Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3901
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 17:32:00 -
[31] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
"what we need is our legalized botting to become even easier" |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
187
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 17:34:00 -
[32] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
And if they want to go the other way, they can redo the yield bonus as a cycle time reduction, so that the "asteroid is depleted" notifications better line up with the asteroids popping.
I don't know, but I suspect, that a lot of semi-AFK Mack and Retriever pilots don't even notice that they've popped an asteroid until the strip miner cycle finally comes to an end and Aura pipes up to tell them. |
Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
752
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 17:37:00 -
[33] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
yes it does.
it takes about 2 seconds to start the lasers on a new asteroid, unless you've taken the dog for a walk or gone for a nap the mackinaw is the king at every type of mining that involves targeting floaty things in space. i dread to think how many series of tv shows i've watched while mining ore in a mackinaw while paying 0 attention to the eve client other than when i hear "asteroid depleted" Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
752
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 17:37:00 -
[34] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
And if they want to go the other way, they can redo the yield bonus as a cycle time reduction, so that the "asteroid is depleted" notifications better line up with the asteroids popping. I don't know, but I suspect, that a lot of semi-AFK Mack and Retriever pilots don't even notice that they've popped an asteroid until the strip miner cycle finally comes to an end and Aura pipes up to tell them.
considering that's the only way to tell unless you want to sacrifice a mid slot for a scanner that needs manually refreshing every cycle.... Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
657
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 18:08:00 -
[35] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
"what we need is our legalized botting to become even easier"
Then they release the Sreegs and ban people for making money while afk! How cunning of them. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
1462
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 18:16:00 -
[36] - Quote
Can somebody explain to me why the mineral price index is over the consumer price index? Why doesn't that put every industrial out of business?
|
Freezehunter
325
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 18:16:00 -
[37] - Quote
Dusty Meg wrote:Freezehunter wrote:Maybe I don't understand macroeconomics, but if people have been mining so damn much compared to the past, how come **** is like 40%-60% more expensive than I remember it 2 years ago if there is such an ore surplus in the system?
Shouldn't prices be going DOWN with all these miners? Because the main source of minerals back then got took out, The drone alloys
Good point, I didn't take that into consideration.
So basically, if they wouldn't have made the barge changes, the situation would be even worse regarding ship prices?
Damn... Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom. |
Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries Orion Consortium
57
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 18:47:00 -
[38] - Quote
People are still building Procurers? Retrievers I can kind of see, but with the selling price of Procurers being one fifth the build cost, why would anyone build them? |
Rick Rymes
Red Federation
11
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 19:13:00 -
[39] - Quote
Molic Blackbird wrote:People are still building Procurers? Retrievers I can kind of see, but with the selling price of Procurers being one fifth the build cost, why would anyone build them?
I imagine people are expecting another Hulkageddon, Procurer would become the barge of choice overnight. |
Yuki Kasumi
Some names are just stupid
3
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 19:26:00 -
[40] - Quote
Rick Rymes wrote:Molic Blackbird wrote:People are still building Procurers? Retrievers I can kind of see, but with the selling price of Procurers being one fifth the build cost, why would anyone build them? I imagine people are expecting another Hulkageddon, Procurer would become the barge of choice overnight.
Then if thats the case, BUY them, not build them for 4x the price :) |
|
Jen Takhesis
The Scope Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 19:30:00 -
[41] - Quote
Rick Rymes wrote:
I imagine people are expecting another Hulkageddon, Procurer would become the barge of choice overnight.
I'm hoping for a Smack a Mack' first, followed by another Hulkageddon. |
Buzz Skywalker
Magnificent Mayhem Mining
6
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 19:34:00 -
[42] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:I believe the hulk figures also show that the mining changes - which were based on max yield being the thing that miners should "pay" the most for - were misguided. What miners love - and what they're choosing - is legalized botting: with the current mackinaw setups they need about two minutes of attention per hour. It's clear these need to be rebalanced with this in mind: to get your legalized botting setup you should be the least gank-resistant, not the second-most, while hulks should have the second-most gank resistance. The yield differential isn't sufficient to overcome the cargo hold on the Mackinaw or the tank on the Skiff for any but the most dedicated miners. I'd bet that most miners in Mackinaws don't even have perfect mining skills. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
1181
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 20:02:00 -
[43] - Quote
That's a big part of the problem, there's just not enough difference between the Hulk/Covetor and the Mack/Retriever. The Hulk and Covetors need about another 5-10% yield/hr over the Mack/Retty in order for them to be preferred for at-the-keyboard mining.
