These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[September] Mining Barge and Exhumer tweaks

First post
Author
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
#221 - 2016-08-26 21:26:36 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
There are lots of ideas. Ideas aren't the bottleneck. There are also people who are paid I'm sure a not unattractive salary to address these issues. The bottleneck is getting things moving where those people start looking at the problems with current mining mechanics, and start considering/adapting the plethora of ideas out there. Yeah I have some thoughts, but I don't claim they are the only way to do it.



Question is still out there: Why is so much effort being put into making a bad process look shinier, while also not addressing some of the problems in that process, be it by using my super plus extra awesome mining idea or that guy over there's?


EDIT: Unless when those structures are launched, mining barges and industrial ships are just going to be completely obsolete and 0 point whatsoever in flying them, those same bad mining mechanics are still going to exist.

To fix these issues, you must have a decent solution that won't break the game. I actually believe that CCP isn't going to kill off Mining barges with the new industrial structures. It'll compliment them if anything!

I'm leaning on 2-3 Industrial structures, 1-2 will be dedicated towards construction and reprocessing whilst the other will be for Moon Goo. Which is easy to figure out! Seeing how CCP is going to be removing POSs, and with that...the ONLY way to acquire Moon Goo....thus T2 manufacturing. So, what structure that we're aware of that can take over that role? Maybe something to do with Drilling in a Platform...form!

I highly doubt CCP will release an asteroid belt vacuum cleaner structure...
Mark O'Helm
Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt
#222 - 2016-08-26 23:26:08 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:
Uriam Khanid wrote:
Gunrunner1775 wrote:
Uriam Khanid wrote:
2 years ago (Kronos?/july 2014) you add ''strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses'' to barges and exhumers.
Now you are removing them. Why?!



CCP Fozzie wrote:
As part of this change we are increasing the yield of all barge-sized strip miners and ice harvesters, which cancels out the changes to hardpoints and bonuses on the Barges and Exhumers



???? what the hell is it???Question
little (just small) explanation: CCP return what they remove 2 years ago.



Well how I just worked it out above, it's a nerf to Ice mining at least. The yield is exactly the same, but the new version needs an extra 91s to fill a skiff.

I haven't done the ore timings/yield yet but I'll get to them.

I tried it on sisi. My skiff will be 0.02 sec faster per block ice.

"Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen." (Ein Single)

"Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind." (Einer, dem es egal ist)

LTC Vuvovich
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#223 - 2016-08-27 00:55:33 UTC  |  Edited by: LTC Vuvovich
Hahahaha....

As career-mining goes and from my personal point of view... wouldn't it be easier CCP if you just decided to erase half of all the ice and asteroids belts in existence from everywhere...? I mean why don't you just **** it all up completely? If there is too much mining going on and the markets are just too fuckin glut with ores, minerals and the like... seems to me there is either too many peeps mining or... there is just simply too much **** out there to be mined. Take your freakin pick. Why have you allowed mining asteroids and ice to continue on in this game anyway? You've done just about everything you can think of to control & curtail mining as a whole, and you have belittled every player whom has ever trained both direct and indirectly related mining skills to Level 5. (A fact which any Rorqual pilot could attest to)

It is so typical of you CCP... nerf the **** that really matters and beef up or adjust a lot of crap that has no real positive impact on mining. Oh sure... kudos to the art department... Barges and Exhumers are going to look awesome...but what good is a pretty ship if it cant mine worth a ****. I am also at a loss trying to figure out how you could even think of allowing any mining vessel's capabilities to ever come close to those of a Hulk's capabilities. Back in the day... when I first started mining seriously... nothing... could out mine a Hulk and I do not believe anything should. The Hulk is SUPPOSED to be mother of ALL mining vessels... so why cant you just leave it that way CCP? I believe CCP that it is high time that you return some of the respect that you've taken away from miner's and their mining vessels.

So please CCP... spare me and could we just dispense with all the fanfare and hoopalah, cuz I'm getting to the point I am like... ' Thank you sir may I have another?'

