These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

** New Module Suggestion ** -- Mining Laser Optimization

Author
Mitt Rawmoney Rawmoney
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2015-11-04 21:54:16 UTC
The Concept is pretty simple:


- Mid slot Module
- Increases Mining laser range by x%

- Drawback

This module is self-balancing in the sense that it requires a mid-slot and inadvertently reduces your ehp or forces you to drop another utility module such as a survey scanner.

I think this would be a very interesting mod that would improve the quality of life for miners.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2 - 2015-11-04 22:02:21 UTC
might be best as a rig, with a cap use penalty
Mitt Rawmoney Rawmoney
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-11-04 22:16:17 UTC
Yea it could be a rig
Mitt Rawmoney Rawmoney
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2015-11-04 22:26:33 UTC
I think a rig with the drawback of reduced maximum shield capacity would be more balanced as not all mining barges would be effected by the capacitor penalty (i.e. skiffs / procurers) hulks would be hit the hardest due to the fact that they use 3 strip miners
Wolf Lafisques
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2015-11-05 00:20:15 UTC
Mitt Rawmoney Rawmoney wrote:
I think a rig with the drawback of reduced maximum shield capacity would be more balanced as not all mining barges would be effected by the capacitor penalty (i.e. skiffs / procurers) hulks would be hit the hardest due to the fact that they use 3 strip miners


But then you'll get all the care bears crying about how it'll be easier for gankers to kill them. This pleases me.Twisted

Supported.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2015-11-05 02:58:15 UTC
Choosing between optimizing weapons in exchange for lowered tank has always been an option for damage boats. I don't see why range can't be a factor for mining hulls as well..

Supported.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#7 - 2015-11-05 06:07:25 UTC
Could very well be a low-slot module instead.

Alternatively, it could be a script for the Mining Laser Upgrade, replacing the yield bonus for a range bonus.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2015-11-05 06:40:59 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
Could very well be a low-slot module instead.

Alternatively, it could be a script for the Mining Laser Upgrade, replacing the yield bonus for a range bonus.


Ehh. Low slots have always been specific to damage mods(ie yield), while mids and rigs focus primarily on range/tracking.
Sure, there are low slot mods to buff range AND tracking, but they don't get used that often, unless you're running short on mids and have a spare low.

Also,'if they're mid slot modules, they can be active mods, thus reducing the need for fitting or tanking related drawbacks.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#9 - 2015-11-05 07:45:20 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Could very well be a low-slot module instead.

Alternatively, it could be a script for the Mining Laser Upgrade, replacing the yield bonus for a range bonus.


Ehh. Low slots have always been specific to damage mods(ie yield), while mids and rigs focus primarily on range/tracking.
Sure, there are low slot mods to buff range AND tracking, but they don't get used that often, unless you're running short on mids and have a spare low.

Also,'if they're mid slot modules, they can be active mods, thus reducing the need for fitting or tanking related drawbacks.

The main reason they're used less often is because they are less useful.

Regardless, there's no reason a low-slot module couldn't be active (damage control comes to mind), nor would a useful module necessarily require drawbacks. Tracking enhancers and turret damage mods have none, and are less CPU intensive than mining laser upgrades are currently.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#10 - 2015-11-05 13:19:54 UTC
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#11 - 2015-11-05 13:25:03 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#12 - 2015-11-05 13:32:59 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Could very well be a low-slot module instead.

Alternatively, it could be a script for the Mining Laser Upgrade, replacing the yield bonus for a range bonus.


Ehh. Low slots have always been specific to damage mods(ie yield), while mids and rigs focus primarily on range/tracking.
Sure, there are low slot mods to buff range AND tracking, but they don't get used that often, unless you're running short on mids and have a spare low.

Also,'if they're mid slot modules, they can be active mods, thus reducing the need for fitting or tanking related drawbacks.

The main reason they're used less often is because they are less useful.

Regardless, there's no reason a low-slot module couldn't be active (damage control comes to mind), nor would a useful module necessarily require drawbacks. Tracking enhancers and turret damage mods have none, and are less CPU intensive than mining laser upgrades are currently.



dmg mods increase rate of fire which increases cap use.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#13 - 2015-11-05 13:41:11 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Could very well be a low-slot module instead.

Alternatively, it could be a script for the Mining Laser Upgrade, replacing the yield bonus for a range bonus.


