand with not much increase in the supply
need to bleed off the excess stock piles of minerals befor we see those numbers affect the market
Jasmine Cheryu
Bearers of Impurism
#11 - 2016-06-24 00:57:46 UTC
"tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field"

I do hope that the changes to efficiency reduce the yield and cycle time appropriately, in order to improve efficiency.
I hate mining an asteroid that has.. i duno.. 10 units of ore.. when a full cycle will give me 4000 units. It's just wasting time, and decreasing the yield and decreasing the cycle time (but keeping the yield/cycle time as a constant) will actually improve efficiency

THAT ORE... (see what I did there? Big smile )
I would like to see.. that when you activate your mining lasers, they dont have a cycle, but just activate like a cloak module does, and it just deposits ore quickly in your ore hold.. and you can just watch the number go up, until the asteroid pops Cool


Thats my opinion (and hopes) for the efficiency improvements
Eva Ronuken
Angels Auxiliary Cohort
#12 - 2016-06-24 02:08:49 UTC
Jasmine Cheryu wrote:

I would like to see.. that when you activate your mining lasers, they dont have a cycle, but just activate like a cloak module does, and it just deposits ore quickly in your ore hold.. and you can just watch the number go up, until the asteroid pops Cool



this is something that I've always wanted. Not because it fixes any issues that exist, it just feels much more satisfying to me to, like you said, just smoothly see the numbers go up.
Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
#13 - 2016-06-24 05:23:51 UTC
Jasmine Cheryu wrote:

I do hope that the changes to efficiency reduce the yield and cycle time appropriately, in order to improve efficiency.
I hate mining an asteroid that has.. i duno.. 10 units of ore.. when a full cycle will give me 4000 units. It's just wasting time, and decreasing the yield and decreasing the cycle time (but keeping the yield/cycle time as a constant) will actually improve efficiency


I have been saying this for a while, diversify the mining ship line with barge/exhumers yields with mining lasers and drones (2 lines). The mining laser version would have very fast small yield cycles, the drone one would just be because I love drones.
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#14 - 2016-06-24 16:24:11 UTC
THE BIGGER PICTURE

ok, was haveing a discussion with friend this morning and resulted in interesting line of thought reguarding the mining barges

As stated in a dev post some were (dont recall exact word for word) the big wars.. the one that resultedin B-R big massive fight... the "world war bee" thats been going on since january.. these types of things bring in the paying customers. the players... even players that have stopped playing come back

what promotes these wars... i do belive there was a comment that stated that after these wars.. things got quiet.. stagnated.. very quiet as forces sliped back into their corners to lick their wounds and rebuild forces...

these big wars are fought with ships, lots and lots of ships...
miners mine ore.. industrialists make ships... big wars are fought, ships blow up

how do we promote more of these conflicts and such.... get more ships into game

beef up miners... increase the supply.. make ships cheaper.. easier to make... get more ships into the field.. promote big wars.. bring in the players and more subscirptions..

along this line of thought however.. other things were discussed ..

now gotta get into the economics.. amount of cash in circulation... supply demand profit margins ect... that adds an entirely new set of mathamatical equations.

miners wont mine unless they are makeing a profit.. and wont make ships unless its profitable...

Alot more to look at for me it seems then just how much a ship can tank or how much M3 it mines per cycle or how much M3 it mines in an hour



Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort
#15 - 2016-06-24 18:02:03 UTC
Gunrunner1775 wrote:
THE BIGGER PICTURE

ok, was haveing a discussion with friend this morning and resulted in interesting line of thought reguarding the mining barges

As stated in a dev post some were (dont recall exact word for word) the big wars.. the one that resultedin B-R big massive fight... the "world war bee" thats been going on since january.. these types of things bring in the paying customers. the players... even players that have stopped playing come back

what promotes these wars... i do belive there was a comment that stated that after these wars.. things got quiet.. stagnated.. very quiet as forces sliped back into their corners to lick their wounds and rebuild forces...

these big wars are fought with ships, lots and lots of ships...
miners mine ore.. industrialists make ships... big wars are fought, ships blow up

how do we promote more of these conflicts and such.... get more ships into game

beef up miners... increase the supply.. make ships cheaper.. easier to make... get more ships into the field.. promote big wars.. bring in the players and more subscirptions..

along this line of thought however.. other things were discussed ..

now gotta get into the economics.. amount of cash in circulation... supply demand profit margins ect... that adds an entirely new set of mathamatical equations.

miners wont mine unless they are makeing a profit.. and wont make ships unless its profitable...

Alot more to look at for me it seems then just how much a ship can tank or how much M3 it mines per cycle or how much M3 it mines in an hour






Sorry, cheaper ships will not promote the big wars like you think. If you increase the amount of ore, you decrease the price, decrease the price decrease the number of miners will to mine, decrease the number of miners, increase the cost of ore, etc.

People will only mine for X amount of profit. Anything you do will change that but the main point is the system balances itself.

Anyways, assuming the T1 market tumbled and ships got cheaper, it would not promote the big null wars you are after. The main question has not been answered and that is "Why should I go take someone elses SOV?" WWB had a sort of herd mentality for everyone going to fight the goons. It was not about SOV as much as taking things from Goons. Aside from location, there is really no reason one SOV area is better than another.

There needs to be a reason to fight and people will fight. Cheaper ships will not cause wars.

As for the thread, my guess is CCP is going to mess with the tank of the skiffs making them far easier to gank because "reasons" or make them so bad at mining it is not worth it to mine at all when you consider gank costs vs additional yield.

Maybe they will go the other way and make a "Mordus Legion" like balance pass of the exhumers lol.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#16 - 2016-06-26 08:50:03 UTC
The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier!
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#17 - 2016-06-27 05:27:54 UTC
Predicting it will be bad for highsec miners......i know that isnt even a bold prediction but rather a given but i put it out their first !

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
#18 - 2016-06-27 19:30:18 UTC
I think the skiff is in the right spot so...

Pessimistic me says skiff gets nerf to EHP, yield, and hold. Placing the ore hold around 8.5k so it's not good for solo mining. Mack will lose 1k ore hold for ice miners. Hulk will get a tank nerf and a yield buff, try to bait more people into glass cannon miners so ganking is easier.

Optimistic me says skiff stays as is, mack get boost to cpu and 1k more ore hold for ice miners, hulk will get more cpu and slightly more yield.
Gwenaelle de Ardevon
Ardevon Corporation
#19 - 2016-06-27 19:50:46 UTC
Do Little wrote:
The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier!



probably the flood of citadels

«An hour sitting with a pretty girl on a park bench passes like a minute, but a minute sitting on a hot stove seems like an hour». Albert Einstein - [11, S. 154]

More Quotes, Poetry & Prose on: https://gwenaelledeardevon.wordpress.com/

Sheeth Athonille
Rabid Dogz Mining
#20 - 2016-06-27 20:17:46 UTC
Gwenaelle de Ardevon wrote:
Do Little wrote:
The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier!



probably the flood of citadels


That probably explains the peak at the end, but it doesn't explain why it's consistently been about 3 times the amount since at least July 2013.
123Next pageLast page