Regrettably Yours,
LTC Vuvovich
FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#224 - 2016-08-27 01:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Cold
Coralas wrote:


in my opinion, native EHP is a completely irrelevent stat, beyond its influence on fitted stats - which we've already determined is not excessive.



It's relevant in two contexts, only one of which I've pointed out, and I've already given ample evidence to support my claim which you've been unable to refute. Another issue is that for other ships that wish to fit buffer tanks, there's a secondary trade-off unrelated to the fitting cost of the modules, which is the sig radius and agility penalties associated with extenders and plates respectively. This relates to my prior points about the skiff being immune to fitting trade-offs that other ships are subject to.

Quote:
Nobody flies around presuming that honor tanks are fitted, its just a suprise when the target melts.


Also wrong. Prepared gankers either ship scan their targets to determine the feasibility of an attack, or bring more dps than the maximum possible tank of the ship they're targeting.

Quote:

Yours, where you keep wanting each and every mining ship, to do each and every mining role, which is confusing, ruins d-scan as an intel tool, makes their roles within mining overlap and makes even just figuring out what people have in your own mining fleet, impossible without checking the fittings of every ship in the fleet.


Wrong again. Several times now you've stated this, and in all of which you're inventing a narrative that I've not advocated. In fact, I've advocated that each ship have a range of possible values and that care should be taken to ensure that they don't overlap, or at least, overlap as minimally as possible. If you desire that members of your fleet adhere to a specific fitting doctrine, then it's your prerogative and burden to ensure that they comply. Just like combat fleets in every other class of ship.


Quote:
There is no logical difference from knowing the role of a module, vs knowing the role of a hull. Do you see why I think what you are saying is bizzare now ? If a miner has gotten to the point that they understand what all 6 barges are for, that is entirely equivalent knowledge to knowing what an LSE is.


The role of other ships is in large place determined by the modules that are fitted to it. A pocket rocket rail rax has a different role to a dual rep thorax, which is different than a plated dual web thorax. Much of pvp is understanding the potential of every ship you encounter and knowing how modules affect the the stats of a ship and thus its role is critical to this understanding. For mining barges, a large part of this is absent and it's not unreasonable to expect that they conform to the norms of other ships.

Quote:
Guess who fleeted with them, guess who's max leadership, implanted orca pilot sat at a safe boosting for an hour a day in their system. Guess who switched to a ****ing skiff to defend when the regular CASMA booster logged in. guess who flew that skiff to the retrievers in the fleet when gankers turned up. Guess who showed them what a skiff was for by example. Guess who discussed fittings with them, guess who discussed yields with them, guess who pointed them to cerlestes to figure out which ore is the most valuable so they spent most of their time not mining the wrong ore, guess who donated ventures to newbies if they lost them. Guess who was telling them to set the gankers to red in their overview.

Guess who was on the npc corp chat telling people about CASMA, how to get boosts, and where to be fleeted, and thus where to begin cooperating with other players. Even though I haven't mined for years, I still tell new players where to get boosts to this very day.

ie the role of fixing the knowledge of miners is not something that the slotting of exhumers solves. that role is a task for players, its a task I've done, and its a task I still do.


Yes I see now, CCP is handing out exhumer skills on trials, putting newbies in skiffs, spawning vast amounts of plag in the starter system, undocking for them, and firing their strips for them, and they are figuring out none of the inbetween, not losing any ships on the way, and not figuring out for themselves what the skiff is for, and they are earning 50m+ an hour on trial from the getgo like I did with this character in a frigate doing combat exploration, where the only bad thing that ever happened to me was hecates being faster than me to the bloody loot.

Because its fair that a destroyer kills every cruiser in the game, in the 16-25 seconds that it takes concord to drop the donuts, even if the player has gone through all the bother of learning about the ship, earning the money for the ship and the skills in a hitpointless barge, and absolutely, whatever else happens, the gankers shouldn't have to think about their fittings, because a catalyst should always automatically win. Your argument is entirely reversable.


I'm happy that you're taking the time to help and teach other players how to mine. Taking initiative and making content grows the game for everyone and I don't think that your contributions are wasted. However, many highsec players, and miners in particular, have shown themselves over the years to be unwilling to conform to what the rest of the game base endures. Fitting a boat is one of those things.

