Player Features and Ideas Discussion

If you're solo mining, use a Mack. That's what it's for; that's what it's good at. You won't out-yield a Mack with a Hulk unless you have 3+ Hulks plus an Orca booster. Hulks are meant for fleet use. Just get used to it. Your rigs still work on your cargo hold, and if you have to carry a lot of crystals you'll still need them. It's not like they're wasted.

I can't believe people are still complaining about this. The Mack is the most pimp solo mining vessel in the game. If you can't be bothered to switch to a vessel that is clearly better-suited to your playstyle, then the problem is yours, not the game's.

Why in the name of the Virgin Mary would you need MORE space in this ginormous ore hold we've been blessed with?

Before the patch, we barely had 2k-6k to work with. Now you have 5 times that. And still your moaning about ore hold size?????

And then you moan about the yield of something that mines faster than it did before.... when you didn't bother fitting for speed of cycles anyway.....

WTF you smoking foo!

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


(I loled at this op)

((IRL))

[Because seriously...]

That's not laziness. When the orca is in station it's not boosting. The more often it has to warp back and forth the less useful it's boost effects are.

First smart thing anyone has had to say!

And i agree 100% to the loss of tank or any defences. If you like to mine.. and mine enough .. the chance of loss on a ship is what you pay for the extra mining bonuses.

Suicide ganks are bound to happen esp when alliances have "Campaigns" to wipe out mining ships.

And if they add rigs its not like you cant put them on what ever ORE ship you want.. or any ship for that matter. The rigs would be good even for all other mining ships .. maybe even the new ORE frig. that is coming out.

And as for having T2 rigs it was so that i could have 2x mining upgrades in lows an extra 18% ore and have the cargo space i needed from the rigs.

As for the old rigs being usless.. i would not care if i could replace them with something that is useful. Cargo rigs are not useful for any mining ships anymore.

If you think about it cargo rigsin the past were used for only two ship types really, mining ships and haulers. 50% of the ships they are designed for now have no use for them. Watch what happens to the price of those rigs over the next few months .. they are going to drop hard im sure.. because no where near as many people will use them or need them.

I support this idea, but it needs to be balanced.

First, reduce all ore holds to the point where mounting a full rack of T2 ore hold rigs results in a roughly 2~5% increase in ore hold size. This would include the Orca and the new frigate.

Next, the rigs need a good drawback. I'm thinking structure HP reduction, much like the cargo expanders. Cargo rigs reduce armor amount but ORE ships emphasize shields and, to a lesser extent, structure.

If the T2 rig bonus were 20% like the cargo expander, then a Hulk should get an ore hold of about 6250m3. Two T2 ore hold expanders would increase that to 9000m3. Similarly, a Mackinaw should have a base ore hold of 20000m3 which, including hull bonuses, would result in a 36000m3 ore hold with a pair of T2 ore hold expanders. The other hulls, Orca included, would follow the same pattern.

I feel this solution stays within the spirit of EVE's system of trade-offs when fitting ships.

lol I already trashed the rigs.. do you know what 20% of 350m3 base cargo space is... in simple math it = USLESS.

So before you blab about coming across as stupid you should check your facts. Do you know how long it takes to fill 350m3 of cargo space when i mine at least 4800m3 in 3 minutes without support ships.

dragging back ore from orehold to cargo hold.. lol are you kidding???

The new empty rig slots will have better use for tanking rigs now.. or maybe something else.. ill have to look at them all to see whats worth using besides tanking rigs if anything.

I don't think you will see ore hold on battleships anytime soon, so i don't think this rig has a use there. as much as i like the idea of a new ore hold rig, i don't think miners will be getting that anytime soon.

that stated i will still try to be constructive.

i think either an ore hold rig, or a slight buff to the hulks ore hold is a good idea. in all likelihood the rig is a more balanced plan of attack, but the straight buff would make me super happy.

the reasoning:

a max yield hulk pulls between 1778 and 1961 M3 per cycle depending on implants, add in the conservative estimate for drone travel time of one drone cycle per strip cycle and my total yield every 104 seconds is 6218 M3 Mining larger ores shaves a bit off of this in practice, but still puts it at 6176 m3.

