From Extraction To Production: Update

EVE Information Portal Announcements
306

If it criples the highsec bots then I can deal with the orca nerfs. Was taking it as a “weaker” third procurer/retriever with the mining yield it had… I take drone mining from porp, orca alltogether as a “bonus ore” which is nice but not really needed. Only highsec afk macro miners and bots would complain about orca getting nerfed really…

Null/lowsec miners only welcome the change as they are using fleets to mine anyway and the 900 dps orca is really welcome change to kill off rats and fend annoying pvpers. What I disagree and REALLY DISAGREE is that to fit the orca with decent shield booster and remote shield rep (to go on with core bonuses) and to fit decently hulk or mackinaw… you need implants and use up all rigs for powergrid/cpu… this is what should be looked into a bit

307

Get slapped in the face but I should say thanks I wasn’t kicked in the nuts? Come on dude…get woke and grow a pair!

308

What’s the yield difference between T2 strips and T2 A-type crystals (or whatever the best yield, lowest waste) crystals are). It seems very counterintuitiv that you get more effective yield from T1 miners compared to T2 crystaled miners since they waste away 34% of the rocks. What’s even more non-sensical is that you get more ore out of your belt with equipment of a technology-level than with higher level equipment.

REDNES

309

You get more ore, at a cost of a significant increase in time.

I actually like this idea of balancing yield against time. It fulfils the stated objective of offering choice in mining setups, while also keeping new players fully viable in the meta.

Don’t forget, the most significant amount of noise was being made about the overall reduction in ore per hour in the initial patch notes. Now, we can determine whether this was genuine concern, or simply “wahhh I want my toys how they are”, as players must now choose between very nearly the same ore extraction as the “old” rorq (hulks with B-types), but at a cost of higher waste, versus a doubling of the available ore at a cost of significant increases in time to extract.

1 Like
311

Very unhappy they have reverted the changes to the experdition frigates. it was going to be a massive buff to the prospects ore mining yield with the ability to ninja mine ice with it too. Now due to misinformation by people who don’t fly them CCP is reverting it.(most of the player base don’t even know they can use T2 crystals) o\ .

There were some bad points about the changes that needed to be ironed out but to smash it all is a shame.

With the exhumers now being buffed and no changes to the frigates it will be an effective nerf a sad day for ninja mining.

312

All in all thanks for actually starting to listen and not just shoving this down our throats. Some good first steps here towards fixing this.

But for the life of me why the heck is there still wastage!!!

Can someone from CCP please EXPLAIN why the need for wastage? i don’t get why its even needed or a thing. As many have said its a backwards mechanic. We should be looking for ways to encourage miners and reward all that work, not creating a system that means you either need to field a ridiculously expensive ship (that currently is paper thin) or just accept you cant mine everything that’s there. I know in the real world there is some loss in ore when mining, but last I checked moon and asteroid mining aren’t in the real world either…

313

Is it a significant increase in time to extract, though if you get 200% valuable ore out of one moon compared to less than 100% but in shorter time? Moons don’t cycle like anoms. In anoms it might be a slightly different story as they respawn more often. However, if you only have so much time to mine per day I wonder if slower mining speed with better yield offsets the respawn timer of the anoms.

The cycle times of ModSM I and II are both 180 seconds. Only B-Types reduce the cycle time by 10/20%, which results in 162/144 seconds before ship bonuses and fleet bonuses, but at significantly increased waste. Not sure if that counts as “significantly increased time to extract”.

REDNES

314

CCP, thank you for the quick update! Some comments I have about your update:

Compression

I’m glad you postpone it until you have a system that works well. I still do believe that compression loss is a good idea that could enhance gameplay by adding additional meaningful choices, but it should not add tedium.

Mining efficiency

Mining waste adds more depth to mining in the form of a meaningful choice between efficiency and yield. I like that.

But it created a problem for newbie miners who did not have the SP to make that choice. I’m glad my main issue with mining efficiency is avoided in your new proposed numbers: which is that newbies had more mining waste than well-skilled players and had no choices to reduce that.

However, you may have gone too far. T1 modules and drones now have 0 waste? Why should using T2 modules be a downgrade when you want to mine a field efficiently?

Suggestion: give T1 modules and drones a baseline non-zero waste. 34%, just like T2 modules with efficient crystals.

Benefits:

  • Newbies still do not waste more than efficient high SP players
  • Efficient equipment like faction minining lasters can have 0 waste and be special.
  • People wouldn’t feel punished for scaling up from T1 to T2 efficient equipment

Bonus idea: add an accessible ‘efficient’ meta module with low (T1 level) yield but with less waste, so that new players with little ISK and low SP can also make the choice between yield and efficiency.

Rorqual changes

Glad to see the nerf to ore yield is still there. Total ice yield seems barely changed, but a large part of the yield bonuses moved to the industrial core.

Mining Frigates & Porpoise

No changes, great!

The current state of the Prospect, Endurance and Venture seems to be fine, so I’m glad you leave them alone. Porpoise as well.

Just one footnote: the usefulness of the mining frigates depends on the yield of the barges. If you buff barge mining yield, mining frigates will fall behind and will need changes as well.

Also you plan on adding gas mining to barges, which will disrupt the use of mining frigates for that role. Please do keep mining frigate usefulness in mind when designing barge gas huffing! Ideally mining frigates should not be (far) behind barges.

Barges / Exhumers

However, we understand that some of these ships are not survivable enough. To that end we’re working closely with the CSM to define the best approach, but our end goal is to significantly increase the EHP of all barges and all exhumers as well as their mining yield.

Nonononono. No.

Neither their EHP needs a significant increase nor their mining yield needs a significant increase. In fact, I would say they need no increase at all.