You also need to understand that I'm not asking for miners to get nothing in return for this. More available mining upgrades will serve to reward those that are the best in their craft and to enable the people that are passionate about it to have deeper, more meaningful game play.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#225 - 2016-08-27 04:59:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Khan Wrenth wrote:
2: That logic means they don't need skiffs or tank. Even if they're out in null...if they're not willing to lower M3 to field a few combat ships to take care of rats...


well no skiffs still make seance as no amount of a defense fleet can help you if you are alphaed off immediately (this is something a small blops gang can do to macks/hulks)
Lugh Crow-Slave
#226 - 2016-08-27 05:08:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:



or we can just do what decent groups do now and have other ships built for those roles do that and keep our miners spect to mining


if you cant lower you m3 to put a pilot into a basi for RR or a falcon for e-war that's your choice.


Its not the fact you lower your M3 per hour its the fact that you have people sitting with the miners doing nothing and earning nothing. This is why nobody flys logi in a mining fleet or parks a combat fleet with them, they have nothing to do. Giving the ability to the miners themselves means the defense and the logi are the very people who are mining.



what do you mean? we have managed it plenty

for example

having them in belt while we are running anoms

or having them fit with a cyno while we are doing a blops op

I suppose with the latter they could be attacked while we jumped at another target but we have yet to have that issue

there are plenty of things security can do to keep busy and make isk w/o having to sit in the belt picking their nose
Kalido Raddi
Crown Mineworks
Goonswarm Federation
#227 - 2016-08-27 05:34:07 UTC
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
As someone who mines, I can tell you that the changes CCP wants to put forth is not going to do squat. The Retriever / Mackinaw will still be #1 and #2 and maybe swap places. The Hulk will still be #3, and the Skiff / Procurer will still be #4 and #5. Why, is because, ore hold, trumps yeild, trumps tank. Ore hold means you can be at the coal-face longer without having to zip back and forth wasting time not mining.

Yield is a secondary concern, yield can almost make up for the time zipping back and forth not mining. The Hulk, King of yeild only manages the #3 spot because its tiny ore hold hampers it except in large industrial concerns with a large number of players. You will note I said players not characters. The single player highsec corp with 10 to 15 characters out mining wants to ALT-TAB as little as possible. This means the Retriever and Mackinaw reign even though the Hulks would out pace them in yeild. To much fiddling with timing to jetison ore and coordinating ore haulers make the Hulk a multi player fleet ship.

Tank is an afterthought for most miners. On the rare time you do get ganked you are only out about one hours worth of mining if you are flying a single Retriever. A single player, running ten mining characters, can make up a ganked Retriever in just over six minutes. A Skiff or Procurer doesn't have the ore bay of the Retriever or Mackinaw so the drawback of having to juggle ALT-TAB'ing doesn't ovecome the greater protection the hulls provide.

I'm sorry, but CCP, baltec1, and many other 'helpful' individuals in this thread, totaly miss the mark on what actual miners want in a mining platform.


The Mackinaw is trash, flown by people who don't understand Mining. It sacrifices all the benefits of the Skiff for the luxury of only Jetcanning or transferring Ore half as often.

Personally I suspect that most Mackinaw pilots are AFK or even botting.

Under the current TQ implementation, 3 Hulks and a DST outperforms 4 Mackinaw, as the Hulks *never* have to dock up to deliver Ore. On SiSi, 3 Hulks and a DST is equal to 4.2 Mackinaw pilots, and the Hulks still never dock. Who spends more time zipping back and forth not mining now?

In addition, you put Remote Shield Boosters on your DST, so not only does the three Hulk & DST combination mine more than 4 Macks, it also tanks better.

As for "Tank is an afterthought for most miners" - no. Really, no. Battleship rats hit quite hard. Rat Dreadnoughts are terrifyingly dangerous. Tank is the difference between a lossmail and a warpout.

Hulk for mining gangs. Skiff for solo. Mackinaw if you don't understand what you are doing.

