These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Kronos] Mining Barges and Exhumers

First post First post First post
Author
Darkblad
Doomheim
#241 - 2014-04-05 19:57:01 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Why don't you clueless morons just buff the Hulks yield instead of nerfing the Mackinaw. The 1% bonus to yield per exhumer skill on the hulk is a joke. Do you really expect people to want to spend 30 days training for 1% more yield?

Read again
CCP Fozzie wrote:
MACKINAW

Mining Barge Bonus per level:
+5% Ore Hold capacity
-2% Strip Miner and Ice Harvester duration

Exhumer Bonus per level:
+4% Shield resistances
-2% Strip Miner and Ice Harvester duration

Role Bonuses:
+25% Bonus to Strip Miner yield
-20% Ice Harvester duration and capacitor use

Slot layout: 2H

HULK
Mining Barge Bonus per level:
+5% Strip Miner and Ice Harvester optimal range
-3% Strip Miner and Ice Harvester duration

Exhumer Bonus per level:
+4% Shield resistances
-2% Strip Miner and Ice Harvester duration

Slot layout: 3H

Mackinaw 2 x 1.25 = 2.5
Hulk 3 x 1 = 3
Plus Mining Barge Skill bonus difference.
Before considering skills, the Hulk (and Covetor) already match THEIR role (highest yield ships).The only difference in skill based bonus is 1 % more reduction of cycle per Mining Barge Skill level (which you already have maxed when boarding the Hulk).
Feel free to call yourself a clueless moron for the 30 days you saved.

NPEISDRIP

GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#242 - 2014-04-05 20:59:06 UTC
Tear Jar wrote:

CCP didn't really mention the effect of actually losing ships.


because this is not a economy blog.

Tear Jar wrote:
I disagree that the procurer changes are a nerf. A procurer can still get 60k+ EHP without using any of its low slots. Procurers are massively more tanky than a retriever by default. They still aren't worth ganking and they get more yield. Thats a buff.



try again. you not have the better yield AND the tank. the yield comparison of Fozzie is based about fitting the lows with MLU2s. So no bulkheads and no DCU. so it will not be 60k will it? end result is a lower tank and lower yield, ie double nerf.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#243 - 2014-04-05 21:16:36 UTC
GetSirrus wrote:
try again. you not have the better yield AND the tank. the yield comparison of Fozzie is based about fitting the lows with MLU2s. So no bulkheads and no DCU. so it will not be 60k will it? end result is a lower tank and lower yield, ie double nerf.

you can get 60k with only 2 adaptive and ! EM hardener and 3 shield extender rigs. Add 1 more low slot
CCP Fozzie wrote:
they assume max skills and that all but one of the lowslots on each ship is filled with a T2 MLU or IHU (One upgrade for the Covetor and Hulk, two for the rest).
and as graph shows, effective strips goes up slightly (not exactly sure how that translates to yield for ore-ice). And throw a DCU into that extra lowslot and boom, 80k hp. No need for bulkheads,

So no double nerf. You now have the option to increase efficiency or fit for tank with that switched lowslot. If you view getting more options as a nerf than thats on you. It's only a nerf if you use that low slot for yield.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#244 - 2014-04-05 21:57:40 UTC
The primary problem with mining as a profession is that the skills are only good for mining, not that it is that boring compared to other ISK-generating activities. I tell every new player I talk with to go for NPC-killing/exploration, because those skill points are useful for PVP as well. For all those faults, at least the Skiff looks decent for those with the right mindset.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#245 - 2014-04-05 23:01:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Jagoff Haverford wrote:
To be clear, when the "re-balancing" took place a few years ago, dozens and dozens of responses on these forums predicted that mining would become nothing but Mackinaws and Retrievers.

There is one other thing that pushed many of us away from the Hulk and Covetor, however, that is not mentioned here -- the ability to carry enough crystals to support mining in low and null sec.


I was one - actually THE most strenuous voice about this trivial "prediction" (of course I promptly had the known Tip... ehm let's just say "mouthpiece" tell the contrary). And the other, white jacket mouthpiece as well. Both OWNED!

Result: I did an ultra-massive speculation on Macks becoming the Next Kings and that netted me 100 billions.

Fast forward to today... and CCP still does not get it.


Since the mining "gameplay" is beyond utterly terrible, there's an incommensurable value to being able to AFK it.

They can buff the other ships forever and ever and ever but as long as there's 1 ship that allows AFK, THAT will the king.
It's like the continuous nerfs being trickled on hi sec: people will NOT leave it even if it'll suck.

And if they completely remove the AFK ship, only two things will happen:

1) That people SHALL return botting.

