These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Developer Comments on Mining Crystals and Cargo Capacity?

First post
Author
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2012-07-31 22:35:01 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Those are just excuses to redirect attention away from the fact that violating the EULA is a conscious decision. This does not make mining an unreasonable burden on an actual player if done with multiboxing.


You really believe botters ever care to stop and think they have to do a conscious decision to violate the EULA? They just do it and that's it.

But hey don't take my word for it.

Let's wait say 2 weeks for the bots to adapt past the next patch and then we'll see.

I mean, they bot even now, before the menial tasks are introduced, imagine after.

If they don't care then it makes no difference how much the mechanic changes as they would be doing it anyways. It doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is against the EULA and carries consequences if caught. If more effort, in such minimal quantities, is considered by some to necessitate botting then I think those to be the players we can afford to lose.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#202 - 2012-07-31 22:36:06 UTC
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Those are just excuses to redirect attention away from the fact that violating the EULA is a conscious decision. This does not make mining an unreasonable burden on an actual player if done with multiboxing.


You really believe botters ever care to stop and think they have to do a conscious decision to violate the EULA? They just do it and that's it.

But hey don't take my word for it.

Let's wait say 2 weeks for the bots to adapt past the next patch and then we'll see.


Yay for blue and grey morality.

Doesn't make you correct, however. Using bots is against the EULA.


I don't need to be correct, it's not like they will come to ask you or me for permission or will have any moral obligation to you.
Dave Stark
#203 - 2012-07-31 22:36:47 UTC
Rented wrote:
If you're unable to cope with the highest-yield fleet-oriented exhumer being able to utilize 'only' 5 crystal sets on its own, your planning skills are awful and your capacity for forethought is terribly lacking.

If you honestly manage to believe this is such a drawback as to reduce the effectiveness of the hulk to below that of its peer exhumers, then by all means feel free to use one of them instead.

Mostly I see this as giving miners who aren't morons the opportunity to execute good decisions and differentiate themselves from the incredibly shortsighted ones.


considering based on the yield differences you're going to to need some thing like 6 or so miners before it's worth having a dedicated hauler over a set of mackinaws.

the size of the fleet shouldn't depend upon how useful a hulk is. if there is a fleet it should be better regardless of the size of the fleet.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#204 - 2012-07-31 22:38:39 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Those are just excuses to redirect attention away from the fact that violating the EULA is a conscious decision. This does not make mining an unreasonable burden on an actual player if done with multiboxing.


You really believe botters ever care to stop and think they have to do a conscious decision to violate the EULA? They just do it and that's it.

But hey don't take my word for it.

Let's wait say 2 weeks for the bots to adapt past the next patch and then we'll see.


Yay for blue and grey morality.

Doesn't make you correct, however. Using bots is against the EULA.


I don't need to be correct, it's not like they will come to ask you or me for permission or will have any moral obligation to you.

Good thing their morality and opinions are irrelevant in regard to enforcement of the EULA.
Anvil44
Quantshure
#205 - 2012-07-31 23:34:51 UTC
Whoa, way too many people aren't getting these changes. First, stop thinking of the Hulk as the top dog. Start thinking of the Skiff as the top dog. Or the Mackinaw as the top dog. Or maybe the Hulk as still the top dog. Prioritize what you want when mining: Are you there on your own or with a small fleet that is not supported by an Orca or haulers? Then go with Macks. Are you in a dangerous area? Lots of ganks around where you are? Or strong rats? Use a Skiff. Have a good fleet with various roles being filled? Then use Hulks.

I have done mining in high sec, both solo and fleet ops which means that for solo mining, I can't even start to thank CCP enough for the Mack. Even if it gets a somewhat less than a Hulk, I will save time by not having to shuttle back and forth so often or to risk jet can mining. When doing fleet ops, I remember being bored as hell when I was a hauler since I spent a lot of time waiting. Running crystals back and forth would've at least kept me occupied and feeling a bit more useful.

Having done mining in unknown space (WH space for all you high-sec players), I could've definitely have used a Skiff a few times as my sloppiness cost me a few barges and a Hulk too I think(been a long time since I was ganked so I don't remember for sure). These new designs fulfill roles. Just remember that if you can't get everything with the Hulk, it is because CCP screwed the pooch when they first created the barges and exhumers and this is the long awaited and well-done balance that is needed. For those that cry for carrying so damn many crystals, I can only assume it is because you are mining 24/7. I have worked asteroid fields with ALL the ore types and in a couple of hours have only needed 2 or 3 sets of crystals. When we plan out our mining a bit, there is a balance of who mines what so we don't all do one ore type, thereby needing to swap crystals so often.

If you are in high-sec space, you are only mining maybe 3 or 4 ore types and if you are in a fleet, the same principal applies. Try to compliment each others work. I seriously am floored at the nit-picking and crying going on about these changes. Come on people, suck it up and adapt. You can do this, really with little effort. Bring on the changes.