The only thing that's really going to change with this is that the Hulk will become the premier tool for Ice Rushes, as it will be the ship with the best cycle time.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#228 - 2016-08-27 06:00:05 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:


what do you mean? we have managed it plenty


It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.

Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#229 - 2016-08-27 06:32:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.

Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded.

I think you are making a big assumption that these people actually regularly do mining rather than afk boosting in highsec or manufacturing on stuff other people bring in.
I'm sure betting they don't spend all day guarding mining fleets on grid though.
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#230 - 2016-08-27 06:52:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Nasar Vyron
Scrap the idea of these do-nothing changes. Making the hulls resemble each other even more only makes the problem worse! How about.....


Remove Mining Laser and Ice Mining Upgrades entirely! Bake whatever bonuses CCP feels is justified for each into the hull or strip miners/mining lasers themselves.

Remove the tank per level bonuses on all barges/exhumers and give them the CPU and PG and adjust slot layouts to fit the replacement tank or whatever else they so desire. I would suggest reducing low slots to 2 tho across the board...

Add a new expanded ore hold mod that can only be fit to barges/exhumers (to prevent shenanigans with the Miasmos) possibly by reducing agility/increasing mass to compensate.

Add pinpointing ore scanners (midslot-think painter, but not able to stack effects) to increase yield for scanning ship on targeted/scanned roid while active. Possibly T1:5%/T2:10%/ORE:12% yield, ~5 second cycle, and ~50GJ activation. Make this effect boolean, it's happening or it's not and only for the ship using the module.

Give the Procurer/Skiff agility per level bonuses while giving the Covetor/Hulk cap usage bonus for the new scanners.

Allow Skiff/Hulk to keep cycle time bonuses.

Lastly, remove the Retriever and Mackinaw. Convert them in either direction.


Now if someone wants to tank, they have to give up yield as it shares the same slots. If they want to fit for yield then they have to give up cap stability and tank. If they want to sit in belt longer, they now give up the ability to quickly warp out or fit stabs. And remember if they fit stabs, they are reducing their already pitiful lock range and scan res, the trade-off already exists there.



The TLDR here is remove all these ridiculous baked in bonuses and modules any miner in their right mind will feel obligated to fit. Give options through altered fittings not baked in hull stats. Add new modules to allow the remaining hull/hulls to mimic to some degree what we see today but with strong trade-offs.
Kenrailae
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#231 - 2016-08-27 07:03:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenrailae
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.

Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded.

I think you are making a big assumption that these people actually regularly do mining rather than afk boosting in highsec or manufacturing on stuff other people bring in.
I'm sure betting they don't spend all day guarding mining fleets on grid though.




No, you're right, we don't spend all day mining. But when we DO mine, we DO keep characters on grid in combat/logistics ships. We DO keep cyno's burning while we do the 3 jumps from Igno to Jita, or use webbing alts where necessary, or keep ships nearby ready to act if needed. We also accept it as the cost of business because every barge we don't lose is one more we don't have to replace, and losing 1 or 2 people of yield is far and away a better bargain than losing barges for stupid reasons. You guys keep going on about a fleet of 14 unsupported exhumers getting roflstomped. Well it should have. It ignored every tool in the book for doing anything to keep itself alive. In Eve, the price of that is dying. Always has been. Mining fleets don't need special treatment swiss army knives. They need to use the tools at hand, to do the job they were designed to do.




You keep asking why we're choosing to be helpless. I'll answer you for the final time, then if you ask again, I'll have to re-assess my opinion of your reading comprehension: We are not helpless. We use the tools we have and protect our stuff. The exact same thing we've been telling 'Oh I got ganked nerf ganking threads' for years. That is the cost of business. We do not require ships that can do everything under the sun and in the ocean too. Ships like that will only become a future problem that we'll still be talking about in 3 years because now they can't be fit for max yield with all these 'useless' high slots and whatnot.


You want to fix the problem with mining?


Let's start by talking about the Bzzzzzzzzttttttttttttttt for hours on end.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#232 - 2016-08-27 07:15:03 UTC
Kalido Raddi wrote:
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
As someone who mines, I can tell you that the changes CCP wants to put forth is not going to do squat. The Retriever / Mackinaw will still be #1 and #2 and maybe swap places. The Hulk will still be #3, and the Skiff / Procurer will still be #4 and #5. Why, is because, ore hold, trumps yeild, trumps tank. Ore hold means you can be at the coal-face longer without having to zip back and forth wasting time not mining.

