These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[September] Mining Barge and Exhumer tweaks

First post
Author
FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#181 - 2016-08-26 00:54:37 UTC
Coralas wrote:



lol - Can you be any more wrong.

proteus + augmented plating + whatever you want to get 7 slots, no implants.

3x trimark II (using similar budget to your c-types - and not lootable items, always superior in a ganking scenario).

2x 1600mm rolled tungsten
1x dc II
2x kin hardener II
2x therm hardener II

760k ehp vs kin/therm from serps. If you change the hardeners to 2 explosive / 1 em and an adaptive (all t2), then you get 240k to everything at once, not _just_ antimatter. I'm sure fitting gurus can come up with even better tanks if they think about it. Even if other T3s can still only get to 200k vs everything, they still vastly outclass the skiff which is only 200k vs antimatter with bling, or 110k vs everything, and _all_ ganked skiffs are scanned for the hole before ganking.

There is a mining ship that has warp core stabilizing. There is a mining ship that fits a covops cloak. They already come with the necessary yield trade offs for those mobility features, and they have the special feature clearly written on them for casual players to see, and yes it is a reasonable presumption that the mining ship works straight out of the box without too much effort, for a casual player.



Dead wrong. Read native EHP again, understand what it means, and how it applies to this argument.

Quote:


This is the most absurd thing that I've heard. People that use mining ships, mine with them. The redesign was specifically to enable each of them to fill a useful role within that sphere. I've pointed out for you to understand exactly why they were redesigned as they are, why there is 3 of each, and why each of them are valid choices in the same system, mining the same stuff, under different tactical circumstances. You refit a mining ship by undocking in the right one, and since 4 of the 6 are expected to dock frequently, its not even that big an ask.

The ships do not need massive fitting flexibility because the requirements for all 3 T1 barges are the same, and they do the same thing - MINE. The requirements for all the t2 series are the same, and because you will use different rigs for different scenarios, which means in your scenario, someone owns 3 macks, and in the actual scenario, someone owns a hulk, a mack and a skiff, and gets the flexibility they need. The yield gap between a hulk in a group with a hauler and a solo skiff is more than sufficient to compensate for the risk.

if you mine exclusively in a skiff, then you lose a skiffs value in ore, every billion isk mined, when I was mining, that appears to me to be sufficient to stop mining population being exclusively skiffs, but if you keep shooting the same player, do not be suprised to find they adopt a solution that actually works.



Duh. People are going to use mining ships to mine. Who's posts are you even referencing at this point? When at any time have I said that I want mining ships to be used for tasks other than mining? I'm simply asking for barges to be redesigned so that there's a greater degree of granularity and trade-offs for miners. If you want to fit for emergent game play, bait, or some other function, than so be it, the system supports it, and my proposal will too. It's been suggested here that there could be only one t1 and one t2 mining barge, and with an appropriate fitting system, it could work fine, even better than the current one. Nothing I've suggested here would impede you from ANY of the in game functions you've mentioned, which bring me to the basis of the whole shebang: why do you even care? I reference the following:

Quote:


Ah the way you *fit* a tank to a mining ship trading off yield is to dock your hulk/mackinaw and undock in a skiff or procurer.

We've already been through this, a yield fitted ship will want different rigs to a tank fitted ship, ergo, you would change hulls anyway. I don't know how much it will take to get this through your skull. Rigs means an individual hull is assembled for a role and left in that role.

Not only that, the way the skiff works is that if I tell everyone I've changed to a skiff because of a ganker in system, then the fleet knows I'm capable of being called on for defense, and the fleet knows that the target choice probabilities by gankers has changed, because the skiff has written on its box, "contents : 1 tank".


That's the problem. You want an idiot proof EVE, one that coddles miners and new players (who often get their start in mining,) a system that shields players from the true nature of eve. Players who make poor choices, who don't network, learn from available resources or other players get punished for their bad decisions. The skiff if about as idiot proof as it gets. You don't need the fit the right hardeners, you don't need a good fit, most of the time you're safe. Can they be ganked? Sure. Are they? At about a 100:1 rate with other t2 barges. That's wrong, no player, ever, should have near immunity to danger, while still reaping most of the benefits of severely more dangerous, but only slightly less lucrative options, while sporting a garbage fit just because the ship that they fly has everything they need baked into the hull.