I may not like you or your point of view but you have a right to voice it.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#206 - 2012-08-01 00:05:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Anvil44 wrote:

If you are in high-sec space, you are only mining maybe 3 or 4 ore types and if you are in a fleet, the same principal applies. Try to compliment each others work. I seriously am floored at the nit-picking and crying going on about these changes. Come on people, suck it up and adapt. You can do this, really with little effort. Bring on the changes.


You don't fix what is not broken. Crystals gymnics was something nobody asked changes for. Maximum configurability of ship's available space was a call to pilot's preference. That's freedom. Freedom does not need to be "fixed", expecially in EvE.
If we wanted freedom to be "fixed", we'd play WoW.


Edit:

Other example of freedom.

If I want to configure i.e. an Hurricane I can fit for armor tank, shield tank, buffer tank, instacane, AC fit, artillery fit, WEB + point fit.
I can even fit it to mine gas or (not really needed any more) tractor and salvage wrecks.

If tomorrow some hooligan decides to WoW-ize it so that an Hurricane will only be able to hold 100 ammo and exclusively armor tank and use ACs, then I'll do the same fuss in there as I am doing today in here, despite I could just use a Cyclone instead.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2012-08-01 00:40:03 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Anvil44 wrote:

If you are in high-sec space, you are only mining maybe 3 or 4 ore types and if you are in a fleet, the same principal applies. Try to compliment each others work. I seriously am floored at the nit-picking and crying going on about these changes. Come on people, suck it up and adapt. You can do this, really with little effort. Bring on the changes.


You don't fix what is not broken. Crystals gymnics was something nobody asked changes for. Maximum configurability of ship's available space was a call to pilot's preference. That's freedom. Freedom does not need to be "fixed", especially in EvE.
If we wanted freedom to be "fixed", we'd play WoW.

Apparently freedom does need fixed from time to time. Adding fuel bays in certain ships comes to mind.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Edit:

Other example of freedom.

If I want to configure i.e. an Hurricane I can fit for armor tank, shield tank, buffer tank, instacane, AC fit, artillery fit, WEB + point fit.
I can even fit it to mine gas or (not really needed any more) tractor and salvage wrecks.

If tomorrow some hooligan decides to WoW-ize it so that an Hurricane will only be able to hold 100 ammo and exclusively armor tank and use ACs, then I'll do the same fuss in there as I am doing today in here, despite I could just use a Cyclone instead.

We've always had limitations. And no, those limitations don't force you into a role, but they do require sacrifices at times including moving away from a particular hull. I can shield tank a harbinger but I'd probably be better off in a drake. And no matter how hard I try that magepulse raven won't seem manifest for me. It's the same here. Also there is the fact that it's seemingly intended that the hulk be nerfed in some capacities. You have a clear best and that is being eliminated. Who knows, maybe there will be some give in the next revision, but IMHO is shouldn't be much as it risks placing the hulk right back on it's pedestal.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#208 - 2012-08-01 00:40:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You don't fix what is not broken.
…which is why they're fixing barges and exhumers: because they're broken. They are a linear progression towards one ship to rule them all. This is bad game design and it's being fixed to be a two-tier selection between three different roles (and one tier is not necessarily better than the other — there are still benefits to the lower tier).

The Hulk is being fixed so it is no longer the ultimate solo mining ship, because that role is now meant for the Mack. This fix includes add in dependencies that make it suboptimal to try to do everything on your own — dependencies that are very easily worked around if there are more people available to share the load or to perform logistics tasks.

You are still free to equip the Hulk for purpose you want to use it, but it will now perform best if that purpose aligns with its role as a fleet mining ship. This is exactly how every other ship in the game works. It will have gaps in its abilities, just like any other ship, and just like those, the gaps can (and are intended to) be filled with complementary ships that are fit for other purposes.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#209 - 2012-08-01 00:55:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:

The Hulk is being fixed so it is no longer the ultimate solo mining ship, because that role is now meant for the Mack. This fix includes add in dependencies that make it suboptimal to try to do everything on your own — dependencies that are very easily worked around if there are more people available to share the load or to perform logistics tasks.


- Most fragile, requires defense / fleet
- Smallest cargo, requires fleet

Those were plenty drawbacks enough.

Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks => profitability / accounts drops to Mackinaw levels and Mackinaw does not have any drawback to begin with. That's your fantastic balance at work.
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#210 - 2012-08-01 00:56:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tippia wrote:

The Hulk is being fixed so it is no longer the ultimate solo mining ship, because that role is now meant for the Mack. This fix includes add in dependencies that make it suboptimal to try to do everything on your own — dependencies that are very easily worked around if there are more people available to share the load or to perform logistics tasks.


- Most fragile, requires defense / fleet
- Smallest cargo, requires fleet

Those were plenty drawbacks enough.

Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks => profitability / accounts drops to Mackinaw levels and Mackinaw does not have any drawback to begin with. That's your fantastic balance at work.


Why can't you use a Mack or Skiff when solo?
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#211 - 2012-08-01 01:00:57 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Lilliana Stelles wrote:
Hulks aren't meant for soloing. Use a mackinaw, which requires less crystals.

In a hulk, you can just refit off the orca.


no you can't! my alt can't see in the corp hangar of my main's orca. even worse if you're in an npc corp because you can't even get roles to alleviate this problem.

even worse on multi-corp ops.