Yield is a secondary concern, yield can almost make up for the time zipping back and forth not mining. The Hulk, King of yeild only manages the #3 spot because its tiny ore hold hampers it except in large industrial concerns with a large number of players. You will note I said players not characters. The single player highsec corp with 10 to 15 characters out mining wants to ALT-TAB as little as possible. This means the Retriever and Mackinaw reign even though the Hulks would out pace them in yeild. To much fiddling with timing to jetison ore and coordinating ore haulers make the Hulk a multi player fleet ship.

Tank is an afterthought for most miners. On the rare time you do get ganked you are only out about one hours worth of mining if you are flying a single Retriever. A single player, running ten mining characters, can make up a ganked Retriever in just over six minutes. A Skiff or Procurer doesn't have the ore bay of the Retriever or Mackinaw so the drawback of having to juggle ALT-TAB'ing doesn't ovecome the greater protection the hulls provide.

I'm sorry, but CCP, baltec1, and many other 'helpful' individuals in this thread, totaly miss the mark on what actual miners want in a mining platform.


The Mackinaw is trash, flown by people who don't understand Mining. It sacrifices all the benefits of the Skiff for the luxury of only Jetcanning or transferring Ore half as often.

Personally I suspect that most Mackinaw pilots are AFK or even botting.

Under the current TQ implementation, 3 Hulks and a DST outperforms 4 Mackinaw, as the Hulks *never* have to dock up to deliver Ore. On SiSi, 3 Hulks and a DST is equal to 4.2 Mackinaw pilots, and the Hulks still never dock. Who spends more time zipping back and forth not mining now?

In addition, you put Remote Shield Boosters on your DST, so not only does the three Hulk & DST combination mine more than 4 Macks, it also tanks better.

As for "Tank is an afterthought for most miners" - no. Really, no. Battleship rats hit quite hard. Rat Dreadnoughts are terrifyingly dangerous. Tank is the difference between a lossmail and a warpout.

Hulk for mining gangs. Skiff for solo. Mackinaw if you don't understand what you are doing.

The only thing that's really going to change with this is that the Hulk will become the premier tool for Ice Rushes, as it will be the ship with the best cycle time.



Your quote about the Mack is pure rubbish, there's a reason it's top of the list.

You presume everyone has 4/5/6/7 accounts, whatever, not everyone has a full blown fleet. For solo guys in HS the Mack makes perfect sense, even for someone with 2 accounts it makes sense.

To base your post around everyone having 4 accounts is just wrong. Trust me, if you mined in Null, your Hulks would be docking. You put a DST on grid in null? Look at the guy in this thread who did that...boom. Hell, you'd be better off with a Miasmos to haul the ore back.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#233 - 2016-08-27 07:15:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:


what do you mean? we have managed it plenty


It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.

Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded.



I'm sorry if the CFC could never manage that but try dropping on an active fleet in Provi you have about 45 seconds from when your cyno de-cloaks to the first responders showing up on grid. (something that will be made irrelevant with the rorqu changes


put your miners at the end of the pipe go run anoms further down and have the miners keep an eye on the probe scanner for potential WHs


what you want is akin to letting haulers hold there own against attackers
Jayla May
Bedlam Corp.
#234 - 2016-08-27 07:15:42 UTC
Wait...what is this again? did CCP call this a revamp? These changes...
how will they effect the market value of the ships.

-The ore that is mined will be more valuable due to the devaluation of barges and profit margin to go into the negative.

-Every ship must be built in EVE online. If you make it harder for the producers to make the things that other people need to use to kill other stuff, your essentially shooting the mining business in the foot and telling us industrialists to walk it off.

-Like This only makes sense if CCP values what CODE and James 315 stand for. And that is for bot aspirant behavior to become less noticable.

