CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
4 PagesPrevious page1234Next page
 

Erika Mizune/Yumene for CSM 10

Author
#21 - 2015-02-06 18:00:39 UTC
Welcome to the race!

Something I've been thinking about recently that I'd like your opinion on, since you're clearly more of a miner than I am: it occurred to me that mining (including ice, and gas huffing) is one of the only industrial professions that requires you to be in space, running an active module, to do anything. PI and industry run just fine while you're sleeping (hauling at least requires you to be in space). PI, industry, and hauling all scale up to the point where it's very easy to get at least a linear benefit for each alt added to the task. Mining scales well because the amount of attention required for each individual boat is relatively small, and more so in areas of space with huge rocks.

Given that, wouldn't any attempt to make mining more interactive reduce the ability of any individual player's operation to scale up? Given that nullsec mining in particular seems to be done by a handful of people, mostly because there's a strong bias against mining among most alliances, what do you think the outcome would be? Would miners trade scalability for more interesting game play per barge?

Are my assumptions wrong? (That's always a possibility.)

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Circle-Of-Two
#22 - 2015-02-06 21:05:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Erika Mizune
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Welcome to the race!

Something I've been thinking about recently that I'd like your opinion on, since you're clearly more of a miner than I am: it occurred to me that mining (including ice, and gas huffing) is one of the only industrial professions that requires you to be in space, running an active module, to do anything. PI and industry run just fine while you're sleeping (hauling at least requires you to be in space). PI, industry, and hauling all scale up to the point where it's very easy to get at least a linear benefit for each alt added to the task. Mining scales well because the amount of attention required for each individual boat is relatively small, and more so in areas of space with huge rocks.

Given that, wouldn't any attempt to make mining more interactive reduce the ability of any individual player's operation to scale up? Given that nullsec mining in particular seems to be done by a handful of people, mostly because there's a strong bias against mining among most alliances, what do you think the outcome would be? Would miners trade scalability for more interesting game play per barge?

Are my assumptions wrong? (That's always a possibility.)


Greetings! And thank you!

And of course, I will try to go ahead and touch on everything, and yea, I did focus on mining there because is it the most active part of mining compared to the other Indy related professions. I don't feel that making mining more interactive will reduce a players scale personally. In this case, the one that I mentioned, about a asteroid scattering and potentially "dropping" another rock to mine - it's not reducing their operation; if anything it's giving them something new to look forward to. It also adds to a nice little reward for mining the rock out to full. Say you completely mine out a rock of Veldspar, a much smaller Veldspar appears, and the units are small, but it's a different type that yields more Trit . That is just a rough example or course. So something like that I don't feel would reduce any operation, it would simply be adding something "rewarding" and interesting and interactive. If they don't want to go after that drop, they don't have to, but it's there, and possibly make it even so that if you don't start mining it in a certain time (say an hour) then that rock scatters with the rest and you loose it (kinda like a normal drop if you were to get a wreck for killing a npc or player). But again that's just a rough idea but I hope that answers your question on that part.

As for PI and Moon Mining, the two passive income, yea we do have that, but there are also other ways to make passive income as well. Ie. looking at say research agents, or even selling kill rights (Yea, I consider those two passive as well). Although setting up a planet and a moon do take a lot more effort IMO.

PI - You need to open your planet view while in space in order to place command centers (cloaked or pos up), and then once you get in place you start trying to scan the planets to find what you need and then place command centers and your buildings and what-not. This is time consuming more than anything IMO, but the end result is passive income, so you can't really complain there.

Moon Mining - This is the same as PI, but instead of scanning moons, you shoot a probe at a moon and wait X-Minutes (depending on the probe you are using) and then your results pop up. From there you set up your PoS and moon harvester, silo's, some defense, and fuel it up. This too is tedious but it's also passive income so can't complain too much there either. Though you do have to calculate the cost of running the PoS and the profits you're getting to see if it's worth it. So there's that, if your not taking that into account, then you could be paying more for the PoS than what you are mining. Which isn't a good thing there.

