These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Ship Balancing: Mining Barges

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#401 - 2012-08-09 18:00:32 UTC
Jane Dough wrote:
Not if your play style is as a solo miner. The cut to the ore holds means the Hulk is not supposed to haul anything. Well, for a solo miner, that pretty much screws you over.

The hulk was never a hauler to begin with, and I don't see how having a single-cycle ore hold changes things versus the previous not quite two-cycle cargo hold. It also doesn't screw solo miners in the least, because if you weren't jet-canning, multi-boxing, or working with corp/alliance mates previously, you were already gimping your output so badly that I'd have to question your mining credentials.

Either that, or you're a high-sec whinebear.
Jane Dough
Jane's Inc.
#402 - 2012-08-09 19:08:45 UTC
Atum wrote:
Jane Dough wrote:
Not if your play style is as a solo miner. The cut to the ore holds means the Hulk is not supposed to haul anything. Well, for a solo miner, that pretty much screws you over.

The hulk was never a hauler to begin with, and I don't see how having a single-cycle ore hold changes things versus the previous not quite two-cycle cargo hold. It also doesn't screw solo miners in the least, because if you weren't jet-canning, multi-boxing, or working with corp/alliance mates previously, you were already gimping your output so badly that I'd have to question your mining credentials.

Either that, or you're a high-sec whinebear.


Well! I guess you just put me in my place!
Obviously, since I don't play this game the way you do, or the way you approve of, I am deserving of scorn and ridicule.
Do you feel superior now? Make you little wee-wee hard?
Glad I could give you a thrill, moron.
I'm not going to teach you math, I haven't the time, inclination, or patience... and it annoys the pig!
Oh, and who the flock are you to question ANYTHING? Got a pretty in inflated opinion of yourself there, don't ya studly?
Put it back in your pants, jagoff, I ain't impressed.
Dave Stark
#403 - 2012-08-09 19:34:59 UTC
given ship with 35k ore hold, still crying over hulk's cargo rigs.

stay classy, guys.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#404 - 2012-08-09 20:01:42 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
given ship with 35k ore hold, still crying over hulk's cargo rigs.

stay classy, guys.

I dunno... based on Jane's last outburst, you'd think I was secretly having the Mittani's love child or something Big smile About the only love I really think the revamped hulk (and all these ships, for that matter) needs is a slightly larger standard cargo hold to carry crystals (issues of multiple types and haulers keeping track of who owns which being beaten to death already), and maybe cap charges if ASB's become the preferred method for tanking them. Granted, a heavier tank would be nice, but all the 0.0 miners I know multi-box , work with friends, or both, so protection from rats is never an issue, and every alliance has some sort of active intel to let folks know of incoming hostiles, even if it's just someone in a ratting carrier being forced to cloak up and report that ten reds just went through system X without being able to provide any further detail.

I'm still not sold on these changes as a whole. Having the T2 exhumers specialized for purpose (volume/ice/mercox) rather than play style (fleet/afk/solo, by my reckoning) better matched how other T2 boats worked, and that early theorists seem to be able to approach hulk-like production with non-hulk ships irks me, but I'm not seeing the complete end of the world that others are screaming about. Hopefully EFT will get updated soon so I can do some theory-crafting of my own and compare before/after numbers.
Smarcus Smokus
Donkey Punch Pioneers
Sticky Green Acres
#405 - 2012-08-09 20:21:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Smarcus Smokus
Jane Dough wrote:

Not if your play style is as a solo miner. The cut to the ore holds means the Hulk is not supposed to haul anything. Well, for a solo miner, that pretty much screws you over.



What exactly are you complaining about?

If you want to mine solo and fly back and forth to station constantly, fly a hulk.

If you want to mine solo and stay in the belts along time, fly a mackinaw.

If you want to mine solo and never die, fly a skiff.
Dave Stark
#406 - 2012-08-09 20:41:53 UTC
Atum wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
given ship with 35k ore hold, still crying over hulk's cargo rigs.

stay classy, guys.