-However, If a miner does not look like a well tuned mining machine going through cycles and coming back to chew through a belt, than the thousand of hours used to mine ores, refine minerals and turn those minerals into ships, ammo, modules and cold hard profitable isk is for nothing.

-The devaluation of the miner's opinion had gone too far.

~ Complete Mining Corporations and Alliances that fleet huge mining operations will stop and the effect will be felt galaxy wide.
-This means capital construction yards would no longer have materials to supply null sec wars, code would run out of miners to kill, and every corporation would lose billions in ISK because the best kind of [ORE] product is an Unsold [ORE] product.

-I invite you to the Fall 2016 Miner Strike(day Zero start). And watch as the economy collapses into turmoil.This is my vision. Spread the word.
.JM #minerstrike2016
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#235 - 2016-08-27 07:54:05 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:



I'm sorry if the CFC could never manage that but try dropping on an active fleet in Provi you have about 45 seconds from when your cyno de-cloaks to the first responders showing up on grid. (something that will be made irrelevant with the rorqu changes


The CFC in Dek had by far the best response times and firepower, they could dump a supercap fleet on your head fast enough to save ratting ishtars. The problem with the mining fleets is that they are so squishy they even by the time the call for help has gone out half of the fleet is well on way to being dead. A single solo bomber will rip apart 4 of the 6 barges before help can arrive.


Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

put your miners at the end of the pipe go run anoms further down and have the miners keep an eye on the probe scanner for potential WHs


what you want is akin to letting haulers hold there own against attackers


And what exactly is wrong with miners being responsible for their own defense? Everyone keeps on saying mining is boring, well no wonder if all they can do is chew on rocks or run away.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#236 - 2016-08-27 08:06:00 UTC
When do we get the Tech II Orca?

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#237 - 2016-08-27 08:06:33 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:

You keep asking why we're choosing to be helpless. I'll answer you for the final time, then if you ask again, I'll have to re-assess my opinion of your reading comprehension: We are not helpless. We use the tools we have and protect our stuff. The exact same thing we've been telling 'Oh I got ganked nerf ganking threads' for years. That is the cost of business. We do not require ships that can do everything under the sun and in the ocean too. Ships like that will only become a future problem that we'll still be talking about in 3 years because now they can't be fit for max yield with all these 'useless' high slots and whatnot.


You want to fix the problem with mining?


Let's start by talking about the Bzzzzzzzzttttttttttttttt for hours on end.


You have no tools to use. Two of the ships have literally no fitting options. All miners are doing is whining for more and more nerfs to keep them safe rather than demanding the ability to keep themselves safe. These ships are bad and promote the very attitude you are showing which is one of complete disconnection to the rest of the game. You are not having to make choices that everyone else has to make when fitting your ships, you are not working together because the ships simply do not promote working together. You do not actively look to join groups outside of highsec because you think null and lowsec organisations look down on you and you are right they do, but that is because as miners you have no understanding of basic game mechanics simply because the mining barges don't allow for you to learn them.

In six months time we will bright right back here with a 4th attempt at a barge rebalance.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#238 - 2016-08-27 08:11:04 UTC
Pls look @ the Mastery pages of the Mining ships too, a lot of stuff in those tabs does not belong in them.

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-

Lugh Crow-Slave
#239 - 2016-08-27 08:38:04 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:



I'm sorry if the CFC could never manage that but try dropping on an active fleet in Provi you have about 45 seconds from when your cyno de-cloaks to the first responders showing up on grid. (something that will be made irrelevant with the rorqu changes


The CFC in Dek had by far the best response times and firepower, they could dump a supercap fleet on your head fast enough to save ratting ishtars. The problem with the mining fleets is that they are so squishy they even by the time the call for help has gone out half of the fleet is well on way to being dead. A single solo bomber will rip apart 4 of the 6 barges before help can arrive.



even if that were true (it maybe if you are not using skiffs)

it will no longer be an issue once the rorqu changes hit
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#240 - 2016-08-27 08:53:29 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:


even if that were true (it maybe if you are not using skiffs)

it will no longer be an issue once the rorqu changes hit


It will in highsec, and every time you don't have a rorqual. These ships should not have to rely on a capital to actually work.