2) That CCP still failed to understand that people AFK stuff that is inhumanly BORING.

Effort should be put into making mining a somewhat acceptable profession (the decade standing, core mining issue), not at spending months tweaking the collateral damage that such boring gameplay causes (AFK and botting).


I am sorry CCP Fozzie, please understand that you need to cure the causes, not to tweak the secondary effects. Back to the drawing board, pretty please.
Nalelmir Ahashion
Industrial Management and Engineering
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#246 - 2014-04-06 00:31:44 UTC
Confession: I'm deep into mining. It's the only reason I'm still in Eve.

First: Shameless promotion - > T3 Modular Mining ship CLICK HERE -> Because it's about time to add shining new ship for miners.
Truck drivers got loads of ships to choose from, Combat pilots got as well. Fleet leaders got plenty of command ships and ships which can feet leadership modules.
Miners got only Frigate > barrage > exhumers. Exhumers are just T2 barrage so nothing new here same function better numbers.
Please give us more specialized ships.

Next the procurer,
Stop crying like babies. I mined my first plex as personal challenge with 1 week mining skills using a Venture. You want procurer not for tank but because it's mining barrage which costs 10 mil isk.
You can get plenty of tank on it and you know... low slots... use Damage Control Unit.

Next is the Ret\Mack
The big thing here was the fact I could use 2 Strip miners while having large ore bay and decent options to tank\fit. After this update I'm happy I sold my mack and went to the skiff.

Skiff,
More range, more target locked, shorter cycle times. My favorite ship just got better. just replace the useless drones damage bonus with mix of Drones HP and Mining yield. My hob's II already killed anything on the belts and I'm not stupid enough to shoot back on gankers, I pay my taxes I'll abuse concord to shoot for me. It's mining ship so mining bonuses - > cheers.

Hulk \ Cov
Why? why anyone will use those extremley overpriced ships which are subpar with other ships and their only advantage is 3 strip miners, Be serious here with max skills 100mil implant and full orca boosts you got too much yield and 1 \ 2 cycles will empty a rock so why I need more yield then I can use?
also 300 mill for hulk which is impossible to abuse for yield fit and you must tank it due to it's price then it got less then fancy yield to justify the price.
I can happily use now 3 MLUII on the new skiff while having stupidly huge tank and I'll get more or less too much yield for any rock so why take a risk of losing and hulk\cov for a bonus I won't need?


Also no words on Mining frigates? no changes to the Venture?
And how about other ships which can use NORMAL mining lasers and not strip mining lasers and that will have an effective bonus for that?
How about make my dream come true and make a drone ship for mining? something like BS sized carrier which can utilize 5 "Fighter" sized mining drones so I can have let's say over 50km range on my mining or sending each drone on different rock to cherry pick the one I like most. This type of ship will also make the AFK experience null and void as you'll need to actively manage your drones in case of rate or empty belts.

Another issue is mining crystals... I'm using T2 strip miners with T2 crystals and the fact is they are too large.. what's the point? let me have maybe a crystal bay on the ship or just make them smaller...

Also I would like to address the Orca piloting.. many people will make an alt for boosts as piloting an orca except for some random Drone mining or pulling ores if doing fleet will leave you with nothing more then looking at the screen, it's less work then actually mine! so how about make some changes to the Command ships that they will have some active role they can do let's say mine for themselves or something,
Example: Let the orca have "Fleet mode" which it will work like now able to boost and have all bays like ships and such or "Solo mode" in which it can give "Solar System" boosts for general day to day out of mining ops action and then the orca will only be able to boost but without the ships bay \ tractor beams or any other fleet support but it will be able maybe to mine veldspar with dedicated veldspar laser or something.. just to have something to do meanwhile instead of orbiting a space station.

Also I would like to address in general the fact that the ores on Empire space is split between 4 factions... why?
Let's say I mine in specific faction space as I got good standing there... I would only need to train for 4 ores to refine and use the crystals and that's it. Lately I started doing mining anomalies so I had an excuse to train extra refining ore specific skills for those.
Why not to mix all of the empire space ore types on belts while keeping their security level spawn so miners will need to train more refining specific skills and would have more activity as they will look for their favorite rocks.