Then there's the whole issue that the preferred mining pair is now a hulk+mack where the mack acts as the hauler for the mini-fleet. The T1 industrial ships can't haul that much, and the Orca's 50k m3 ore bay is now pretty much a joke (that needs to be boosted up into the 400-600k m3 range). |
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
259
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 20:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
Hey CCP, you forgot to mention how you decided it was best if nobody built T1 barges, like the Procurer ever again....since you still refuse to change the scrap rates, why would someone build one when it costs 5x more than they can buy it for on the market? http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
Smodab Ongalot
Shadows Of The Federation Drunk 'n' Disorderly
132
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 20:35:00 -
[45] - Quote
Panhead4411 wrote:Hey CCP, you forgot to mention how you decided it was best if nobody built T1 barges, like the Procurer ever again....since you still refuse to change the scrap rates, why would someone build one when it costs 5x more than they can buy it for on the market?
They actually thought this one out, more so than your idiotic response.....
What are you suggesting about scrap rates? Are you suggesting that we should be able to reprocess ships and get more minerals back than we put in?
Because I can't see any issues with that....
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
664
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 20:44:00 -
[46] - Quote
Smodab Ongalot wrote:Panhead4411 wrote:Hey CCP, you forgot to mention how you decided it was best if nobody built T1 barges, like the Procurer ever again....since you still refuse to change the scrap rates, why would someone build one when it costs 5x more than they can buy it for on the market? They actually thought this one out, more so than your idiotic response..... What are you suggesting about scrap rates? Are you suggesting that we should be able to reprocess ships and get more minerals back than we put in? Because I can't see any issues with that....
Beyond the greed part. He is saying that no one is going to be making procurers when the market is glutted for the next 2 years. Which is what happened in PI also. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
192
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 21:01:00 -
[47] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Then there's the whole issue that the preferred mining pair is now a hulk+mack where the mack acts as the hauler for the mini-fleet. The T1 industrial ships can't haul that much, and the Orca's 50k m3 ore bay is now pretty much a joke (that needs to be boosted up into the 400-600k m3 range).
That would be a great opportunity to split the Orca up into the four or so ships that it's always wanted to be, with the Orca remaining behind as a sort of jack-of-all-trades (because that's quite useful).
If there was a fitted ship hauler, and a flying corp hangar, and a flying ore bay, and a "little freighter" in addition to the ordinary Orca, the ORE Industrial Command Ship skill would be even more valuable.
In addition to changing the yield bonus to a cycle time reduction, I'd support nerfing the yield on Retrievers and Mackinaws, maybe even down to parity with the Skiff. That way, there's a more difficult choice between tank, convenience or yield. The alternative is buffing the Hulk, and I don't really see the need for that. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2209
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 21:17:00 -
[48] - Quote
From the point of view of a miner, here's how the ships pan out:
- Skiff has a huge tank, huge ore bay, suitable for AFK mining in hostile hisec
- Mackinaw has a gigantic ore bay, enough tank that only the really dedicated gankers are going to attack it in hostile hisec, and folks in lowsec are going to suspect that you're bait, not just a solo miner
- Hulk doesn't have enough extra yield to make it worth using over a Mackinaw
The tank on the Mackinaw is insanely good. The idea of giving the mining ship with the largest ore bay such a huge tank was obviously aimed smack bang at AFK miners. The catch is that its yield is far too good, so even when you are actively running a fleet the preference is to have the Orca parked somewhere "safe" providing the mining boosts (e.g.: snuggled in a POS, keeping the mining foreman mindlink safe from gankers) with all the miners in Mackinaws. The time taken to warp all the Mackinaws to station and back to belt is more than made up by the time saved over warping a hulk to station and back to belt.
To redress this imbalance, the Mackinaw should have the lowest yield. This could be achieved by simply halving the Retriever & Mackinaw bonus to strip miner cycle time. It's designed for "safe" AFK mining. AFK miners should not get the same rewards as at-keyboard miners. If you want more yield, pick the mining ship with the medium yield and medium ore bay (Procurer/Skiff), or the mining ship with the maximum yield.
The Mackinaw/Retriever is severely overpowered/imbalanced. Halving its cycle time bonus would be a good first step at balancing it with the other mining vessels.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
757
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 21:35:00 -
[49] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:The tank on the Mackinaw is insanely good. The idea of giving the mining ship with the largest ore bay such a huge tank was obviously aimed smack bang at AFK miners. The catch is that its yield is far too good,
this is the crux of it, really.
if you look at each ship individually, it should be excellent at one thing, average at another, and terrible at something else.
let's look at the skiff. best tank, check 1 for excellent at one thing. medium ore bay, check 2 for average at something, lowest yield so check 3 for being terrible at something.