So anyways, I probably went on a tangent there - I can write a lot when I get going - but in any case, I hope it answered your question in regards to the mining.

Thanks Smile

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Preatoriani
#23 - 2015-02-06 21:29:33 UTC
Well, you definitely have my vote for the election ;)

About the improvements you want to push on the mining. I'm all in favor of improvement.
Mining hasn't really changed since the game launched.

Imho tho, it is because it's a good system. Alltho it would benefit from a minigame, that would improve revenue (and lower it if you don't play it).

On the minigame, any industry needs tweaking to keep it running at max effciency. So I'd like to see that you constantly have to adjust your mining gear (bypass hard rock, direct to soft rock, ...). The bonus ore you propose, for mining out a rock, could, for example, be implemented as 'ore samples' that scatter when depleting a roid. Add the 'ore samples' into your ship's analyzer (the minigame), and your beams get better modulation, yielding more ore.

Also, about the defense of mining ships... imho, they're good as they are. One on one, they shouldn't be able to win against a combat ship. It's a commercial ship ffs. Combat ships should have 'free reign' over them. But with a friend watching your back, properly fitted, they guarantee your friend a kill.

What could/should be added tho, is that asteroid fields become claimable. Allow corporations to set up mini poses in asteroid fields. they don't have a bubble, but they do allow you to anchor guns and hangars. It provides more safety for miners, if you add a mining array, it might provide (some) passive income. And mining in a claimed field would give you a criminal timer for thieving (and the guns would open up on you). Big pro... it would further more small scale conflict in the game over one more resource (hey, we're allready fighting over moons and planets, why not over asteroid belts).

my five cents ;)
Circle-Of-Two
#24 - 2015-02-06 22:19:05 UTC
Arwen Ariniel wrote:
Well, you definitely have my vote for the election ;)

About the improvements you want to push on the mining. I'm all in favor of improvement.
Mining hasn't really changed since the game launched.

Imho tho, it is because it's a good system. Alltho it would benefit from a minigame, that would improve revenue (and lower it if you don't play it).

On the minigame, any industry needs tweaking to keep it running at max effciency. So I'd like to see that you constantly have to adjust your mining gear (bypass hard rock, direct to soft rock, ...). The bonus ore you propose, for mining out a rock, could, for example, be implemented as 'ore samples' that scatter when depleting a roid. Add the 'ore samples' into your ship's analyzer (the minigame), and your beams get better modulation, yielding more ore.

Also, about the defense of mining ships... imho, they're good as they are. One on one, they shouldn't be able to win against a combat ship. It's a commercial ship ffs. Combat ships should have 'free reign' over them. But with a friend watching your back, properly fitted, they guarantee your friend a kill.

What could/should be added tho, is that asteroid fields become claimable. Allow corporations to set up mini poses in asteroid fields. they don't have a bubble, but they do allow you to anchor guns and hangars. It provides more safety for miners, if you add a mining array, it might provide (some) passive income. And mining in a claimed field would give you a criminal timer for thieving (and the guns would open up on you). Big pro... it would further more small scale conflict in the game over one more resource (hey, we're allready fighting over moons and planets, why not over asteroid belts).

my five cents ;)


Greetings! Thank you for the support as well!

Just going to touch on the suggestions as well, which they are all interesting suggestions. I also agree that mining has never really changed. We did get new visuals, which are nice, but it didn't add anything “game-play” wise.

The mini-game sounds interesting with regards to the ore that can drop after mining an asteroid being ore samples that you have to analyze before you can actually mine it, does sound interesting. I would like to play with that idea further though.

As for the adjusting, I am not sure about that one because if you get the T2 strip miners you have the crystals. Which do in a sense “tweak” your strip miner so that you can yield more. Unless I am reading that wrong on that part, I think that's fine the way that it is.