Everyone else gets the hard lessons. Think your orthrus is a solo pwnmobile and that you can warp into two oracles and a huginn? You're going to get whats coming to you. Undock a carrier with t1 fighters and no support to fight a 100mn cruiser gang and you're in for another expensive lesson. That is EVE, this is the game we play, and no player should ever be set apart because it breaks the system, leaves players self entitled and leads to this kind of 'debate' we see on this forum every day.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2016-08-26 05:49:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Coralas
FT Cold wrote:



Dead wrong. Read native EHP again, understand what it means, and how it applies to this argument.



in my opinion, native EHP is a completely irrelevent stat, beyond its influence on fitted stats - which we've already determined is not excessive.

Nobody flies around presuming that honor tanks are fitted, its just a suprise when the target melts.

Quote:


Duh. People are going to use mining ships to mine. Who's posts are you even referencing at this point?



Yours, where you keep wanting each and every mining ship, to do each and every mining role, which is confusing, ruins d-scan as an intel tool, makes their roles within mining overlap and makes even just figuring out what people have in your own mining fleet, impossible without checking the fittings of every ship in the fleet.

Quote:


That's the problem.

You want an idiot proof EVE, one that coddles miners and new players (who often get their start in mining,) a system that shields players from the true nature of eve.

Players who make poor choices, who don't network, learn from available resources or other players get punished for their bad decisions. The skiff if about as idiot proof as it gets. You don't need the fit the right hardeners, you don't need a good fit, most of the time you're safe.



There is no logical difference from knowing the role of a module, vs knowing the role of a hull. Do you see why I think what you are saying is bizzare now ? If a miner has gotten to the point that they understand what all 6 barges are for, that is entirely equivalent knowledge to knowing what an LSE is.

Guess who fleeted with them, guess who's max leadership, implanted orca pilot sat at a safe boosting for an hour a day in their system. Guess who switched to a ****ing skiff to defend when the regular CASMA booster logged in. guess who flew that skiff to the retrievers in the fleet when gankers turned up. Guess who showed them what a skiff was for by example. Guess who discussed fittings with them, guess who discussed yields with them, guess who pointed them to cerlestes to figure out which ore is the most valuable so they spent most of their time not mining the wrong ore, guess who donated ventures to newbies if they lost them. Guess who was telling them to set the gankers to red in their overview.

Guess who was on the npc corp chat telling people about CASMA, how to get boosts, and where to be fleeted, and thus where to begin cooperating with other players. Even though I haven't mined for years, I still tell new players where to get boosts to this very day.

ie the role of fixing the knowledge of miners is not something that the slotting of exhumers solves. that role is a task for players, its a task I've done, and its a task I still do.

Quote:


Can they be ganked? Sure. Are they? At about a 100:1 rate with other t2 barges. That's wrong, no player, ever, should have near immunity to danger, while still reaping most of the benefits of severely more dangerous, but only slightly less lucrative options, while sporting a garbage fit just because the ship that they fly has everything they need baked into the hull.



Yes I see now, CCP is handing out exhumer skills on trials, putting newbies in skiffs, spawning vast amounts of plag in the starter system, undocking for them, and firing their strips for them, and they are figuring out none of the inbetween, not losing any ships on the way, and not figuring out for themselves what the skiff is for, and they are earning 50m+ an hour on trial from the getgo like I did with this character in a frigate doing combat exploration, where the only bad thing that ever happened to me was hecates being faster than me to the bloody loot.

Quote:


Everyone else gets the hard lessons. Think your orthrus is a solo pwnmobile and that you can warp into two oracles and a huginn? You're going to get whats coming to you. Undock a carrier with t1 fighters and no support to fight a 100mn cruiser gang and you're in for another expensive lesson. That is EVE, this is the game we play, and no player should ever be set apart because it breaks the system, leaves players self entitled and leads to this kind of 'debate' we see on this forum every day.