I dunno... based on Jane's last outburst, you'd think I was secretly having the Mittani's love child or something Big smile About the only love I really think the revamped hulk (and all these ships, for that matter) needs is a slightly larger standard cargo hold to carry crystals (issues of multiple types and haulers keeping track of who owns which being beaten to death already), and maybe cap charges if ASB's become the preferred method for tanking them. Granted, a heavier tank would be nice, but all the 0.0 miners I know multi-box , work with friends, or both, so protection from rats is never an issue, and every alliance has some sort of active intel to let folks know of incoming hostiles, even if it's just someone in a ratting carrier being forced to cloak up and report that ten reds just went through system X without being able to provide any further detail.

I'm still not sold on these changes as a whole. Having the T2 exhumers specialized for purpose (volume/ice/mercox) rather than play style (fleet/afk/solo, by my reckoning) better matched how other T2 boats worked, and that early theorists seem to be able to approach hulk-like production with non-hulk ships irks me, but I'm not seeing the complete end of the world that others are screaming about. Hopefully EFT will get updated soon so I can do some theory-crafting of my own and compare before/after numbers.


to be honest i like the changes, aside from the crystal change with i don't think any one has said they like, welcome, or find enjoyable. a lot of arguments were put forth as to why it wasn't "bad" but there's absolutely nothing good about the situation.

i don't think it's a bad thing that all the exhumers have similar yield, it provides viable options rather than "the skiff is ******* useless other than one asteroid that would be hated as much as spod if morphite prices fall any lower" and "oh look, ice".
no changes were ever going to be perfect but when all is said and done these changes are a lot better than what could have happened.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#407 - 2012-08-09 20:53:41 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
i don't think it's a bad thing that all the exhumers have similar yield, it provides viable options rather than "the skiff is ******* useless other than one asteroid that would be hated as much as spod if morphite prices fall any lower" and "oh look, ice".

Except it goes against the dev statement that the hulk was supposed to be the "king" of mining. I don't mind flying a glass cannon (and neither does anybody else using tier 3 BC's), but at least make it worth the risk... right now, there doesn't seem to be much point in flying a hulk anywhere, given that the mack can truck a lot more ore, and the skiff can just sit there and buffer tank (assuming the appropriate logistics is within a titan bridge or two), for what looks to be a relatively minor loss in ore volume.
Quote:
but when all is said and done these changes are a lot better than what could have happened.

QFT
Dave Stark
#408 - 2012-08-09 21:08:23 UTC
Atum wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
i don't think it's a bad thing that all the exhumers have similar yield, it provides viable options rather than "the skiff is ******* useless other than one asteroid that would be hated as much as spod if morphite prices fall any lower" and "oh look, ice".

Except it goes against the dev statement that the hulk was supposed to be the "king" of mining. I don't mind flying a glass cannon (and neither does anybody else using tier 3 BC's), but at least make it worth the risk... right now, there doesn't seem to be much point in flying a hulk anywhere, given that the mack can truck a lot more ore, and the skiff can just sit there and buffer tank (assuming the appropriate logistics is within a titan bridge or two), for what looks to be a relatively minor loss in ore volume.
Quote:
but when all is said and done these changes are a lot better than what could have happened.

QFT


well if you think of it from a pure yield perspective, the hulk is still king, nothing will bring in more m3/time, however the other barges have perks beyond crunching rocks, they are able to move it to the station more efficiently, or stand up to rats/gankers better etc. there are just new crowns to be handed out. although i must say with the mackinaw having more ehp and cargo it's yield being awfully close to the hulk's then i guess it's a strong contender for the hulk's crown.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#409 - 2012-08-09 22:22:22 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
well if you think of it from a pure yield perspective, the hulk is still king, nothing will bring in more m3/time, however the other barges have perks beyond crunching rocks, they are able to move it to the station more efficiently, or stand up to rats/gankers better etc. there are just new crowns to be handed out. although i must say with the mackinaw having more ehp and cargo it's yield being awfully close to the hulk's then i guess it's a strong contender for the hulk's crown.