On the defensive mining ships, I'm not saying they should be able to win over a combat ship, but more rather adding a “get away” defense. For the instance that I stated; adding an extra high slot that can say, be used for a Nos to drain your target and better your chance to get away. It would add more flexibility in my opinion. It would be nothing more than that. You could have a friend watch your back, but a ganker in high-sec for instance isn't going to go after a mining ship that has combat defense with them (well they can, but it's not usually likely unless they have friends close by). They would have to be off-grid somewhere or docked. Which by the time they come out to defend you, it can be too late if their fast enough. At least in this case you would have more “options”.

Interesting idea on the passive mining, however, I'm not to keen on the idea of making mining passive and belts claimable like that. Belts should be open to everyone. Mining should remain active; as in you have to be in space and activity mining the ore in space.

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Preatoriani
#25 - 2015-02-06 23:57:28 UTC
Erika Mizune wrote:
As for the adjusting, I am not sure about that one because if you get the T2 strip miners you have the crystals. Which do in a sense “tweak” your strip miner so that you can yield more. Unless I am reading that wrong on that part, I think that's fine the way that it is.

Well, consider it a 'base configuration'. After that, you'd have to start the minigame (open the controls of your miners).
eg: It could show you a 'scan' of the asteroid(s) you're mining. akin to the PI overview (would also make the ore scanner more viable :D). Which could show you harder and softer spots (harder = husk, softer = valuable ore). So you'd have to pinpoint your laser to where to mine. And allow miners to amp their lasers, but do it to much, and it results in heat damage.

This way, active miners get rewarded, and afk-miners get penalised.

Erika Mizune wrote:
On the defensive mining ships, I'm not saying they should be able to win over a combat ship, but more rather adding a “get away” defense.

I live in lowsec, and I mine their happily. Truly no boost needed. Hulk, with cloack = uncatchable (yes, you sacrifice some revenue for reduced risk). Mining in a venture is riskless. And if you engage a squad of procurers fitted with neut and ecm drones... you're nuts... imho, any change right now, would make barges op.

Erika Mizune wrote:
Interesting idea on the passive mining, however, I'm not to keen on the idea of making mining passive and belts claimable like that. Belts should be open to everyone. Mining should remain active; as in you have to be in space and activity mining the ore in space.

Wel, my point of view on it, is that it drives conflict. The passive income, is what we fight over. In null and low, we fight over moons, in low and empire we fight over poco's. Staking our claim and fighting over it, is what makes Eve come alive.

I do agree not all belts should be claimable. But you can limit it perfectly to sec status of the system. eg: only .7 and below.
On top of it, it fits perfectly in the storyline of the empires losing power, and by only allowing more easily destructible structures to be deployed, it would be a boon to small gang warfare.
Circle-Of-Two
#26 - 2015-02-07 00:44:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Erika Mizune
Quote:
Well, consider it a 'base configuration'. After that, you'd have to start the minigame (open the controls of your miners).
eg: It could show you a 'scan' of the asteroid(s) you're mining. akin to the PI overview (would also make the ore scanner more viable :D). Which could show you harder and softer spots (harder = husk, softer = valuable ore). So you'd have to pinpoint your laser to where to mine. And allow miners to amp their lasers, but do it to much, and it results in heat damage.

This way, active miners get rewarded, and afk-miners get penalised.


- Ah, alright, so I did misunderstand that. Thanks for explaining that there for me. I see where you are going with that now. Now that does sound interesting there and it does make sense, though it sounds like instead of a mini-game, that it would be similar to what you do with PI and trying to find the right spots to go for. Would be a interesting interaction addition to mining.

Quote:
I live in lowsec, and I mine their happily. Truly no boost needed. Hulk, with cloack = uncatchable (yes, you sacrifice some revenue for reduced risk). Mining in a venture is riskless. And if you engage a squad of procurers fitted with neut and ecm drones... you're nuts... imho, any change right now, would make barges op.