And lastly I would like to address toward this incoming expansion the suicide ganking issue. You need to add into the tutorials a mission on how to properly tank a mining ship and explain that like you balance tank\dps on combat ship you need to balance tank\yield on mining ships.
Also how about making suicide gankers expelled from the system by concord for X amount of time after they break the law?
I understand that this is a sandbox game but let's be reasonable if we talk about area which controlled by an empire which deem ganking miners and neutral targets against the law (hence shooting the gankers down) wouldn't they also either execute him (pod kill by concord) or imprison\banish him?
On areas without concord same thing like we got now but on highsec with concord active let's use our heads and think this through.
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#247 - 2014-04-06 02:35:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Belt Scout
Thank you uncle Fozzie. You're the best! Your gift of ganker tears is the best gift yet. Big smile

Can we also have one more high slot on the skiff and make it work with a covops cloaky thingy. I'll put in a petition. Thx.

Oh also, how about being able to open a freighters cargo bay so we can throw the ore and ice right in and not have to use the orca? I'll petition that too. Big smile


o7m8


. <-------ganker tear here.


(\.../) .,!,
( 0.o)//'
(") (") Fluffy bunny's for gankers too.


Twisted

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.

Souverainiste
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
What Could Possibly Go Wr0ng
#248 - 2014-04-06 03:42:35 UTC
TBH, range on the hulk is useless in my opinion since it is always accompanied by an orca, which is giving it more range with its boosts. This range boost will not make me use it any more than I did before.
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#249 - 2014-04-06 10:16:26 UTC
Rowells wrote:
you can get 60k with only 2 adaptive and ! EM hardener and 3 shield extender rigs.


no, thats worth 42k with maxed skills. adding a DCU2 goes to 62k. and ice costs a rig of you want more ice yield.
Vhelnik Cojoin
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#250 - 2014-04-06 11:30:36 UTC
Forgot to mention: The range bonus to survey scanners on the Orca. That has got to be the most useless hull bonus to any ship in EVE, at least for HiSec mining ops.

Due to the small asteroids sizes in HiSec, it would be a herculean effort to have the Orca pilot utterly spam new targets for multiple Hulks, never mind the confusion when trying to determine who takes which target/asteroid. And without a long range survey scanner on each Hulk, then Orca target spam would be needed to utilize the new, enhanced range bonus on the Hulk.

Considering the mass confusion resulting from having no easy way to determine if an asteroid is already being mined, combined with the feeble capacitor on the Hulk (causing the Hulks to cap out once they realize they are competing with another pilot for a rock), and the confusion and inefficiency resulting from 'Orca target spam' should be obvious. It is much less hassle to just move the whole fleet, once all asteroids within 22.5km, the current range of a locally fitted T2 survey scanner on a Hulk, are mined out.

It should come as no surprise then, that I have absolutely, positively never seen anyone ever use an Orca like this in HiSec. The new Hulk range bonus is thus completely useless for HiSec miners, and it won't help influence anybody's choice of mining ship. IE. it won't get anybody in HiSec to fly a Hulk over, say, a Skiff.

So: New increased range on survey scanners, or reconsider the range bonus on the Hulk. It currently isn't worth the electrons used to render it on my screen.

Have you Communicated with your fellow capsuleers today? It is good for the EvE-oconomy and o-kay for you.

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#251 - 2014-04-06 11:41:12 UTC
Vhelnik Cojoin wrote:
Stuff.


You its a Nullsec Mining Buff? Lol
Jagoff Haverford
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#252 - 2014-04-06 13:33:44 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Just a quick reminder to everyone, this discussion of survey scanners is still alive:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3100906#post3100906
Don't take this the wrong way, because I don't mean to be insulting. But a dev post from nearly a year ago? That hardly suggests that this topic is "still alive". Especially since they have had 11 months since then, haven't changed a thing about survey scanners in that time, and forgot to include it with any of the changes announced here.

It's great to remain hopeful, but this is :ccp: we are talking about.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#253 - 2014-04-06 20:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
GetSirrus wrote:
Rowells wrote:
you can get 60k with only 2 adaptive and ! EM hardener and 3 shield extender rigs.


no, thats worth 42k with maxed skills. adding a DCU2 goes to 62k. and ice costs a rig of you want more ice yield.

Alright I'll eat it, my mobile fitter was wrong. However the correct numbers are 47k and 64k. The rig is another choice you get to make, just like i mentioned earlier.

Jagoff Haverford wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way, because I don't mean to be insulting. But a dev post from nearly a year ago? That hardly suggests that this topic is "still alive". Especially since they have had 11 months since then, haven't changed a thing about survey scanners in that time, and forgot to include it with any of the changes announced here.