Assuming CCP Tallest has made all the changes to the dev blog that were promised, and running off the rorq bonus list, the hulk has a roughly 1.16x advantage over the mack, but the mack has 1.33x the EHP and over 4x cargo. Against the skiff, it becomes 1.26x mining, but 3.34x EHP and 1.76x cargo. There's the rub... if I'm flying a hulk, a 16% mining boost against a ship that can sit there 4x longer (6x according to the blog, but....) doesn't seem to be a very good trade-off. In fact, the additional cargo space (aka crystals!) really makes you question the hulk's viability. Looking at ice instead of ore, six cubes per hour is likewise a pretty lousy trade-off, and as you move into lesser-boosted conditions, it gets worse for the hulk (just going to orca boosting costs a cube every hour).

In short, if the hulk is meant to be "king of mining," at the cost of autonomy and survivability, its output compared to the others just doesn't make sense. In fact, you could easily make the argument that you'd be better off flying a covetor (which still outperforms the mack) and forgo the T2 cost differential entirely.
Dave Stark
#410 - 2012-08-09 22:48:26 UTC
******* ****** forum eating my post.
remiust
Doomheim
#411 - 2012-08-09 22:57:24 UTC
Atum wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
well if you think of it from a pure yield perspective, the hulk is still king, nothing will bring in more m3/time, however the other barges have perks beyond crunching rocks, they are able to move it to the station more efficiently, or stand up to rats/gankers better etc. there are just new crowns to be handed out. although i must say with the mackinaw having more ehp and cargo it's yield being awfully close to the hulk's then i guess it's a strong contender for the hulk's crown.

Assuming CCP Tallest has made all the changes to the dev blog that were promised, and running off the rorq bonus list, the hulk has a roughly 1.16x advantage over the mack, but the mack has 1.33x the EHP and over 4x cargo. Against the skiff, it becomes 1.26x mining, but 3.34x EHP and 1.76x cargo. There's the rub... if I'm flying a hulk, a 16% mining boost against a ship that can sit there 4x longer (6x according to the blog, but....) doesn't seem to be a very good trade-off. In fact, the additional cargo space (aka crystals!) really makes you question the hulk's viability. Looking at ice instead of ore, six cubes per hour is likewise a pretty lousy trade-off, and as you move into lesser-boosted conditions, it gets worse for the hulk (just going to orca boosting costs a cube every hour).

In short, if the hulk is meant to be "king of mining," at the cost of autonomy and survivability, its output compared to the others just doesn't make sense. In fact, you could easily make the argument that you'd be better off flying a covetor (which still outperforms the mack) and forgo the T2 cost differential entirely.



This may have been mentioned already , but just to be sure those roq/orca bonus lists for ore yield, assume you have both the highwall-2 and michis implants. Last i checked the michis, still goes for around a bil. Without the implants the yeilds are closer.
Atum
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
#412 - 2012-08-10 00:49:42 UTC
remiust wrote:
This may have been mentioned already , but just to be sure those roq/orca bonus lists for ore yield, assume you have both the highwall-2 and michis implants. Last i checked the michis, still goes for around a bil. Without the implants the yeilds are closer.

If I read CCP Tallest's comments correctly, the ore/ice/mercox output tables in the dev blog reflect every booster possible being applied (Fleet boosted by a Rorqual 5 pilot with mining foreman 5, mining director 5, mining foreman mindlink, and warfare link specialist 5, then the barge/exhumer pilot having mining 5, Highwall MU-1005, Michi's augmentor, tech 2 crystals, the whole shebang). The more boosts you take away from there, the worse the hulk becomes in relation to the other ships :(
Tainted Greek
House Of Hades
#413 - 2012-08-10 01:58:42 UTC
Where to start?... First I’d like to thank those who focused only on my comment that EVE was a sandbox… and should be left alone… WOW you guys set me straight with your own perverted views on what it’s definition is! People will always perceive things how they want to suit themselves… it proves it when people reject definitions from dictionary’s, encyclopedias etc and substitute it for their own.

Secondly to all those articulate trolls and those who are can sell ice to eskimo’s with your sugar coated BULL SHI* … Thanks! It really helps me swallow it and feel better about being fu*ked over…

My argument has not changed …

It made perfect sense before the changes… The Hulk was king… it was the biggest and could do everything well… with the long training invested, it provided a logical autonomous or fleet solution for the miner. You had options (limited) as to how you fit it to suit your gameplay. That should not have changed! The buffs should have been in line with the lesser barges.