I agree that having a smaller ore hold on the hulk is balanced. but setting up the ship so at optimal performance it could still hold 2 cycles of ore is not unbalancing and is frankly far more proactical than having it set at one cycle. I think one rig devoted to this instead of tank is a fair tradeoff for peak efficiency at mining. the ship is still made of glass and needs the Orca handy for reps most of the time.

the size of the ore hold in a hulk as it stands is more tedious than anything. i still use it, but i occassionally miss cycles simply because i have less than two minutes with rorqual boosts (more time with an orca or unboosted) to clear all my hulks ore holds

another point i would like to make is this issue only crops up with harvesting normal ores. mercoxit and ice do not have this issue. this gave me an idea since bothe mercoxit and ice have special rigs, why not do this

Ore expander rig (no t2 version like the ice and mercoxit rigs) +50% to ore hold, - 50% structure 250 calibration

this way each specialization in mining (Ice Ore and Mercoxit) has a unique rig that you can only use one of on any given setup. it will be beneficial to all three barges while having a sufficient drawback to make it balanced.

i think this is by far the best approach to the ore hold complaint for all barges and will keep most people happy

the other two specialization rigs have no penalty at all. their benefits are either 12% reduction in ice harvester cycle time, or 16% increase in mercoxit yield. looking at the effect of primary tank(shield) reduction is a very bad choice of drawback, especially for a rig hats purpose is to specialize the ship, not make it glaringly better.

a 50% boost to ore hold for each exhumer (obviously reduced for barges)

Hulk from 8500 to 12750
Mack from 35000 to 52500 (at level 5)
Skiff from 15000 to 22500

these are significant gains, but given the yields of conventional ores compared to mercoxit or ice. the numbers are pretty fair. in a world where miners aren't so persecuted for whatever reason people seem to hate on miners, this rig is easily balanced by the fact that you have to sacrifice a rig that would increase tank (in most fits) for this rig, which is a fair tradeoff. the token structure penalty isn't really a token penalty, because short of the skiff it is a significant decrease in EHP overall.

think of it this way. you slice much more off a hulks shields it will have less EHP than an assault ship, a way larger sig and way less speed. these things need to be capable of at least survivng nulsec belt spawns in time for some sort of logistics to show up because thats what they are designed for. just because its a mining ship that is getting max yield doesn't mean it needs to have a crappy tank. you can get maximum DPS out of a combat ship and still have a good shield tank ammo capacity etc, why cant the Mining ships do the same if you equate their DPS to ore yield

shield tanking requires mids DPS requires lows so its pretty easy to fit a max DPS ships with sufficient tank. look at the prevalence of shield canes for proof. especially when you skip out on a point and fit two LSEs mining ships don't really need points or prop mods to do their jobs, but most people will fit a survey scanner in one slot so there are still sacrifices being made.

as far as tanks and buffers are concerned, a pvp buffer can easily tank belt spawns or grav site spawns.

my biggest question is why do so many people seem to think industral/mining/hauling ships need to be week helpless easy kills. merchant vessels are armed when traveling hostile water in the real world. perhaps not as well as a battleship, but suffieciently to deter most minor threats.

I personally am a proponenet of making these types of ships actually fun to fly in pvp situation without making them murder machines. you might see more ballsey fun to chase industrialists if they had a chance to GTFO in PVP. basically non combat ships need a fun buff. the thrill of a pvp kill is either totally outclassing an oponent or winning by the skin of your teethe. in a world populated by the volume of combat ships in eve, flying a non combat ship is an i lose button. and it would really help if the game moved away from that mentality. as it stands, if your ship is good at anything other than PVP or PVE combat, it stands little to no chance of surviving a pvp situation, and you basically have to sacrifice a huge chunk of your industrial or hauling etc efficieny to even have a bad chance at surviving.