Barge EHP is at a good spot and barge mining yield has only one problem currently in the game: it is too far behind Rorqual yield. But that problem is getting solved, right?

Barge mining yield
First, yield is relative.
Barge yield is higher than that of mining frigates.
Barge yield is lower than that of Rorquals

If Rorqual yield is nerfed, the relative value of barge yield already increases even without touching their yield.
If Barge yield is increased but ‘mining frigates are untouched’ then mining frigates will become worthless as they currently already are barely worth using in situations where barges can mine due to the much lower yield.

The only reason barge yield would need an increase is if miners cannot fulfill the ore supply in the game. But in that case mining frigates also would need a yield increase to keep up.

I doubt this will be the case however - if prices of ore go up due to reduced supply, more people that currently think mining is not worth their time may pick up a barge and go mining when mining pays better. Unless there is not enough ore in the game, people can and will solve this problem themselves.

My recommendation: Do not increase barge yield (for now)

Barge EHP

Barges and exhumers are survivable. They are very survivable, if you pick the right barges: (Procurer, and Skiff).

If you want to equalize the barges by giving them all significant EHP, why would people make the choice to pick the ‘survivable’ barge or exhumer of the three when they can pick a barge which also has convenience or yield instead on top of survivability?

My recommendation: Be careful with EHP buffs!

Also understand that miners may ask for EHP buffs for their ships, but there are other players in the game as well who shoot those barges and exhumers. A Procurer is a very tough nut to crack for solo hunters and solo gankers. Don’t remove the gameplay of those players by buffing the survivability of the other barges and exhumers beyond their reach as well.

Closing the Mining Gap

I like where the Rorqual falls in the new graphs. Useful, but no longer far beyond the rest. This will be great for barge and exhumer pilots!

What I would like to see is a similar graph but with mining frigates. I would want to know how the mining frigates compare to barges for ore, ice and gas mining. In my opinion it would be ideal if the mining frigates were not too far behind the slower barges, say 10-15% slower.

Moon mining, resource distribution, blueprints

I don’t have much to say about these, but others may, so I’ll leave it at that.

1 Like
315

900×900 149 KB

2 Likes
316

And keep minerals in R4 Highsec moons. :slight_smile:

1 Like
317

So, Orca and Rorqual perform well in mining, while providing boosts. “Well” is not “outperform everything to the point where any other mining ship is a senseless ballast”, but “does a meaningful contribution to the overall operation performance”.

318

By “performs well”, you mean that it is relegated to destroying Dark Ochre and R16s and below because of the 60% waste of excavators?

REDNES

1 Like
319

I spend several months and several billions IKS for my rorq, but you just bury it. Here is my proposal to CCP: sack authors of those changes. EVE will be much better if such people will never touch it.

4 Likes
320

A polished turd, is still a turd.

3 Likes
321

Deep. Profound. :slight_smile:

322

Here’s my sugestion about compression (not an indy player and haven’t tested on sisi so maybe i miss the point).
So as I understood players are mad about the compression time, in that case why not make the compression cycle such that it is enough to compress ore from x hulks ? Lets say 20 hulks mine 1000units in 1 cycle so make the rorq compress 1000 unit in 1 compression cycle that’s the same duration as the miner cycle (or longer cycle time but with more so that it match what the hulks have mined).
That would make so 1 rorq is enough to support 20 hulks but if you want to mine with more, either you need a second rorq or you need to compress afterward and loose time.

323

So what is the reasoning behind the more than doubled power grid for the rorq and the Industrial core module? broke my fit for what? and i still have not fit a compression module.

324

Too bad for compression being delayed, I was looking forward to it. But at least now take your time to make it work from the ore/ice/gas hold, possibly in a loop without need to reload.
Regarding barges I’d ease a bit fitting constraints, I remember fitting tank on a Mackinaw was quite hard.

Thanks for reverting the Venture change, I was seriously considering gas huffing on a Hoarder…
I didn’t mind the Prospect changes, I believe those were fitting the ship role, but the Endurance changes were a shame, it is a more interesting design to have ships for the purpose (ice/ore/…) rather than faster/tankier (for how tanky a frigate can be)

I also like the change to waste, I believe it supports the concept between using a pickaxe or an excavator

After some doubtful thought I came to the conclusion that I also like that the Porpoise is reverted while the Orca is not, it widens the difference between the two instead of one just being the bigger version of the other. I’m assuming it also cannot use the Compact Industrial Core, otherwise it will have quite a high mining yield from drones.

Speaking of which, make sure the Orca gets some cool animation for the Compact Industrial Core :wink:

1 Like
325

I don’t dispute that, but what I wanted to understand was your reasoning. I’m not a person who really cares about yields and whatnot. I do want to knock the orca down a peg so that it’s not the endgame mining ship that it became, and it seems like that’s still the intention. I cared that new players might get ostracized for wasteage, but it seems like that’s no longer going to be the case. The rest of the changes are math and fiddly bits that don’t really matter to me all that much and so I rely on other people to interpret that information and spit back some general information I can apply. Lots of people do provide these interpretations, but it’s hard to assess which are reliable through all the bias when I’m not familiar with the people.

As someone who seems capable of constructing a reasonable position and citing some evidence instead of just trying to promote an agenda, you’re one of the people who’s insights I value, so I asked if you would share some with me. I know people have other things to do with their time, though, and writing a short essay sounds like homework, so no biggie if you’d rather not.

1 Like
326

Still a cash grab going after solo players who rely on the rorq to make money, nerfing it more = less rorqs in space for content, forcing people to have more alts to mine, and the x2 ore buff is still a nerf, only 20% ore not the original nerfed 80% ore removed from the game,