Consolidation is a good thing.

As is getting out of the noob corp once you know how to play.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#212 - 2012-08-01 01:03:07 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tippia wrote:

The Hulk is being fixed so it is no longer the ultimate solo mining ship, because that role is now meant for the Mack. This fix includes add in dependencies that make it suboptimal to try to do everything on your own — dependencies that are very easily worked around if there are more people available to share the load or to perform logistics tasks.


- Most fragile, requires defense / fleet
- Smallest cargo, requires fleet

Those were plenty drawbacks enough.

Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks => profitability / accounts drops to Mackinaw levels and Mackinaw does not have any drawback to begin with. That's your fantastic balance at work.


Sounds like a good thing to me. One step closer to fixing the alt problem.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#213 - 2012-08-01 01:08:45 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
- Most fragile, requires defense / fleet
- Smallest cargo, requires fleet

Those were plenty drawbacks enough.
…but that second drawback means that the inability to carry every crystal under the moon is moot — you get more than enough space to carry what you need.

Quote:
Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks
…neither of which is necessary if you plan it properly. Use complementary loadouts and/or have one of the haulers or defenders in the group act as waiter. Unless you pay absolutely no attention to what you're doing, the crystal breaks should be the same as they are now.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#214 - 2012-08-01 01:09:04 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks => profitability / accounts drops to Mackinaw levels and Mackinaw does not have any drawback to begin with. That's your fantastic balance at work.


Sounds like a good thing to me. One step closer to fixing the alt problem.


...by adding a new alt to carry the stuff?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2012-08-01 01:13:06 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Mechael wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Waste 1 more account just to play waiter + dead time due to more cystal breaks => profitability / accounts drops to Mackinaw levels and Mackinaw does not have any drawback to begin with. That's your fantastic balance at work.


Sounds like a good thing to me. One step closer to fixing the alt problem.


...by adding a new alt to carry the stuff?

Or, if it's that big an issue, a mack.
Anvil44
Quantshure
#216 - 2012-08-01 01:22:45 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


You don't fix what is not broken. Crystals gymnics was something nobody asked changes for. Maximum configurability of ship's available space was a call to pilot's preference. That's freedom. Freedom does not need to be "fixed", expecially in EvE.
If we wanted freedom to be "fixed", we'd play WoW.


Edit:

Other example of freedom.

If I want to configure i.e. an Hurricane I can fit for armor tank, shield tank, buffer tank, instacane, AC fit, artillery fit, WEB + point fit.
I can even fit it to mine gas or (not really needed any more) tractor and salvage wrecks.

If tomorrow some hooligan decides to WoW-ize it so that an Hurricane will only be able to hold 100 ammo and exclusively armor tank and use ACs, then I'll do the same fuss in there as I am doing today in here, despite I could just use a Cyclone instead.

Sadly, you can't really compare combat ships with mining ships, that's comparing apples to oranges, but to stay in context, I will give it the ol' college try.
First off, our freedom has not been taken away. I am free to mine with large ore hold capacity, a tanky ship or a max yield ship. Saying we can't do all in one ship virtually equates to taking away choice as then everyone would use the same ship and we would have one mining ship, one PvE ship, one PvP ship, one freighter, one indy...you get the idea. Diversity can equal freedom but ONLY if there is a real reason for diversity. In other words, trade offs. The trade off for using a Skiff is that I can't hold as much as a Mack and can't vacuum as many rocks/ice as a Hulk.
Secondly, if we look at your comparison of combat ship holding ammo vs mining ship holding crystals, then the only reasonable and useful way to compare them is the amount of time you can get out of a hold full of 'ammo'. I have no doubt that a mining ship can use it's 'ammo' for a much longer time than virtually any combat ship. So I think the mining ships cargo hold will be adequate to the task at hand. Especially if you are going to compare it to a typical combat ship.

I may not like you or your point of view but you have a right to voice it.

Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#217 - 2012-08-01 01:25:56 UTC
people mine?

O.o...
AdmiralJohn
The Unknown Bar and Pub
#218 - 2012-08-01 04:17:15 UTC
ITT: Tippia spewing common sense over everyone and everything, while two buttmad miners complain that they will have to make choices and maybe even have to play with others in a game that is about making choices and playing with others.
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#219 - 2012-08-01 04:18:56 UTC
AdmiralJohn wrote:
ITT: Tippia spewing common sense over everyone and everything, while two buttmad miners complain that they will have to make choices and maybe even have to play with others in a game that is about making choices and playing with others.


I think the OP wants to have a ship that is the best yield, tank, and hauler. That is a dumb idea and won't happen, and he knows it.
Dave Stark
#220 - 2012-08-01 06:24:44 UTC
AdmiralJohn wrote:
ITT: Tippia spewing common sense over everyone and everything, while two buttmad miners complain that they will have to make choices and maybe even have to play with others in a game that is about making choices and playing with others.


except the current situation with crystals already involved choice and the new system doesn't and is just pure bad.
i know you guys don't mine much since you have tech but that's no excuse for ignorance.