It's great to remain hopeful, but this is :ccp: we are talking about.
The deve may have popsted a year ago but it looks like some people saw it and caught on. It's not like the devs have responded to anything on this one too either.
MBizon Osis
Doomheim
#254 - 2014-04-06 20:53:18 UTC
CFC loses an ice interdiction to procurers. Procurers must be OP. Makes sense CCP. ROLL with what you know.
Dave Stark
#255 - 2014-04-06 21:18:05 UTC
MBizon Osis wrote:
CFC loses an ice interdiction to procurers.

yup, let's just casually ignore the fact that they actually abandoned it to grind delve for renter income which was substantially more important than an interdiction that didn't need to be done since the speculation provided more isk than the actual interdiction.
Hildebrandt Koeppl
Hybrid Flare
#256 - 2014-04-06 21:32:16 UTC
While I like the Idea of the Covetor getting a third low slot to make it more viable, I disagree on the Hulk. the Hulk should get that low slot as well, otherwise there is no benefit in using the hulk over the covetor, given the huge difference in cost and the extremely bad tank both have. from an economic point of view a hulk doe not pay off how - even when mining directly into an orca auf it will do so even less in the future, because it is way too easily ganked. A covetor costs next to nothung, so the higher yield compared to other ships leads to a situation where you can afford to loose one every day and still have higher profit. wit a Hulk this is does not work.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#257 - 2014-04-06 22:13:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie and Rise

Can we please have a rethink on the procurer losing a mid slot.

As it stands now we have the tanky barge option, the storage barge and the high performance barge option, its only fair to pay for the tanky option with lowered performance. If I feel unsafe I fly a heavily tanked procurer, removing that mid slot will affect my ability to create as good a shield tank as I would normally have, this would seriously diminish the benefit of the procurer.

If I want to risk it I can use a retriever for faster mining or a covetor if I am mining with support, by encouraging people to fly procurers with the same yield as a retriever I think you are diminishing the value of choice that comes from the present set up. The only barge that could use some work from a rebalance point of view is the covetor/hulk in my opinion.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#258 - 2014-04-06 23:26:53 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
CCP Fozzie and Rise

Can we please have a rethink on the procurer losing a mid slot.

As it stands now we have the tanky barge option, the storage barge and the high performance barge option, its only fair to pay for the tanky option with lowered performance. If I feel unsafe I fly a heavily tanked procurer, removing that mid slot will affect my ability to create as good a shield tank as I would normally have, this would seriously diminish the benefit of the procurer.

If I want to risk it I can use a retriever for faster mining or a covetor if I am mining with support, by encouraging people to fly procurers with the same yield as a retriever I think you are diminishing the value of choice that comes from the present set up. The only barge that could use some work from a rebalance point of view is the covetor/hulk in my opinion.


The "tanky barge" has less than half the storage capacity of the "storage barge", and that's the main difference. It pays for its defensive abilities with a lack of afk mining ability.

The procurer and skiff already have immense defensive capability and losing a midslot to add a lowslot does nothing to diminish this, as you can now fit a damage control, which does more for its defence than a 2nd or third invul field.

The procurer/skiff need the most work because being tough isn't just about having a buffer to resist highsec ganking. Surviving in nullsec involves being able to eliminate the nasty rats without having to redock, change ship, kill the rats, go back, change ship etc. And as stated, it's far too boring to force another player to defend the mining fleet. Mining ships with adequate yield and excellent defensive capability are what's needed for null, because not everyone is a highsec afk miner.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#259 - 2014-04-06 23:29:30 UTC
Hildebrandt Koeppl wrote:
While I like the Idea of the Covetor getting a third low slot to make it more viable, I disagree on the Hulk. the Hulk should get that low slot as well, otherwise there is no benefit in using the hulk over the covetor, given the huge difference in cost and the extremely bad tank both have. from an economic point of view a hulk doe not pay off how - even when mining directly into an orca auf it will do so even less in the future, because it is way too easily ganked. A covetor costs next to nothung, so the higher yield compared to other ships leads to a situation where you can afford to loose one every day and still have higher profit. wit a Hulk this is does not work.

Please re-read fozzie's post, sir. You have mixed up the facts, for the covetor is not gaining a lowslot. The procurer & skiff are at the cost of a midslot.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

CowRocket Void
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#260 - 2014-04-07 01:20:35 UTC
Galphii wrote:
I just want to reiterate what I said in an earlier post as I feel it bears further emphasis. With the barge's quick locking time, +50% bonus to drone damage and a battleship tank, the procurer will be frickin *nasty* against small ships, and that's with level 1 barge skill. I strongly suggest reducing the locking speed and consider giving only the skiff the 10% drone damage bonus.



Bite your tongue sir, It needs the high scan res to lock on pods when the ganker fails. Pirate

bleeding shadow darkness > did i just saw a red procurer? :P