EVE General Discussion

Excerpt from the dev blog.

•New ORE frig: we want this ship to replace current mining frigates as low barrier of entry vessel, but also fulfill high-end gameplay expectations by providing a very mobile platform for mining in hostile space. Lowest mining output, decent ore bay, little to no resilience.

•Procurer/Skiff: primarily made for self-defense. Better mining rate than the ORE frig, good ore bay, but capable of having battleship-like EHP.

•Retriever/Mackinaw: made for self-reliance. Has the largest ore bay, similear to the size of a jet can, second best mining output but less EHP than the procurer mining barge.

•Covetor/Hulk: ore bay is identical to its current cargo hold, little to average EHP, but best mining output. Basically made for group operations when players have industrials and protection to back them up.

Can you please show me where the Hulk is being buffed?

Doesn't really matter to me anyway, since I'm a null sec Ice miner. All this means is less docking and more mining. Not to mention quicker ice cycles!

not entirely true since your mack will be mining less ice, even with the new ice rig.

Do these upcoming changes mean that suicide ganking will be impossible? I suppose not, since you just need a big enough ship, or just a lot of them. Does it it mean it becomes less profitable (measured in tears, since real profit would be more loot than loss)? Yes it does.

So what should are the possible consequences?

a) Give up suicide ganking miners and look for other targets.
b) Rethink your approach and form ganking bands with lots of cheap ships.
c) Start a career in highsec-mining, since, according to some people, it's absolutely safe now.
d) Go on the forums and complain, then do a), b), or c)

The fact is that gankers do the exact same thing the miners have been doing since the first Hulkageddon: They complain because propably won't be able to do things they way they are used to do them. They need to adapt, the way the miners should have adapted to the ganking. So why not be a good example, swallow the pill and find a new way to pass your time in New Eden?

Am I forced to agree with the bad predictions of a random dude on the EVE-o forums?

Just throwing this out there; what if the lower the system sec status the faster the mining laser cycle time?

How dense are you?
If you are really worried about Catalysts, you tank against blasters.
All this bleating: "no fair I lose my 300M ISK Hulk to a 1M ISK Catalyst."
Catalysts (and Brutixes, and Taloses) ALL SHOOT KIN/THERM, so it makes perfect sense to tank it.

And thats aside from the fact that Thermal is the weakest overall resist on an Exhumer, and is the default damage selection against any Exhumer.

OFC, Tornados can also shoot EMP or Fusion, but now we aren't talking about 3M ISK gank ships anymore.

Why are you dissembling, while trying to point out other people are dissembling?

Besides, you'd have an argument if miners even made an honest attempt at tanking and were getting torched anyway. But we find empty slots. Civilian Shield Boosters? Cap Rechargers? Complete lack of ECM drones.
In the VAST majority of cases. And if you can figure out how to tank, great? Why are you complaining - YOU aren't going to be the one exploded - its going to be your neighbor.

Oh wait - I forgot, you always insist on a 'max DPS' Glass-cannon Exhumer fit.

Cow says moooo.

What does a chicken say?

Didn't read all of this thread because it's 70 pages but, I suggested a HP buff for hulks over a year ago. You can't argue that it's perfectly fair for 1 or 2 catalysts to gank a 300m isk Hulk who has to sit still in a belt for hours on end.

I don't know much about the other changes but a HP buff was needed.

If you want to kill hulks, use bigger ships.

And you can't kill a 30k EHP hulk solo in a 0.7 system even with a 1 billion isk vindicator. Isk balancing is dumb balancing.