Any love for the porpoise. Please increase it’s fleet hangar size. It’s getting small for the yield of barges and exhumers will put out.
9 Likes
This Carebear Approves. 
I applaud the walking back of R4s, i would continue to advocate adding Gas to the moons rather than PI. (if you are going to pull out mins, id rather just keep the mins).
**** PS, give back the hulk the 3rd turret!**
4 Likes
The need for bulky PP and gas raw materials creates a need to build where you harvest in order to “compress”. This makes certain space interesting and opens up opportunities. Instead of removing bulky raw materials to the point of non-existance perhaps you should look at greatly reduce the m^3 of the produced components, such as:
(Capital) Core Temperature Regulator
Life Support Backup Unit (Introduce a capital version with lower total m3?)
Auto-Integrity Preservation Seal (Introduce a capital version with lower total m3?)
Neurolink Enhancer
etc.
I feel that the most vocal about m3 issues expect the ability to source all raw material and vertically integrate the whole capital building process in a single structure as a solo player (with several accounts). The m3 requirements and the “compression” the components could provide creates oppertunities for people and groups to specialize.
This is just my opinion and hopefully it contributes to some balance in what I feel is a monotone feedback about bulky raw materials.
1 Like
Read the update: From Extraction To Production: Update - #2061 by CCP_Psych
1 Like
Hi there,
I was wondering if we added Gas Mining Sites to the same area that the Ice Mining fields are currently, would that help or hurt EvE overall?
More predictability isnt always a good thing
1 Like
No it doesn’t. It is only an additionnal 1% per level for shield hp, not enough to make up for the loss of two mids. And only the structure got a 500hp increase. They doubled the weight of the ship with what?
5 Likes
I’m not competing against someone who buys my stuff, or whom I buy stuff from. I’m not competing against a corp mate, etc.
MMO yes. Interactions, a lot. PvP, sometimes.
To keep track of the latest changes, the newest results on the three barges in terms of mining speed:
→ skill levels used: mining V, astrogeology V, mining barges V, specialty crystals related IV (e.g. veldspar processing on TQ, common asteroid on SiSi)
→ calculated theoretical time to fill ore/mining hold, as TFH in minutes per mining module. As all ships can fit two, the actual time to fill the hold is half of what is shown below !
→ fits used:
- Covetor (reference fit: 3 mining laser upgrades II, 1 x Modulated Strip Miner II)
- Retriever (reference fit: 3 mining laser upgrades II, 1 x Modulated Strip Miner II)
- Procurer-2LS (reference fit: 2 mining laser upgrades II, 1 x Modulated Strip Miner II)
- Procurer-3LS (reference fit: 3 mining laser upgrades II, 1 x Modulated Strip Miner II)
→ bonuses, as far as known are applied in the numbers shown e.g., mining hold bonus on retriever
→ current values for direct comparison with tech I and tech II crystals are shown in lower half
3 Likes
Yes, please !
2 Likes
It would probably cause a shift of gas huffing from lowsec to highsec, as there’s little incentive to be risking your slippery but low-yield frigates in lowsec when you can just huff with some immobile bricks at a much higher yield which is even increased by the platform next to it that shows off how much it cares about agility by sieging up, too.
the result would be a bearing k-space gas market, which would result in the booster market also turning bearish quickly, as the primary market is Abyss T5/T6 runners, who are so rich they don’t care about the booster prices anyway, and while they would of cause welcome a reduction of the booster prices as it made them even richer, they won’t consume additional boosters only because they got less expensive. The other market for expensive boosters are Highsec solo/small fleet pvp-ers, and like the abyss runners, while welcoming a lower price of the boosters, never had an issue paying for them and won’t use more just because they’re cheaper, either.
In null, bringing more alts is preferred over using boosters, and IMO boosters are a waste of isk anyways, as in most cases a slight improvement of anything (and a chance it causes side effects) is way below what can be attained by paying more attention to the game instead of watching netflix while flying 5 muninns that are not shooting a structure because their guns have run out of charges and autoreloaded, but not resumed cycling
1 Like
I think the wastage and extra rock percentage should both be lowered .
Only bonus 25% extra rocks and a progression of wastage percentages around 18 / 13 / 9 / 5 using T1 to best case scenario equipment wise leaving it a ‘factor’ in desicions regarding how to mine but making it a smaller overall effect . Reducing the ore bonus percentage or there would be an overall bonus in ore .
Beautiful! Thank you for this CCP
Again, thank you for listening. We’re still not fully aligned (based on the forum responses) but these changes are making more and more sense.
Now just tell us you’re not removing the mid slots from mining ships… we’re ganked enough as it is.
1 Like
Can the the size changes of the barges also be reassessed given the light of the multiple cargo bay change . Some of the justification of it has gone surely and slow warp times and quicker locking definitely aren’t a buff in the battle to avoid being ganked.
Regardless thanks for listening regarding a number of issues with the planned update and being brave enough to make changes
Better. Much better. Please consider giving t1 strip miners back their original mining amounts and 50% waste. I know the some people will ■■■■■ and whine but we need more rate of mineing and the 12ish% drop in rate for the t1 strip miners will be felt for most miners in high and lowsec.
Procurers are pretty much Nerfed out of existence with the 2 mid slot removal. I thought they would pick up on that and reverse it … Seems like they have an agenda here to make the tank so weak that miners will move up the Skif. very Anoying
2 Likes
Only after we told CCP not to completely butcher them thanks to your intervention of telling CCP about the “lack of progression” in this field. Now I would be interested to know if Rattati only talked with you about this “issue”, or if he contacted some serious gas miners as well and asked them about their opinion on the matter. I know for sure that he didn’t ask someone in my corp about this and we mean big business in gas mining. Judging by the first iteration of their ideas, they did not ask anyone else about this and just based their decision on your flawed perspective.
Do you do any gas mining? With these changes, especially the speed reduction, they will be even harder to catch than Prospects if they are being fit correctly.
There were no bigger ships to fill the role and there was no need at all for bigger ships for that role. Gas mining is not a profession where you need to come in with Rorqual boosts, gobble up the cloud and then have to scan the next cloud and repeat. This line of thought simply makes gas mining worse and not a better experience.
The what now? A Ceptor can orbit a BS at above 30km and keep it tackled, it can tackle it outside the BS’ scram/web range (grappler are meaningless beyond 10 km), it can orbit the BS faster than many drones and mitigate gun and missile damage, and with the extended point range it can tackle things further away from the warp in to prevent it from getting away. And on top of that, the tank of ships like an MSE Stiletto is anything but fragile.
1 Like
The Skiff is not in a much better position. The new Mackinaw will have a better tank than the current Skiff, with the yield and it’s enormous ore hold. While for the Skiff, you may need to nerf yourself by using one ore more low slot to keep up with tank you are used.
If CCP can finally update Singularity with the current proposed changes I could make affirmation instead of assumptions.
@CCP_Psych Please, have your team update Singularity, it’s been almost one week since your update on barges/exhumers.
Oh, and any plan to change the name of asteroid belts to asteroid bubbles ? They are one step away to aggregate and form bigger rock.
1 Like