Because its fair that a destroyer kills every cruiser in the game, in the 16-25 seconds that it takes concord to drop the donuts, even if the player has gone through all the bother of learning about the ship, earning the money for the ship and the skills in a hitpointless barge, and absolutely, whatever else happens, the gankers shouldn't have to think about their fittings, because a catalyst should always automatically win. Your argument is entirely reversable.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#183 - 2016-08-26 06:07:32 UTC
Catalysts have no fitting options either. Rack of blasters. Magstabs. Done.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2016-08-26 06:27:12 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

And that is because we do not need 3 T1 barges. Or 3 T2 barges.
We only need a single T1 barge, with the ability to be fitted properly. And in terms of mining we only need a single T2 barge also.
If they are given a full rack of utility highslots then you 'could' introduce speciality T2's that do different things with the utility highslots, but otherwise you only need the one exhumer also.


We've been through this already. if you make this so, then you d-scan tells you generic exhumer is in the anomoly or belt. that is all it tells you. You do this and solo cat gankers are only going to warp to ventures. The only people favoured by this is industrial scale ganking groups.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#185 - 2016-08-26 07:07:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Because these ships are bad.

Im going to use a mining fleet that was caught in O-JPKH (Branch) / 2016-08-21 14:00.

The fleet consisted of 14 exhumers and a jump freighter and faced off against 12 mixed pirate cruisers, 2 sabres, 4 interceptors. The 14 exhumers all died within 2 minutes, the attackers lost nothing.

This is the reality for miners with the current and proposed changes. They cannot do anything to protect themselves and even if they had the old defense fleet that used to be in deklien (multiple titans, supers and carriers on constant standby) by the time the call for help goes out the mining fleet is dead.

Why exactly should a fleet worth 5.6 billion be so utterly helpless and easy to kill?


I rented a system from your old space hitler for more than 6 months. I was the first occupied system in Vale next to a geminate exit. Which meant that pretty much I had no intel. Hulks take no longer to align than it takes me to retract drones and align a dominix. I probably warped my ratting ships to my pos 500 times without intel and without being intercepted - local is godlike intel.

If they have only 1 anomoly (the thing that screwed interceptor pilots was that I had 12 or 16 anomoly haystack with only 1 battleship needle and lots of potential d-scan overlap), then they should drag bubble the approaches from gates so that only interceptors can land directly, everything else has a long burn and share the 1 in 15 pilot roles with an anti frigate ship, which means if they were mining for 4 hours, individuals need on average do 16 minutes of picket duty. In any case, splitting that fleet to interceptors with the dictors out of range would have allowed most of the fleet to exit, or at least allowed the fleet to kill interceptors, making it not a "flawless victory".

What you are describing to me is a fleet that couldn't take precautions in a place where precautions are known to be necessary, and a fleet that cannot seem to be able to turn their own territory into homefield advantage (which surely is the point of sov, docking rights and being able to jump freighter in bulk defensive resources).

Also, any concept of a barge formation being any sort of genuine competition to a well supported pirate cruiser formation is ridiculous. You'd surely expect the apex combat cruisers to be massively superior to mining cruisers at combat. The one thing I've never ever wanted from the skiff was for it to be any sort of headsup competitor to a real combat cruiser.


Abadayos
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#186 - 2016-08-26 07:18:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Anoron Secheh wrote:
What about changes to the Rorqual and Orca?


Changes to the Rorqual and Orca are currently planned for November (rather than September for these mining barge changes). We'll be discussing those more as we get a bit closer.



I hate to split hairs but wouldn't balancing one without the other be pretty much useless for those that only have half the picture?

If we are to discuss balancing the mining ships, their fits, yields, actual use (tank/cargo/yield/other unknown) then all of the figures must be reasonably supplied so that a 'before and after' image can be seen by everyone and balance discussion can stem from that, rather than speculation and 'what if?' in regards to boosting, the new battle cruiser mining booster, potential changes to mining drones/introduction of fighters and the long waited for Rorqual changes.

Saying that right now (pulling numbers out of my butt) that with the current proposed changes the hulk is mining less than current, but having in the future the new mining boosts pushing it to say 5% over what it currently does (thus making the proposed change better rather than worse which is what it would look like without the full picture). Saying 'Don't worry guys, it will be fine' won't really do to make people happy because of the track record of ignoring player feedback with things (jump fatigue, fozzy sov etc).