- I understand that, however in your case of the Hulk, you have to sacrifice yield to fit that cloak, but if you look at a lot of combat ships, they have extra high slots that they can utilize whereas none of the mining ships have. Combat ships that have that extra high slot, don't have to sacrifice their turret bays for the dps. Maybe call it balancing as well – the extra high slot can be for say set mining ships – say adding the high slot to just retrievers and mackinaws only, so you have to choose.

Quote:
I do agree not all belts should be claimable. But you can limit it perfectly to sec status of the system. eg: only .7 and below.
On top of it, it fits perfectly in the storyline of the empires losing power, and by only allowing more easily destructible structures to be deployed, it would be a boon to small gang warfare.


- Interesting idea on this part, but I'm still not keen about claimable belts. I understand it would drive conflict, which is always good, There needs to be conflict in Eve, we already have Null-Sec where you can stake your claim and fight for systems. If someone comes into your system to mine and they are not Alliance/blue, well, they are asking to get shot to be honest. So in a sense belts are claimed by who holds the Sov. in that system. I think that's fine how it is personally.

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Guns-N-Roses
#27 - 2015-02-07 02:05:38 UTC
YAY!!!!
You have my full support! And I vote!!! :)
This will be cool as well, cuz I have also had ideas over the years, but not had any real way of finding someone to suggest them to. I did push kinda hard to one candidate years ago about ship skins... and it's finally coming! so ideas do get serious treatment by CCP via CSM... Again, so cool! And there aren't that many ppl who have the qualifications to serve on CSM, but you definitely have them in spades!

Lemme know if you need anything done to further your candidacy!!

Mintaki
Circle-Of-Two
#28 - 2015-02-07 03:03:00 UTC
Mintaki Ryosuke wrote:
YAY!!!!
You have my full support! And I vote!!! :)
This will be cool as well, cuz I have also had ideas over the years, but not had any real way of finding someone to suggest them to. I did push kinda hard to one candidate years ago about ship skins... and it's finally coming! so ideas do get serious treatment by CCP via CSM... Again, so cool! And there aren't that many ppl who have the qualifications to serve on CSM, but you definitely have them in spades!

Lemme know if you need anything done to further your candidacy!!

Mintaki



That's great! And thanks Mintaki for the support! :)

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Preatoriani
#29 - 2015-02-07 18:47:04 UTC
Erika Mizune wrote:
I understand that, however in your case of the Hulk, you have to sacrifice yield to fit that cloak, but if you look at a lot of combat ships, they have extra high slots that they can utilize whereas none of the mining ships have. Combat ships that have that extra high slot, don't have to sacrifice their turret bays for the dps. Maybe call it balancing as well – the extra high slot can be for say set mining ships – say adding the high slot to just retrievers and mackinaws only, so you have to choose.

That's a good middle ground imho :) Alltho I'd only give it to the Procurer/Skiff, since those are the ones designed for operation in hositle territory ;)

Erika Mizune wrote:

Interesting idea on this part, but I'm still not keen about claimable belts. I understand it would drive conflict, which is always good, There needs to be conflict in Eve, we already have Null-Sec where you can stake your claim and fight for systems. If someone comes into your system to mine and they are not Alliance/blue, well, they are asking to get shot to be honest. So in a sense belts are claimed by who holds the Sov. in that system. I think that's fine how it is personally.

Well, I think it would make for a more granular Eve. It would give smaller corporations a chance to claim something, make it easier to challenge other corporations. Look at it as an intermediate step between empire and low sec.

And, it would encourage cooperation between carebears and pvp'ers to work together more :)
It would be an ideal addition for small gang warfare, outside of FW.
Circle-Of-Two
#30 - 2015-02-07 19:29:29 UTC
Quote:

That's a good middle ground imho :) Alltho I'd only give it to the Procurer/Skiff, since those are the ones designed for operation in hositle territory ;)


Yea, I agree there, I'd like to see it on the skiff and procurer as well. Macinaw and retreiver was the first that had popped into my head to write as an example. lol.


