EVE Information Portal

I'm hoping for a Smack a Mack' first, followed by another Hulkageddon.

That's a big part of the problem, there's just not enough difference between the Hulk/Covetor and the Mack/Retriever. The Hulk and Covetors need about another 5-10% yield/hr over the Mack/Retty in order for them to be preferred for at-the-keyboard mining.

Then there's the whole issue that the preferred mining pair is now a hulk+mack where the mack acts as the hauler for the mini-fleet. The T1 industrial ships can't haul that much, and the Orca's 50k m3 ore bay is now pretty much a joke (that needs to be boosted up into the 400-600k m3 range).

They actually thought this one out, more so than your idiotic response.....

What are you suggesting about scrap rates? Are you suggesting that we should be able to reprocess ships and get more minerals back than we put in?

Because I can't see any issues with that....

That would be a great opportunity to split the Orca up into the four or so ships that it's always wanted to be, with the Orca remaining behind as a sort of jack-of-all-trades (because that's quite useful).

If there was a fitted ship hauler, and a flying corp hangar, and a flying ore bay, and a "little freighter" in addition to the ordinary Orca, the ORE Industrial Command Ship skill would be even more valuable.

In addition to changing the yield bonus to a cycle time reduction, I'd support nerfing the yield on Retrievers and Mackinaws, maybe even down to parity with the Skiff. That way, there's a more difficult choice between tank, convenience or yield. The alternative is buffing the Hulk, and I don't really see the need for that.

this is the crux of it, really.

if you look at each ship individually, it should be excellent at one thing, average at another, and terrible at something else.

let's look at the skiff. best tank, check 1 for excellent at one thing. medium ore bay, check 2 for average at something, lowest yield so check 3 for being terrible at something.

so, why doesn't this hold with the mackinaw and hulk? the mackinaw is terrible at nothing. it has the best ore bay, and medium yield AND tank. the hulk on the other hand is mediocre at nothing, it's got the best yield then the worst tank and ore bay.
just as a quick point, if you rate being the "best" at something as a 3, average as a 2, and worst as a 1. and work out how many points each ship scores, it's obvious that the mackinaw wins with 7 points for being the worst at nothing, followed by the skiff's 6 points for having one of each, and the hulk trails behind with 5 as it has to "terrible" stats.

a suggestion i've seen before, and one i like therefore i'm "stealing" it is that the hulk and mackinaw's tank should be switched. if you want to go and leave your mackinaw afk mining the price should be a paper thin ship. besides, if you've got so much empty space inside your ship there's not going to be much space for armour plates and structure is there?
if we go back to my point above about being good at one thing, average at another, and terrible at another then this problem would also be solved by the tank switch. the mackinaw's tank goes from average to terrible, and the hulk's goes from terrible to average, and thus all the exhumers score a 6.

now you have a choice between high risk afk easy mode, or slightly safer higher reward afk-less mining, or super safe semi-afk mining at the cost of yield.

Actually this is fairly misguided, the highest yield solo mining is the mackinaw regardless due to transit times.

Hey, maybe if CCP listened to some of the smarter suggestions out there about fixing the production and mining systems, we wouldn't be looking at AFK highsec mining in Mackinaws being the pinnacle of industry. But CCP doesn't. And we are.

I forgot to add: congratulations to the economist working for CCP for his smoke and mirrors abilities. The data is clearly selectively taken to show what CCP wants to say, and not what was going on.

I don't mine. Did it when I started Eve and gave it a go lately out of boredom. Here I go anyway.

It seems to me the suggestion quoted is marvelous. Specialization of the mining fleet, with application to other situations.

As suggested in another devblog, a conceptual basis for an Ore/Container hauler design might be:

Haulers


My added suggestion was to give the ship a changing look (forget the dev's term for these moving parts on ships) as containers were added over time-- perhaps it would have to enter into a "loading mode" like a Rorqual in Industrial ore compression mode. The hauler would need a capital tractor beam, decent agility and, ideally, bonuses to warp corp stability to make it competitive with freighters which can now load cargo in space (albeit from absolutely one place). If it were truly ore specific, something along the lines of an oil tanker (?) might be more in line-- but not as cool looking as the cargo ships above.

I would think a (universal) ship hauler/corp hanger could be combined into one ship with a limited number of slots. Such a ship might even have a usefulness in combat, if it could tank or GTFO. In my mind, it would more closely resemble the actual role of an aircraft carrier.

I think Eve has enough industrials, and if the above two ships were implemented correctly (good luck with CCP doing that!), then there would be little need for an additional mining specific one. Don't know if CCP had in mind loading Freighters with Industrials running around, it seems ludicrous.

IMO, why the **** not? People complain that mining is boring, and in the same post demand that CCP make it more frustrating, via interface-clicking no less. "We like to suffer, CCP, make us suffer this boring activity with even more pain!"

It's boring, we need minerals, someone has to mine. CCP can declare botting illegal all they want, and spend time hunting bots down, or they can let the masses AFK mine without the need for a bot, and save themselves some time and effort.