I'm sure some of us would appreciate the bigger picture, even if it's just a rough sketch, so that we can ascertain the rough idea of how things are going to work out. other wise this is just a pointless exercise when looking at the mining meta and how it's changing rather than the single units that make the whole.

Just my thoughts however
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#187 - 2016-08-26 08:07:52 UTC
Coralas wrote:


We've been through this already. if you make this so, then you d-scan tells you generic exhumer is in the anomoly or belt. that is all it tells you. You do this and solo cat gankers are only going to warp to ventures. The only people favoured by this is industrial scale ganking groups.

I'm sorry. And how is this a bad thing that a lazy gander can no longer automatically tell from dscan who he can kill. All I'm seeing here is entitlement from too many months of perfect intel. Make some friends. Doesn't take many.
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#188 - 2016-08-26 08:56:10 UTC
"That's the problem. You want an idiot proof EVE, one that coddles miners and new players (who often get their start in mining,) a system that shields players from the true nature of eve. Players who make poor choices, who don't network, learn from available resources or other players get punished for their bad decisions. The skiff if about as idiot proof as it gets. You don't need the fit the right hardeners, you don't need a good fit, most of the time you're safe. Can they be ganked? Sure. Are they? At about a 100:1 rate with other t2 barges. That's wrong, no player, ever, should have near immunity to danger, while still reaping most of the benefits of severely more dangerous, but only slightly less lucrative options, while sporting a garbage fit just because the ship that they fly has everything they need baked into the hull.

Everyone else gets the hard lessons. Think your orthrus is a solo pwnmobile and that you can warp into two oracles and a huginn? You're going to get whats coming to you. Undock a carrier with t1 fighters and no support to fight a 100mn cruiser gang and you're in for another expensive lesson. That is EVE, this is the game we play, and no player should ever be set apart because it breaks the system, leaves players self entitled and leads to this kind of 'debate' we see on this forum every day."



Ahh, the truth is out at last..you just can't go and kill one when you want with a **** fit Catalyst...didums.

You and others are still trying to compare them to other ships, you're on about the Orthrus and Carriers, which were designed to fill a role, a SPECIFIC one.

How long does it take to train into a gank Catalyst or other Destroyer? How long for a Skiff? I'll post from Uniwiki below.

Coddles miners, lmao. New players can't even dream of flying one for months...It's not being self entitled you self entitled moron..To sit in a Skiff, a player has earned that right over a long period.

http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Skiff

52 days just to sit in it, months and months more for the fittings and skills just for T2 crystals, then there's ice mining to train for, gas huffing to train for, drones to train for, to bring the core skills up, god knows (the info is probably out there somewhere, I got sick of counting).

http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Catalyst

A few paltry hours, and you all expect to be able to kill a ship that takes the above amount of training....

Every miner has had the hard knocks pal, all through his or her career, we have to put up with your rubbish as well on top of it all, but don't worry, the tears from wannabe gankers is worth it.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#189 - 2016-08-26 10:40:58 UTC
I think you'll discover friendo that the tears of dead miners by now are crystalising in to their own ice fields.
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#190 - 2016-08-26 11:30:04 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I think you'll discover friendo that the tears of dead miners by now are crystalising in to their own ice fields.



Agreed, but there'll never be enough for some Roll

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#191 - 2016-08-26 11:30:34 UTC
I'd like to see mining ships get a bonus to fit and use large smartbombs. Plus a fix to smartbombs to actually make them "smart", when used in high-sec, so that they only hit targets which are actively attacking you.

This would make it possible for mining ships, and particularly mining fleets, to mount a real defense against high-sec ganks - assuming, ofc, that the miners are (a) willing to sacrifice yield in favor of an usable offensive capability, and (b) not AFK or bots.

Please note that this suggestion is fully CODE compatible. :)
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#192 - 2016-08-26 12:04:05 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:

Ahh, the truth is out at last..you just can't go and kill one when you want with a **** fit Catalyst...didums.

Or you know, he's actually right. Mining & Industrial ships should have real fittings. The nitpicking over what the T2 versions should be specialised to is one thing, but the basic fact that mining vessels should not have hard coded stats which fittings barely alter in three different version, but one version that fittings then create three (or more) different archetypes from is something EVE desperately needs as it's what really moves miners from being purely treated as helpless prey by everyone to being taken seriously. The reason people treat miners as Helpless prey is because CCP have said so with their lack of fittings.

Also, if you are going to compare a Catalyst and a Skiff, please compare a T2 fitted Catalyst to a Skiff at least.
Or you know, do the actual realistic comparison of a Catalyst to a Procurer. Which also has more than enough tank to laugh at a solo skiff, and doesn't take 52 days to get to and sit in.

and no Sizof, Smart Bombs should A: Never become what you list as it makes pipe bombs insanely overpowered and a module should not magically become worse in a different security space. and B: Will not provide a real defence anyway because ganks are currently over far too fast. And C: To do this you need to provide them with utility highs and massive PG/CPU/Cap bonuses. Or insanely overpowered Smart bomb bonuses. Oh and Utility highs anyway. 50% of Yield to fit 1 bomb that won't actually do enough damage in 20 seconds is pointless.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#193 - 2016-08-26 12:51:26 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:

Ahh, the truth is out at last..you just can't go and kill one when you want with a **** fit Catalyst...didums.

Or you know, he's actually right. Mining & Industrial ships should have real fittings. The nitpicking over what the T2 versions should be specialised to is one thing, but the basic fact that mining vessels should not have hard coded stats which fittings barely alter in three different version



I just took a second look at the OP. I don't know what kind of objectives that CCP are hoping to achieve with their mining barges but barely changing them at all isn't going to do very much.

Kicking a dead horse really. Mining and everything related to it from the AFK rock-wand, unworkable ships, mining boosts, POSmodule rorqual and compression is tardy and lame.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#194 - 2016-08-26 13:28:18 UTC
Coralas wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

And that is because we do not need 3 T1 barges. Or 3 T2 barges.
We only need a single T1 barge, with the ability to be fitted properly. And in terms of mining we only need a single T2 barge also.
If they are given a full rack of utility highslots then you 'could' introduce speciality T2's that do different things with the utility highslots, but otherwise you only need the one exhumer also.


We've been through this already. if you make this so, then you d-scan tells you generic exhumer is in the anomoly or belt. that is all it tells you. You do this and solo cat gankers are only going to warp to ventures. The only people favoured by this is industrial scale ganking groups.


Gankers have been scanning ships prior to attacks for a while now.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#195 - 2016-08-26 13:33:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Caleb Seremshur wrote:



I just took a second look at the OP. I don't know what kind of objectives that CCP are hoping to achieve with their mining barges but barely changing them at all isn't going to do very much.

Kicking a dead horse really. Mining and everything related to it from the AFK rock-wand, unworkable ships, mining boosts, POSmodule rorqual and compression is tardy and lame.


Their objective was to update the models and give them a 'light' balance pass. Its literally right there in the op ffs.

They never said they were going to change anything about how they work...

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Kenrailae
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#196 - 2016-08-26 13:38:47 UTC
So serious question? Since you're doing a mining barge pass, and will soon be doing some of the mining structures, and the orca and rorqual.... why is all this work being thrown into making a bad process look better, but still be just as bad?


Why are we not doing a proper re-vamp and addressing, for better or worse, alot of the long standing complaints with mining, and working forward from there?

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#197 - 2016-08-26 13:45:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Drago Shouna
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:

Ahh, the truth is out at last..you just can't go and kill one when you want with a **** fit Catalyst...didums.

Or you know, he's actually right. Mining & Industrial ships should have real fittings. The nitpicking over what the T2 versions should be specialised to is one thing, but the basic fact that mining vessels should not have hard coded stats which fittings barely alter in three different version, but one version that fittings then create three (or more) different archetypes from is something EVE desperately needs as it's what really moves miners from being purely treated as helpless prey by everyone to being taken seriously. The reason people treat miners as Helpless prey is because CCP have said so with their lack of fittings.