Quote:
Well, I think it would make for a more granular Eve. It would give smaller corporations a chance to claim something, make it easier to challenge other corporations. Look at it as an intermediate step between empire and low sec.


Giving a chance to smaller corps and alliance, that does go into how I feel about null-sec currently with how stagient it is. It's very hard for a smaller groups to claim anything with the way it is right now. Unless you know one of the main power blocks, you can't expect to really go very far. Which is discouraging.

What I would like to see on that regards is to get rid of those power blocks. A lot of them have systems just for the sake of having them because they can.; meaning they don't actually use them. What I would like to see on that end is that if a system isn't actually being used by the holder's alliance, then that sov should drop. Or something to that extent. That's a rough idea that I had for a bit and something like that would open the doors for smaller groups wanting to claim their stake. It would also help if coalitions were recognizable in-game.

I did place these maps side by side to show the difference:

http://eve.icefaerie.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/sov_map2-15.png

But anyways, I probably went off on a tangent there, however I think once the null sec problem is resolved then those smaller groups will have that better opportunity to claim a piece of space for their own.

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

WE FORM V0LTA
#31 - 2015-02-08 19:09:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Ouuo Markovic
Arwen Ariniel wrote:

I live in lowsec, and I mine their happily. Truly no boost needed. Hulk, with cloack = uncatchable (yes, you sacrifice some revenue for reduced risk). Mining in a venture is riskless. And if you engage a squad of procurers fitted with neut and ecm drones... you're nuts... imho, any change right now, would make barges op.

Erika Mizune wrote:

On the defensive mining ships, I'm not saying they should be able to win over a combat ship, but more rather adding a “get away” defense.

Why not just make a T3 Exhumer -type ship that could fit an "Advanced Shield Unit" in a high-slot which would basically make it invulnerable for X-minutes unless neuted, etc. ? Would be time to get some new industry ships looking at how the majority of development lately has been PvP and sov-warfare related.

You got my vote o.o
Circle-Of-Two
#32 - 2015-02-08 21:19:54 UTC
Ouuo Markovic wrote:
Why not just make a T3 Exhumer -type ship that could fit an "Advanced Shield Unit" in a high-slot which would basically make it invulnerable for X-minutes unless neuted, etc. ? Would be time to get some new industry ships looking at how the majority of development lately has been PvP and sov-warfare related.

You got my vote o.o


Thanks for the support!

As for the T3 Exhumer, it does sound interesting and I have seen this idea pop up in the feedback and suggestions forum, but I'm not sure how it would work; I don't think it should be invulnerable, I think that's a little bit too much imo, so that would need tweaking, and yes I do agree there that it would be nice to get some new industry ships.

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Preatoriani
#33 - 2015-02-08 21:53:32 UTC
Erika Mizune wrote:
Ouuo Markovic wrote:
Why not just make a T3 Exhumer -type ship that could fit an "Advanced Shield Unit" in a high-slot which would basically make it invulnerable for X-minutes unless neuted, etc. ? Would be time to get some new industry ships looking at how the majority of development lately has been PvP and sov-warfare related.

You got my vote o.o


Thanks for the support!

As for the T3 Exhumer, it does sound interesting and I have seen this idea pop up in the feedback and suggestions forum, but I'm not sure how it would work; I don't think it should be invulnerable, I think that's a little bit too much imo, so that would need tweaking, and yes I do agree there that it would be nice to get some new industry ships.

Yeah, a T3-barge would rock, alltho I agree with Erika, invulnerable would be OP. but yeah, give the T3 the extra high slot, have it fit a cov-ops cloack, give it a overheating bonus to shield tanks. Make it a really tough nugget to crack. As a pvp'er, you won't know in advance, wether it's bait, or a miner that got caught off guard.

And give it a drone bay to fit large drones Twisted
Circle-Of-Two
#34 - 2015-02-08 22:01:51 UTC
Arwen Ariniel wrote:
Yeah, a T3-barge would rock, alltho I agree with Erika, invulnerable would be OP. but yeah, give the T3 the extra high slot, have it fit a cov-ops cloack, give it a overheating bonus to shield tanks. Make it a really tough nugget to crack. As a pvp'er, you won't know in advance, wether it's bait, or a miner that got caught off guard.