so, why doesn't this hold with the mackinaw and hulk? the mackinaw is terrible at nothing. it has the best ore bay, and medium yield AND tank. the hulk on the other hand is mediocre at nothing, it's got the best yield then the worst tank and ore bay. just as a quick point, if you rate being the "best" at something as a 3, average as a 2, and worst as a 1. and work out how many points each ship scores, it's obvious that the mackinaw wins with 7 points for being the worst at nothing, followed by the skiff's 6 points for having one of each, and the hulk trails behind with 5 as it has to "terrible" stats.
a suggestion i've seen before, and one i like therefore i'm "stealing" it is that the hulk and mackinaw's tank should be switched. if you want to go and leave your mackinaw afk mining the price should be a paper thin ship. besides, if you've got so much empty space inside your ship there's not going to be much space for armour plates and structure is there? if we go back to my point above about being good at one thing, average at another, and terrible at another then this problem would also be solved by the tank switch. the mackinaw's tank goes from average to terrible, and the hulk's goes from terrible to average, and thus all the exhumers score a 6.
now you have a choice between high risk afk easy mode, or slightly safer higher reward afk-less mining, or super safe semi-afk mining at the cost of yield. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
994
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 22:34:00 -
[50] - Quote
Buzz Skywalker wrote:Weaselior wrote:I believe the hulk figures also show that the mining changes - which were based on max yield being the thing that miners should "pay" the most for - were misguided. What miners love - and what they're choosing - is legalized botting: with the current mackinaw setups they need about two minutes of attention per hour. It's clear these need to be rebalanced with this in mind: to get your legalized botting setup you should be the least gank-resistant, not the second-most, while hulks should have the second-most gank resistance. The yield differential isn't sufficient to overcome the cargo hold on the Mackinaw or the tank on the Skiff for any but the most dedicated miners. I'd bet that most miners in Mackinaws don't even have perfect mining skills.
That's exactly it. As I said - isk:effort (or isk:attention, if you prefer) is what rules mining, because it's boring. Prior to the changes the hulk ruled because the only way to increase that ratio was to increase your overall yield, and this was mistaken for favoring yield over all. The fact that the tank is "good enough" to dissuade casual suicide ganking is just a bonus.
In light of that, I'd absolutely support the idea of swapping the tank on the mack and hulk, though it's a quick fix, a bandaid; something more nuanced should probably happen for the long term. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
|
HxChippiewill
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 22:48:00 -
[51] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:I believe the hulk figures also show that the mining changes - which were based on max yield being the thing that miners should "pay" the most for - were misguided. What miners love - and what they're choosing - is legalized botting: with the current mackinaw setups they need about two minutes of attention per hour. It's clear these need to be rebalanced with this in mind: to get your legalized botting setup you should be the least gank-resistant, not the second-most, while hulks should have the second-most gank resistance. Actually this is fairly misguided, the highest yield solo mining is the mackinaw regardless due to transit times. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1222
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 23:31:00 -
[52] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:The large ore hold may make the Mack the king of ice mining, but not ore mining. But the Mack was the ice mining king before, so whats new? In the case of ore, its a rare high sec roid field where you can aim 2 strips at 2 roids then 24 minutes later return to a full hold. Many roids deplete in a single strip cycle. If you really want to see mineral prices go down, CCP should refactor roid fields to having fewer roids, each with more ore. That way ore can be mined like ice is mined, with little effort.
yes it does. it takes about 2 seconds to start the lasers on a new asteroid, unless you've taken the dog for a walk or gone for a nap the mackinaw is the king at every type of mining that involves targeting floaty things in space. i dread to think how many series of tv shows i've watched while mining ore in a mackinaw while paying 0 attention to the eve client other than when i hear "asteroid depleted" If you are watching TV with the keyboard on your lap, you are hardly AFK. Its right there, on your lap. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
673
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 23:39:00 -
[53] - Quote
Hey, maybe if CCP listened to some of the smarter suggestions out there about fixing the production and mining systems, we wouldn't be looking at AFK highsec mining in Mackinaws being the pinnacle of industry. But CCP doesn't. And we are. EveO is a circus train that is for bafflingly unclear reasons also carrying tanks of chlorine gas,-ácrashing and exploding in the middle of a small midwestern town. -áCalling it a mere train wreck gives neither the entertainment nor the horror it offers its proper due. |
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
128
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 23:41:00 -
[54] - Quote
So, let me see if I can summarize without all the CCP Hype/FUD:
1) PLEX prices continued to go up (a lot);
2) Consumer prices only decreased 1% for the year (*unethusiastic thumb twirl*);
3) ***All*** gains in mining use is in high sec with afk mining ships, notably the Retriever and its big brother (wait, wasn't CCP trying to put an end to this kind of botting?)