Ehh. Low slots have always been specific to damage mods(ie yield), while mids and rigs focus primarily on range/tracking.
Sure, there are low slot mods to buff range AND tracking, but they don't get used that often, unless you're running short on mids and have a spare low.

Also,'if they're mid slot modules, they can be active mods, thus reducing the need for fitting or tanking related drawbacks.

The main reason they're used less often is because they are less useful.

Regardless, there's no reason a low-slot module couldn't be active (damage control comes to mind), nor would a useful module necessarily require drawbacks. Tracking enhancers and turret damage mods have none, and are less CPU intensive than mining laser upgrades are currently.



dmg mods increase rate of fire which increases cap use.

Not even a drawback.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#14 - 2015-11-05 14:25:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Felsusguy wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.


Currently the range on the lazers is balanced to reach their max when combined with max rorq boost and max hull level.

likewise mining anomos and belts are balanced around the max range achievable in that space.


the range of mining lasers were not just picked arbitrarily there is balance behind it


the longer my lasers the more ore i can mine in my sphere of influence

the more ore i can mine the less likely i will run out of ore in my sphere of influence before adding more ore to it by moving

this will overall improve my yield
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#15 - 2015-11-05 14:50:39 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.


Currently the range on the lazers is balanced to reach their max when combined with max rorq boost and max hull level.

likewise mining anomos and belts are balanced around the max range achievable in that space.


the range of mining lasers were not just picked arbitrarily there is balance behind it


the longer my lasers the more ore i can mine in my sphere of influence

the more ore i can mine the less likely i will run out of ore in my sphere of influence before adding more ore to it by moving

this will overall improve my yield

By a veritably small amount. If CCP were concerned about a moderate boost in mining range, they would not have made the Mining Laser Field Enhancement link so obscenely effective. In fact, I wouldn't even mind if they nerfed that in exchange for a local range boosting module. Do I really need my range nearly doubled from a single link?

And even then, if they made it a script to the Mining Laser Upgrade module then they wouldn't "need" to nerf anything, since forgoing yield would be enough of a balancing factor.

The way you format your posts is an eyesore, by the way.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2015-11-05 15:24:44 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.


Remember the freighter change? People though exactly as you are now when proposing fittings for them. See where it got us.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#17 - 2015-11-05 15:31:21 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.


Remember the freighter change? People though exactly as you are now when proposing fittings for them. See where it got us.

What, did they think they freighters were going to be exactly the same as before, but better?

A range upgrade module would take up room for other modules, and theoretically would only be a quality of life improvement. It is not the same as giving three extra slots to a ship that previously had none.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2015-11-05 15:35:00 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
You guys do know that this means the base ranges on the miners would have to be nerffed forcing you to use one of these mods to get the same range

No, that is not what that means. Even CCP couldn't possibly be that dumb.

Other modules receive that treatment for balance reasons. But mining range never hurt anyone.


Remember the freighter change? People though exactly as you are now when proposing fittings for them. See where it got us.

What, did they think they freighters were going to be exactly the same as before, but better?

A range upgrade module would take up room for other modules, and theoretically would only be a quality of life improvement. It is not the same as giving three extra slots to a ship that previously had none.


They though freighter would keep the same stats + added slots. Instead, they got nerfed stats + slots so you need to use the mods that have drawback to get the stats you used to have.

Your mining ships would then get a nerf to range with 1 mods required to get the range abck and 2 or more to gain any range over what you had.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#19 - 2015-11-05 15:42:10 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
They though freighter would keep the same stats + added slots. Instead, they got nerfed stats + slots so you need to use the mods that have drawback to get the stats you used to have.

Your mining ships would then get a nerf to range with 1 mods required to get the range abck and 2 or more to gain any range over what you had.

The two scenarios are entirely different, as I explained before.

That said, I wouldn't even mind if they nerfed this rather than the modules themselves.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2015-11-05 16:46:59 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
They though freighter would keep the same stats + added slots. Instead, they got nerfed stats + slots so you need to use the mods that have drawback to get the stats you used to have.

Your mining ships would then get a nerf to range with 1 mods required to get the range abck and 2 or more to gain any range over what you had.

The two scenarios are entirely different, as I explained before.

That said, I wouldn't even mind if they nerfed this rather than the modules themselves.


They will nerf the base stats because that's how they proceed. Accept that and then think hard if you want to push for that suggestion.
12Next page