And give it a drone bay to fit large drones Twisted


That would be a beast barge Twisted +1

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Pandemic Legion
#35 - 2015-02-09 04:26:12 UTC
How do you feel that living in null has effected your industrial side, for better or for worse? And at the couple changes you described regarding an extra high on a barge/exhumer, why do you feel an extra high would be better than say, more PG so you can fit a large extender, or a bonus to shield extenders, or an extra mid instead of high so you have a higher chance of surviving an empire gank/ give you more time to get backup if you're stuck in null.

Regarding missions, do you have any ideas already on how you would like to see them go, or something added to make them less repetitive?
Circle-Of-Two
#36 - 2015-02-10 02:34:30 UTC
yoyaz wrote:
How do you feel that living in null has effected your industrial side, for better or for worse? And at the couple changes you described regarding an extra high on a barge/exhumer, why do you feel an extra high would be better than say, more PG so you can fit a large extender, or a bonus to shield extenders, or an extra mid instead of high so you have a higher chance of surviving an empire gank/ give you more time to get backup if you're stuck in null.

Regarding missions, do you have any ideas already on how you would like to see them go, or something added to make them less repetitive?


It's actually been better personally. There is only one mineral that is hard to get out here, which when we need we usually head into high-sec to get it (Mexillion). Aside from that I have no real issues and I find it safer out here vs. being a high-sec miner. Better ore as well. The only time our operation has really been effected is when our system was under heavy traffic by Gorgon and they have attempted to take it over; but we readjusted our operations and now are back to being pretty steady.

As as far as the extra high slot, it's to give more options - in this case of the extra high slot, it would make better sense to give it to the skiff and procurer since those two are meant to be able to tank and hold off pretty decently. The high slot vs. power grid, I think that the high slot would be beneficial because it can give you a better chance since a lot (if not most) are usually solo, and again, gives you that extra option for survivability, and not having to rely on having backup at all times. Extra shield doesn't give you that. even if you have backup, that backup may not get to you in time, so having that extra option if you choose to go with a skiff or a procurer would be nice.

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2015-02-11 08:55:52 UTC
+1, Got my vote here!
Circle-Of-Two
#38 - 2015-02-12 20:04:18 UTC
She has been a great corp member and works hard!!! Definitely has my vote!!
Circle-Of-Two
#39 - 2015-02-15 00:21:12 UTC
Thank you so much guys for the support :)

Former DJ & Manager of Eve Radio | Blog | Sounds of New Eden | Twitch | Twitter

Manic Miners Alliance
#40 - 2015-02-15 14:33:57 UTC
In my humble opinion, being an Industrial representative means a general understanding of what effect industry has on this game as a whole and not just one aspect of it.
Mining changes are brilliant, I'm not knocking that, but industry details so many more aspects than just mining and I'm curious as to your understanding of the rest of the aspects.
For instance, you said you're a freighter pilot, do you have a detailed understanding of how the changes in the Rhea patch effected industry and the impact that change has on the markets throughout all of New Eden?
If you're only running to effect change in mining, how can you be an effective representative of industry as a whole?
You should then be running for "Mining Representative" and not a full on Industrial Representative, again just in my humble opinion.

Also another major concern of mine is the fact that you are so involved in EvE-Radio as a manager etc, do you really have the time and energy needed to dedicate to CSM with your other duties?
FunkyBacon was just a DJ/Blogger yet he proved to not be an effective CSM Representative as his DJ & RL duties took away from that.
Running for CSM should be to improve the game as a whole for your constituents that you are there to represent, and not just one single aspect of it (ie mining).

"Whether it be peace by diplomacy or peace by a gun, in the end there WILL be peace!" - TPK

4 PagesPrevious page1234Next page
Forum Jump