With the changes as it is now, it is not a viable option … you have devalued and essentially made useless/obsolete to the majority of miners their flagship!

Sure you have given us a cheap and viable alternative,(no one including myself is going to ***** about that) but it makes as much sense as it would’ve to just strap a strip miner to a hauler…and it would have been more believable.

Why the hell didn’t the DEV team simply balance things in a balanced manner?!!!

They could have given balanced incremental bonus’s to all the barges that were for the most part useless…
The redefining of ship roles could have been the introduction of T3 EXHUMERS that specialised in a skill path and provided the option of a narrowing and specializing in types/classes of mining.

I’ll say it again… Your so called REBALANCING is fundamentally flawed!
The way it has been done is the problem.
It remains a crock of shite and it stinketh.

Just keep dumbing the game down, making changes that belong in a realm of fantasy and magic and more and more veterans will leave, fed up with the sugar coated BULL SHITE

What’s done is done… thanks to everyone for their “help” but I don’t have to like it.
If I wanted to play pure fantasy I would be playing some other game all this time....
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#414 - 2012-08-10 02:02:55 UTC
Well done CCP. Not a miner, but the changes look good to me anyway.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#415 - 2012-08-10 04:35:43 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Well done CCP. Not a miner, but the changes look good to me anyway.

I think this sums things up rather nicely.

If you are NOT a miner, the changes look good. But, if you ARE a miner, then, perhaps, not so good, eh? :)
Spice Flow
Spice Industrys
#416 - 2012-08-10 05:53:50 UTC
Qual wrote:
Matthew Toomb wrote:
Can you guys please think this through just a little bit before you finalize? Those of us noobie idiots who've spent months training for Hulks only to have them downgraded to a piddly craptastic support miner- I assume we'll be ISKompensated for the hundreds of millions of $$ we've spent on our soon to be useless ships correct?

Oh, and will this "uber" retriever at least get a third strip slot? Or just a bloated cargobay?

Glad I manufacture retrievers with an original BPO though, the price is about to go WAY up.


You want some cheese with that whine?

Seriously, did you even read the numbers in the blog? All your questions is answered in there. Hulk is still the king of mining yield, its just not as thick skinned as it used to be.

And the lower tiers get some love as well. Those getting hit the hardest are the Macinaw ice miners, as thier ship is no longer king of its former profession.



Well if they are unable to give my hulk back to its former glory, maybe they can give me the time in my life back that was spent to get the game play I liked to play.
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#417 - 2012-08-10 06:58:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Caldari 5
Atum wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
well if you think of it from a pure yield perspective, the hulk is still king, nothing will bring in more m3/time, however the other barges have perks beyond crunching rocks, they are able to move it to the station more efficiently, or stand up to rats/gankers better etc. there are just new crowns to be handed out. although i must say with the mackinaw having more ehp and cargo it's yield being awfully close to the hulk's then i guess it's a strong contender for the hulk's crown.

Assuming CCP Tallest has made all the changes to the dev blog that were promised, and running off the rorq bonus list, the hulk has a roughly 1.16x advantage over the mack, but the mack has 1.33x the EHP and over 4x cargo. Against the skiff, it becomes 1.26x mining, but 3.34x EHP and 1.76x cargo. There's the rub... if I'm flying a hulk, a 16% mining boost against a ship that can sit there 4x longer (6x according to the blog, but....) doesn't seem to be a very good trade-off. In fact, the additional cargo space (aka crystals!) really makes you question the hulk's viability. Looking at ice instead of ore, six cubes per hour is likewise a pretty lousy trade-off, and as you move into lesser-boosted conditions, it gets worse for the hulk (just going to orca boosting costs a cube every hour).

In short, if the hulk is meant to be "king of mining," at the cost of autonomy and survivability, its output compared to the others just doesn't make sense. In fact, you could easily make the argument that you'd be better off flying a covetor (which still outperforms the mack) and forgo the T2 cost differential entirely.