4) Mining ship production spiked briefly (but we hear nothing about subsequent sales as people realized their mistake?)
3) Morphite prices went up over January (forget the decrease with the changes)
So, same old, same old. Except we have more botters. |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
673
|
Posted - 2012.12.06 23:48:00 -
[55] - Quote
I forgot to add: congratulations to the economist working for CCP for his smoke and mirrors abilities. The data is clearly selectively taken to show what CCP wants to say, and not what was going on. EveO is a circus train that is for bafflingly unclear reasons also carrying tanks of chlorine gas,-ácrashing and exploding in the middle of a small midwestern town. -áCalling it a mere train wreck gives neither the entertainment nor the horror it offers its proper due. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
839
|
Posted - 2012.12.07 00:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
Haifisch Zahne wrote: 4) Mining ship production spiked briefly (but we hear nothing about subsequent sales as people realized their mistake?)
What mistake?
The mistake which will, eventually, give me a ten fold return on investment?
Sure, It'll take a fair time. But it's pretty much no risk. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator, invention chance calculator, isk/m3 Ore chart-á and other 'useful' utilities.As well as mysql and CSV/XLS conversions of the Static Data Extract. |
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
128
|
Posted - 2012.12.07 00:41:00 -
[57] - Quote
I don't mine. Did it when I started Eve and gave it a go lately out of boredom. Here I go anyway.
It seems to me the suggestion quoted is marvelous. Specialization of the mining fleet, with application to other situations.
As suggested in another devblog, a conceptual basis for an Ore/Container hauler design might be:
Haulers
My added suggestion was to give the ship a changing look (forget the dev's term for these moving parts on ships) as containers were added over time-- perhaps it would have to enter into a "loading mode" like a Rorqual in Industrial ore compression mode. The hauler would need a capital tractor beam, decent agility and, ideally, bonuses to warp corp stability to make it competitive with freighters which can now load cargo in space (albeit from absolutely one place). If it were truly ore specific, something along the lines of an oil tanker (?) might be more in line-- but not as cool looking as the cargo ships above.
I would think a (universal) ship hauler/corp hanger could be combined into one ship with a limited number of slots. Such a ship might even have a usefulness in combat, if it was agile enough and had, ideally, some bonuses to warp core stability or slots to add them in order to GTFO. In my mind, it would more closely resemble the actual role of an aircraft carrier.
I think Eve has enough industrials, and if the above two ships were implemented correctly (good luck with CCP doing that!), then there would be little need for an additional mining specific one. Don't know if CCP had in mind loading Freighters with Industrials running around, it seems ludicrous.
Dersen Lowery wrote:Scrapyard Bob wrote:Then there's the whole issue that the preferred mining pair is now a hulk+mack where the mack acts as the hauler for the mini-fleet. The T1 industrial ships can't haul that much, and the Orca's 50k m3 ore bay is now pretty much a joke (that needs to be boosted up into the 400-600k m3 range). That would be a great opportunity to split the Orca up into the four or so ships that it's always wanted to be, with the Orca remaining behind as a sort of jack-of-all-trades (because that's quite useful). If there was a fitted ship hauler, and a flying corp hangar, and a flying ore bay, and a "little freighter" in addition to the ordinary Orca, the ORE Industrial Command Ship skill would be even more valuable. |
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
128
|
Posted - 2012.12.07 00:43:00 -
[58] - Quote
Yes, let's put your short-term profit ahead of everything else.
Point is: the changes did nothing.
Steve Ronuken wrote:Haifisch Zahne wrote: 4) Mining ship production spiked briefly (but we hear nothing about subsequent sales as people realized their mistake?)
What mistake? The mistake which will, eventually, give me a ten fold return on investment? Sure, It'll take a fair time. But it's pretty much no risk.
|
Merouk Baas
54
|
Posted - 2012.12.07 01:31:00 -
[59] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:"what we need is our legalized botting to become even easier"
IMO, why the **** not? People complain that mining is boring, and in the same post demand that CCP make it more frustrating, via interface-clicking no less. "We like to suffer, CCP, make us suffer this boring activity with even more pain!"
It's boring, we need minerals, someone has to mine. CCP can declare botting illegal all they want, and spend time hunting bots down, or they can let the masses AFK mine without the need for a bot, and save themselves some time and effort. |
Camios
Minmatar Bread Corporation
115
|
Posted - 2012.12.07 03:54:00 -
[60] - Quote
First: if the mineral volume is increased so much in highsec, I would expect a reduction of lowend ore prices. It's not happening, so what? Is the lowend market going to crash in the next months?
Second: the fact that the most used barge is the one for AFK mining means that mining is just not fun and miners are not mining in order to chil out with friends. This is just a big lie. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |