These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Mining barge changes [now with feedback]
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Unit757
North Point
#201 - 2012-07-25 22:40:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Unit757
Infinite Force wrote:
Unit757 wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1481903#post1481903

"WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE HULK AFTER THE CHANGE? Exact modifications are still vague, but the plan is to quite reduce its cargo hold and add an ore bay of the same size than the removed cargo hold. That means cargo expanders and rigs won’t affect the ore bay at all, requiring players to unload ore more frequently. This is by design, as we want the Hulk to be moved into a fleet purpose that has to rely on others to make proper use of its best mining output. That also means we will not be introducing items that affect the ore bay size. "

Directly from CCP. If you want something with a bigger hold, jump in a machinaw or skiff, otherwise, park your ass next to an orca, and start unloading. It is NOT a solo ship, AT ALL.

Quote:

I don't mind the changes that turn everything upside-down, but whether or not you choose to mine solo or in a fleet, 2 cycles at max yield / bonuses should be the baseline for the Ore holds.


Why is it so hard for people to understand that the hulk IS NOT MEANT TO MINE SOLO. If the machinaw had a tiny ore bay, I'd understand your concern, but as of yet, nobody seems to have clued in to the fact that the hulk is no longer THE best all round ship. It has a role, and that's fleet yield. The mackinaw has a role, and that's solo efficiency.

LOL. Fail. Not once have I said, or implied, that the Hulk was meant as a solo mining vessel, nor did I say or imply that I want it to mine solo (that's the Mack's new role).


Quote:
That means cargo expanders and rigs won’t affect the ore bay at all, requiring players to unload ore more frequently.

With the current implementation of the Hulk, you can sit for up to 15 minutes and not need to move before unloading.

Just because it's suddenly classified now as a "FLEET SHIP", doesn't suddenly mean that unloading every 3 - 4 minutes (2 fully boosted cycles) somehow breaks the concept of "fleet mining".

Open your eyes and stop thinking that all of us are "hulk" only people (start thinking outside that lame excuse box). I use all the Exhumers fairly equally, and I've said numerous times that ALL the cargo holds need to be adjusted and ALL the Ore holds should be adequate to the specialized task at hand - which, in my opinion - should be 2 fully cycles as a baseline.


In regards to the first part, I read that wrong then. I took it as you implying it specifically to the hulk.

However, for the second part, I have yet to see a reason why it needs to hold 2 cycles. I mined for almost the first 2 years of playing, using an orca, and very rarely, if ever, did I have more then one cycle inside the hulks themselves. Much like your opinion is that it should have two as a baseline, mine is that they don't. if it's meant to have a hauler or an orca with it, why does it need 2, all it really needs is the space to hold what it brings in, which it has more then enough for.
Droxlyn
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#202 - 2012-07-25 22:44:11 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Well, I'm sure that they hate the tendency for players (and honestly this goes for players of all types, not just miners) to have everything exactly the way they want it. Blink

From a roleplaying perspective, the ship designers are idiots who if I ever found them in a bar (WiS), I'd suicide gank in a heartbeat. (Not a threat on the game designers. I'd try to bribe them with beer.)
It's like the engineers calculated out the perfect number and subtracted 2 from it. And as sad as that sounds, it has happened in real life too. The original Stealth bomber designers had no computers, so they were doing the math by hand. When doing the math to maximize the fuel capacity, they got a derivative's sign backwards and instead MINIMIZED the fuel capacity. (At least that's what my Calculus teacher told us.)

Anyway, let me know when ORE hires some competent ship engineers.

Drox
Dave Stark
#203 - 2012-07-25 22:49:44 UTC
Arctos Canis wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Arctos Canis wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
Won't the Skiff mine Ice better than the Mack now?

Skiff gets 3/cycle by the bonuses, Mack only gets 2/cycle.

I'll check soon, but I need to resinstall Sisi, so maybe someone who's already on can check.


no it's identical.


Really happy that more people have started looking in to this :) cuz there will be a lot more people who will come to same conclusion then.
Buzzy everything maxed out - numbers are like this :)

new skiff cycle time is 65.83 seconds 1block
new mack cycle time is 119.82s 2 blocks
new hulk cycle time is 166.3s 3 blocks


what are you using to get those numbers.
using max skill, max yield fits, with max orca bonuses and a 3% yeti implant i'm getting the following;

old mack = 191 second cycle, 75 blocks/hour
new mack = 103, 69
hulk = 143, 75
skiff = 56, 63

as we see, the old mack is better than the new mack, but it's still in line with the hulk. (if we don't round and truncate the new hulk is worse but by so little that nobody cares)

I don't understand how your numbers are lower then mine :) if we bouth use max skill,fits,boosts . that's strange


i may or may not be calculating the fleet bonus correctly.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#204 - 2012-07-25 23:02:27 UTC
3 light drones for the skiff? That's kind of lacking isn't it? The hulk carries 10... shouldn't the skiff get at least 5?

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Dave Stark
#205 - 2012-07-25 23:07:39 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
3 light drones for the skiff? That's kind of lacking isn't it? The hulk carries 10... shouldn't the skiff get at least 5?



skiff needs more drone space, and the hulk needs more space moving from the ore bay to regular cargo and the mining barge changes will be perfect, to be honest.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#206 - 2012-07-25 23:20:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Infinite Force wrote:
Gevlin wrote:
This why in null sec often Multi box miners often use miner Is , as we move the max yield we specialize in the crystals we use we will require team work to plow through a field as a group.

I am looking forward to the changes except the level bonus for the skiff and Mach, ie move away from yield increase of 1 percent to another aspect of the ship and have a increase per level that matters

I understand multi-boxing as I run 6-9 accounts myself. I have lived & mined in Null, Low, High and WH space - in both large (30+) and small (<10) fleets as well as solo.

These changes should be based around a fully T2 fitted Barge. If you want to use Miner I's after that, then you certainly can - but that does not mean that because you decide to use Miner I's, other must as well.

Remember that crystal sizes are based on the ORIGINAL implementation of the Barges & Exhumers.

CCP doesn't want the barges to be used as haulers anymore (I never did out side of "mining" stuff) and by implementing specialized Ore holds and significantly reducing the cargoholds, they've accomplished that.

The bottom line is still that the mining crystals (both T1 and T2) are out of whack with these new changes as they currently stand.

never used hulks as haulers myself either.. but I did on a couple of miners run hulks with a cargo expanded just enough for 2 cycles.. so I could haul to station with my orca without having to drop the yield progression waiting for the orcas return.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Jake Rivers
New Planetary Order
#207 - 2012-07-25 23:39:49 UTC
I don't mind having to dump the ore every cycle when I mine, it makes the mining more active, and is why I have never like ice mining due to the long wait times on the cycles. No matter where you are when mining, you really don't want to go afk for long periods, as you will get ganked if you afk mine.

Also I like having various crystals for change up when mining, it keeps you busy when you are mining and cuts out some of the boredom.

But I don't like the idea that I would have to move my vessels around due to not being able to keep enough crystals in the hold, this is going to suck, and I really hope it was an oversight by CCP to not account for the size of the bloody crystals when they reduced the cargohold.

Reduce the size of the crystals and you will have happy miners.

Senex Legio
Gevlin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#208 - 2012-07-26 01:26:57 UTC
with the new ore hold, the rorqual will be able to hold and extra 140km3 of compressed ore with retrievers holding ore in their ore hold.

137 Cargo Hold
30 in Corp Hanger
250 K in Ore hold
140 in Retrievers
that is 557mk3 in ore. veldspare is compressed at 40 to 1

22,280,000m3 of Ore Now that is a planet - divided by 7k = 3182 Covetor loads?

Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Hypercake Mix
#209 - 2012-07-26 03:47:19 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Barbara Nichole wrote:
3 light drones for the skiff? That's kind of lacking isn't it? The hulk carries 10... shouldn't the skiff get at least 5?



skiff needs more drone space, and the hulk needs more space moving from the ore bay to regular cargo and the mining barge changes will be perfect, to be honest.

Procurer too. Mining drones are mining yield too! Would be nice if it were 50/50 so we could run a flight of light drones too for belt rats.
Rushuna Vash
Perkone
Caldari State
#210 - 2012-07-26 06:47:25 UTC
My question is, is the Hulk even worth it anymore? Is the increase in yield over the Mack worth the hassle of having a dedicated hauler?

With Macks you have the ability to haul a jetcan+ of ore back to Station/POS/Rorq. And since you're gonna have to go back and get crystals all the time now, you will have more down time to drop off your ore. Converting a hauler into another Mack might be more efficient than having a dedicated hauler.

If the hulks can't mine 24/7 with all their gear/crystals ready to go, I really don't see the point of the increase in yield. They really need to do something about the mining crystals, cause if you've ever had to clear a belt/grav site you know you need more than 3 kinds of crystals to clear it. And you do a lot of clearing of sites/belts in mining OPs, which is supposedly the Hulks role right?
Dave Stark
#211 - 2012-07-26 06:52:59 UTC
Rushuna Vash wrote:
My question is, is the Hulk even worth it anymore? Is the increase in yield over the Mack worth the hassle of having a dedicated hauler?

With Macks you have the ability to haul a jetcan+ of ore back to Station/POS/Rorq. And since you're gonna have to go back and get crystals all the time now, you will have more down time to drop off your ore. Converting a hauler into another Mack might be more efficient than having a dedicated hauler.

If the hulks can't mine 24/7 with all their gear/crystals ready to go, I really don't see the point of the increase in yield. They really need to do something about the mining crystals, cause if you've ever had to clear a belt/grav site you know you need more than 3 kinds of crystals to clear it. And you do a lot of clearing of sites/belts in mining OPs, which is supposedly the Hulks role right?



yes, the hulk will still pull in more isk/hour solo if you can be bothered to pay attention and drag ore every 3 mins and swap to a hauler. all about effort vs reward really. the reward is there, though.

you aren't going to "go back and get crystals all the time" at all. crystals don't break every 3 cycles; you're just going to have to focus on certain ores and change crystals when you haul. inconvenient but hardly game breaking for a solo miner... in fleets when you're not docking up to swap ships etc though it's a bit of an oversight.

yes, the mackinaw will make a better hauler based on the fact that it's got more ore bay space than a fully expanded DST. however an orca gets up to 180k m3 vs the macks 37k.
Ptiht Lerdds
#212 - 2012-07-26 08:36:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Ptiht Lerdds
Max orca fleet bonus + yeti +3%

Hulk 2xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 143,47s
Mackinaw 3xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 103,35s

Ice harvester accelrator rig cycle time bonus -12%
Arctos Canis
Ice Wolves
#213 - 2012-07-26 08:40:10 UTC
Ptiht Lerdds wrote:
Max orca fleet bonus + yeti +3%

Hulk 2xmlu2 + ice harvester accelerator = 143,47s
Mackinaw 3xMLu2 + ice harverster accelator = 103,35s

These are based on numbers only? so why when u log on to sisi u only get hulk 166 and mack 119? is there something not working properly in sisi?
Dave Stark
#214 - 2012-07-26 08:44:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Ptiht Lerdds wrote:
Max orca fleet bonus + yeti +3%

Hulk 2xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 143,47s
Mackinaw 3xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 103,35s


consistent with what i'm getting.


