open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked 'Scow' Heavy Industrial
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Sarf
Spacelane Logistics
Posted - 2007.06.08 21:20:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Nox Solaris
Edited by: Nox Solaris on 08/06/2007 20:49:06
CCP could easily nerf CPU requirments for the fitting of mining lasers to, say, 1000% or more like they did with scan probe launchers.

IMO CCP should actually look at the CPU/PG requirments for all mining lasers anyway, doubling or tripling that while increasing the fitting bonuses for mining frigs/cruisers to compensate.
That would reduce both AFK mining industrials and battleships.

At the least they could implement a range limitation on the scow to no closer than 30km to an asteroid. Land on one at 0 and you bounce out to range swiftly (meaning, in that huge slow, lumbering cow you might bounce 50 km or more before getting under control enough to warp out).


So if they changed the CPU requirements and had to add new bonus to all ships that should be able to fit mining lasers would mean allot of work and QA. I think you would scuttle this idea with that. And IIRC some of the ships have the most bonus that they can have already.

So unless your idea includes the fitting of mining lasers it is not going to work, the 30km bounce is also lame.. You need to take into account how it will be played with, if you start making allot of changes to the rest of the game to allow one new ship that maybe 20% of the server population is going to use.

So taking your ship as it sits now would be perfect of AFK mining, and hopefully us miners get a bit of loving. But breaking mining for the sake of a combat transport to haul stuff into 0.0 is not a good plan.

I would be more in favor of specialized capital and outpost expanders that allow a transport to move 10 or 100 times the number of capital parts as it does now.


Nox Solaris
Posted - 2007.06.09 12:23:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Nox Solaris on 09/06/2007 12:22:46
Originally by: Sarf
Originally by: Nox Solaris
Edited by: Nox Solaris on 08/06/2007 20:49:06
CCP could easily nerf CPU requirments for the fitting of mining lasers to, say, 1000% or more like they did with scan probe launchers.

IMO CCP should actually look at the CPU/PG requirments for all mining lasers anyway, doubling or tripling that while increasing the fitting bonuses for mining frigs/cruisers to compensate.
That would reduce both AFK mining industrials and battleships.

At the least they could implement a range limitation on the scow to no closer than 30km to an asteroid. Land on one at 0 and you bounce out to range swiftly (meaning, in that huge slow, lumbering cow you might bounce 50 km or more before getting under control enough to warp out).


So if they changed the CPU requirements and had to add new bonus to all ships that should be able to fit mining lasers would mean allot of work and QA. I think you would scuttle this idea with that. And IIRC some of the ships have the most bonus that they can have already.


Truly, I don't think they should tinker with mining lasers as they are now. There just needs to be a method to curtail the use of these ships as AFK mining dirigibles. Either by making mining lasers (and salvagers for that matter) unable to place their production into the ship's cargo, or by making the ship somehow completley incapable of mounting them at all.

Originally by: Sarf

So taking your ship as it sits now would be perfect of AFK mining, and hopefully us miners get a bit of loving. But breaking mining for the sake of a combat transport to haul stuff into 0.0 is not a good plan.


IMO as it stands now miners have gotten a good plenty of loving. T2 mining lasers, crystals, and barges, not to mention hauler spawns that dump insanely massive ammounts of low end minerals at a single pop. The prevalence of macro use has abused these to the utmost limit of what I think CCP should have allowed, or continue to allow (yes, I realize that they are taking measures to limit them... but as proposed those limitations will only assist macro abusers by moving them away from the few and overwhelmed numbers of 'ore thieves' that are the only true risk that exists for them.)

This transport/logistic ship is intended for moving goods, protecting itself & assisting its escort, not at all in any fasion for the furtherance of mining or any other sort of resource gathering.

Jhar'An
God's of Eve
X-PACT
Posted - 2007.06.14 01:24:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Nox Solaris
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
Why does it even have turret hardpoints? No need to gimp cargo loading abilities if it can't mine anything. Nobody afk mines in a Bustard, right?


Firstly, mining lasers are not 'turrets', they're 'utility' modules, so regardless of your highslot layout you can fit mining lasers in every turret.
The purpose of having weapon hardpoints is to actually give the cows the ability, however limited, to fight back. If industrials can fit one gun it stands to reason that their bigger cousins can (why freighters can't I have yet to figure out... probably that mining fear).

And yes, I have seen tech 2 industrials (Occator & the Amarr tier-2 transport) mining on several occasions. With just 1 laser. AFK. It stands to reason that somewhere someone has set their Bustard to do the same, or even a Crane/Prorator/et al.


Mining Laser 1 & 2 *ARE* turrets, or at least require turret hard points.

This ship should have 0-1 hardpoints for turrets, and/or 0-1 Turret hard points for Missiles. These ships should also have a a CPU Penalty to any type of strip miner, in the ball park of making it require all the low slots with CPUIIs to fit one.

We don't need a super 'afk' mining ship; we don't want to create one either.

Spy4Hire
Posted - 2007.06.16 21:21:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Jhar'An
Originally by: Nox Solaris
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
Why does it even have turret hardpoints? No need to gimp cargo loading abilities if it can't mine anything. Nobody afk mines in a Bustard, right?


Firstly, mining lasers are not 'turrets', they're 'utility' modules, so regardless of your highslot layout you can fit mining lasers in every turret.
The purpose of having weapon hardpoints is to actually give the cows the ability, however limited, to fight back. If industrials can fit one gun it stands to reason that their bigger cousins can (why freighters can't I have yet to figure out... probably that mining fear).

And yes, I have seen tech 2 industrials (Occator & the Amarr tier-2 transport) mining on several occasions. With just 1 laser. AFK. It stands to reason that somewhere someone has set their Bustard to do the same, or even a Crane/Prorator/et al.


Mining Laser 1 & 2 *ARE* turrets, or at least require turret hard points.

This ship should have 0-1 hardpoints for turrets, and/or 0-1 Turret hard points for Missiles. These ships should also have a a CPU Penalty to any type of strip miner, in the ball park of making it require all the low slots with CPUIIs to fit one.

We don't need a super 'afk' mining ship; we don't want to create one either.


Or make a 4th type of high-slot: Mining turret. If your ship has no mining turret slots, it can't mine at all. Enough said.

Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive
Posted - 2007.08.26 15:15:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Nox Solaris
Caldari 'Prospectus' +100% Shield Transfer range.
Minmatar 'Valhalla' +75% Smartbomb Area-of-Effect.

Get stuffed! lol Laughing


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only