Here is the main problem that I have with the rebalance, that Any of the T1 Barges can out mine Any of the T2 Exhumers. The ore m3 per hour should be in the progression

Most m3/hr
Hulk
Mackinaw
Skiff
Covetor
Retriever
Procurer
Least m3/hr

The EHP and Ore Holds are otherwise fairly Balanced.

The Next Problem I have is that the Cargo Holds are all of different Sizes, I don't believe that this should be different for each ship, if anything the Cargo Holds should be reversed in size the Skiff and the Procurer with the Smallest, the Mackinaw and the Retriever with the middle and the Covetor and Hulk with the Largest, as you have 1 Strip, 2 Strips and then 3 Strips, It is natural for the Larger Ships to have to carry more Crystals because they have more Strips. I think around 350 450 and 550 would probably be in the right ball park.
Andrew Indy
Cleaning Crew
#418 - 2012-08-10 07:50:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrew Indy
To all the people who keep on saying the Hulk is no longer any good, stop complaining and just get a Mack or Skiff. If 16% less yield is really such a tiny amount then switch to a ship that can carry almost 2X more ore than a Hulk ever could or can tank like a BS. This should be a welcome change if that's the case.

That being said 16% is not a small amount of extra mining yield, people pay millions if not billions to buy implants to get less than that.

You might be able to compare this to the Incursion nerf a few months ago.

Before the nerf the Legion was the king of VGs, now it makes up maybe 50% of a fleets DPS if you are lucky. Does it really matter, not really, people adapted, bought new ships and every thing returned to the status quo (less all of the people who only ran incs for bulk Isk)

PS, I mine 3 hours per day everyday (15 ours on weekends), though I shall admit its mostly in HS.

PPS

Quote:
Here is the main problem that I have with the rebalance, that Any of the T1 Barges can out mine Any of the T2 Exhumers. The ore m3 per hour should be in the progression


What crack are you smoking, the only Barge that can out mine an Exhumer is the Covetor and that has the same limitations that the Hulk has, as it stands the Exhumers are each better than their barge equivalents in every way other than cost.
Dave Stark
#419 - 2012-08-10 07:58:17 UTC
Andrew Indy wrote:
That being said 16% is not a small amount of extra mining yield, people pay millions if not billions to buy implants to get less than that.


this, michi is close to a billion apparently, i dropped a billion for the mining foreman mindlink, that's 2bn on implants that give a total bonus of just over 10%, and yet you can get a hulk which gives you a 16% increase for a quarter of that?

the hulk is worth every isk. not to mention in the context of 16% of an hour, that's about 9 mins per hour if my maths is right, if you're spending more than 9 mins per hour swapping to an impel (which has more cargo space than a mackinaw) then you're doing something wrong. the hulk will still outmine the mackinaw solo if you just spend a bit of time training amarr industrial to V, infact the smallest DST has 29k without using t2 rigs, and that's the mastodon.

the simple fact is, the hulk is still a very strong ship, crystals aside.
Sigras
Conglomo
#420 - 2012-08-10 08:02:39 UTC
Caldari 5 wrote:
The Next Problem I have is that the Cargo Holds are all of different Sizes, I don't believe that this should be different for each ship, if anything the Cargo Holds should be reversed in size the Skiff and the Procurer with the Smallest, the Mackinaw and the Retriever with the middle and the Covetor and Hulk with the Largest, as you have 1 Strip, 2 Strips and then 3 Strips, It is natural for the Larger Ships to have to carry more Crystals because they have more Strips. I think around 350 450 and 550 would probably be in the right ball park.

This would be totally correct not taking into account the intended roles of the ships, but knowing that the role of the mackinaw is to be the king of autonomy, I would say it could use a slightly bigger cargo hold, IMHO change the 1% mining bonus to a 10% cargo bonus and youre good.

That being said, I believe the skiff could use a little nerf to its cargo hold something like 200 m^3 base and the hulk can probably stay where it is, with the ability to fit 12 crystals (4 changes of ore + 1 in the miners to begin with) seems right to me, thats 1/3 of the types of ore in the game, and most large scale 0.0 mining operations have the miners organized so thats all they'll need for quite a while.