Arctos Canis wrote:

These are based on numbers only? so why when u log on to sisi u only get hulk 166 and mack 119? is there something not working properly in sisi?

i did hear fleet bonuses on sisi were a bit funky at the moment, perhaps that's why the napkin maths isn't reflecting what's happening on sisi?

also are you using a foreman implant on sisi?
edit: you're missing the implant, i just removed the implant from my spreadsheet and i get the same numbers you are. mining foreman mindlink is what you need.
or warfare link specialist V that's the same bonus as the implant.
Yuliana Sin
Edge Of Dawn
#215 - 2012-07-26 09:08:14 UTC
I'm a bit concerned about the exhumerbonus from the Skiff/Mackinaw. It renders the exhumerskill nearly pointless on them.
The choice for highsec lonewolf-miners is the now Mackinaw, new miners don't have to train it past IV or even III to get full benefit from the ship alone.
The direction of devaluating a rank5(!) tech2-skill cannot be a good step ... -> EvE, harsh, etc. you know.
Dave Stark
#216 - 2012-07-26 09:19:09 UTC
Yuliana Sin wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the exhumerbonus from the Skiff/Mackinaw. It renders the exhumerskill nearly pointless on them.
The choice for highsec lonewolf-miners is the now Mackinaw, new miners don't have to train it past IV or even III to get full benefit from the ship alone.
The direction of devaluating a rank5(!) tech2-skill cannot be a good step ... -> EvE, harsh, etc. you know.


the only people training exhumer V before the changes are people mining mercoxit, and even then mercoxit is poor isk/hour right now.

in truth; there's never really been a reason to train exhumers past III.
Yuliana Sin
Edge Of Dawn
#217 - 2012-07-26 10:03:20 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Yuliana Sin wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the exhumerbonus from the Skiff/Mackinaw. It renders the exhumerskill nearly pointless on them.
The choice for highsec lonewolf-miners is the now Mackinaw, new miners don't have to train it past IV or even III to get full benefit from the ship alone.
The direction of devaluating a rank5(!) tech2-skill cannot be a good step ... -> EvE, harsh, etc. you know.


the only people training exhumer V before the changes are people mining mercoxit, and even then mercoxit is poor isk/hour right now.

in truth; there's never really been a reason to train exhumers past III.


I don't think so.
Albeit the current bonus is fairly low it get's even worse. Now there is no reason at all except for hulks. Providing such a high rolebonus with that low exhumerbonus is just unnecessary in my opinion.

Is it poor gamedesign? Or a even new direction to reduce the impact of (high) skills? I don't think there is currently a skill which gives only 1% bonus ...
Arctos Canis
Ice Wolves
#218 - 2012-07-26 10:22:54 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Ptiht Lerdds wrote:
Max orca fleet bonus + yeti +3%

Hulk 2xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 143,47s
Mackinaw 3xIHU2 + 1x ice harvester accelerator rig = 103,35s


consistent with what i'm getting.


Arctos Canis wrote:

These are based on numbers only? so why when u log on to sisi u only get hulk 166 and mack 119? is there something not working properly in sisi?

i did hear fleet bonuses on sisi were a bit funky at the moment, perhaps that's why the napkin maths isn't reflecting what's happening on sisi?

also are you using a foreman implant on sisi?
edit: you're missing the implant, i just removed the implant from my spreadsheet and i get the same numbers you are. mining foreman mindlink is what you need.
or warfare link specialist V that's the same bonus as the implant.


Confirming. :)
Hulk 143,47s (current mack output 73 block/h < new hulk 76 block/h)
Mack 103.35s
Skiff 56.79s
Doddy
Excidium.
#219 - 2012-07-26 10:56:21 UTC
All these tears about cycles to cargo etc are pretty hilarious for those of us who mined before there were barges and you had 1 minute cycles that filled your cargo entirely.
Dave Stark
#220 - 2012-07-26 11:14:23 UTC
Doddy wrote:
All these tears about cycles to cargo etc are pretty hilarious for those of us who mined before there were barges and you had 1 minute cycles that filled your cargo entirely.


clearly you haven't read the problem. the distribution between cargo and ore bay means you don't have room for crystals and there's "wasted" space in the ore bay that would be much more useful as regular cargo not as part of the ore bay.