Also, if you are going to compare a Catalyst and a Skiff, please compare a T2 fitted Catalyst to a Skiff at least.
Or you know, do the actual realistic comparison of a Catalyst to a Procurer. Which also has more than enough tank to laugh at a solo skiff, and doesn't take 52 days to get to and sit in.

and no Sizof, Smart Bombs should A: Never become what you list as it makes pipe bombs insanely overpowered and a module should not magically become worse in a different security space. and B: Will not provide a real defence anyway because ganks are currently over far too fast. And C: To do this you need to provide them with utility highs and massive PG/CPU/Cap bonuses. Or insanely overpowered Smart bomb bonuses. Oh and Utility highs anyway. 50% of Yield to fit 1 bomb that won't actually do enough damage in 20 seconds is pointless.



To get a Catalyst and fit it with T2 Blasters and ammo is a little over a week.

To get a Proc and fit it with T2 strips and just 1 type of crystal (veld) is a minimum of around 2 weeks, to train for T1 Arkonor crystals alone is 27 days..Training wise there's no comparison. (much longer with 16 crystals to train)

I haven't checked everything, this is taken from the requirements tabs with a brand new pilot I just made. (Skiff is showing 58d 9h 58m 50s) ( A Harbinger is 1d 14h 25m 2s another 23d 15h for T2 Beams and ammo)

Neither have I gone into mids and lows etc, either way you try it, the barges and exhumers take a damn sight longer to train into.

But bear in mind that the gank Catalyst won't have rigs or T2 armour, to achieve it's full tank the Proc needs all that and more.

My time investment gets me a tanky ship, yours gets you a cheap, paper tank, disposable ship, as it should be.

Some suggestions in here have merit I agree, but someone crying over alleged self entitled miners needs to know what he's on about.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Neugeniko
Insight Securities
#198 - 2016-08-26 13:57:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Neugeniko
Hi guys,
I thought I would punch in the new stats for the t2 ships into a my mining simulator and see what conclusions I could come up with. The mackinaw hasn't changed so I didn't bother simulating it.

The skiff showed little change for null, whether using your survey scanner to short cycle your laser or lazy mining. In high sec, lazy mining yield went up 12%. This was due to less over mining, more lasers of lower yield. I didn't simulate low sec mining but I would expect lazy mining to be a few percent better too.

The hulks I only simulated with orca support using all ore types. One hulk and a orca was 6% better due to a extra mlu. Under lazy mining conditions it was only 4% better due to losing its very low yield lasers.

Typically the t1 ships show a similar trend to the t2 version under simulation.

TLDR; Lazy high sec skiff miners rejoice.

Cheers,
Neug
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#199 - 2016-08-26 14:19:58 UTC
Coralas wrote:

Also, any concept of a barge formation being any sort of genuine competition to a well supported pirate cruiser formation is ridiculous. You'd surely expect the apex combat cruisers to be massively superior to mining cruisers at combat. The one thing I've never ever wanted from the skiff was for it to be any sort of headsup competitor to a real combat cruiser.




Why is it that you want to be defenseless? Miners keep on moaning about how they get treated as second class citizens, how they are continually getting killed easily and how pvp should be nerfed to make their lives easier yet when someone puts forwards a plan to provide all the defenses and options you want you turn around and demand to be helpless victims.
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#200 - 2016-08-26 15:10:39 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Coralas wrote:

Also, any concept of a barge formation being any sort of genuine competition to a well supported pirate cruiser formation is ridiculous. You'd surely expect the apex combat cruisers to be massively superior to mining cruisers at combat. The one thing I've never ever wanted from the skiff was for it to be any sort of headsup competitor to a real combat cruiser.




Why is it that you want to be defenseless? Miners keep on moaning about how they get treated as second class citizens, how they are continually getting killed easily and how pvp should be nerfed to make their lives easier yet when someone puts forwards a plan to provide all the defenses and options you want you turn around and demand to be helpless victims.



I haven't seen one post like that, what I have seen is players saying ganking should have more consequences other than losing a cheap ship and taking a 15 min tea break.

How would utility slots possibly help a solo miner anywhere?

Give me an extra 5 turret slots and the power grid and cpu needed to run them and I'd go for it.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.