These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Retriever or mackinaw?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fancy Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2014-09-11 13:53:11 UTC
Is slightly more ore hold and 10% faster mining speed really worth the massive SP sink and significant ISK cost?

Am I missing something? Input from the miners please.
Aerie Evingod
Midwest Miners LLC
#2 - 2014-09-11 14:29:28 UTC
Fancy Bear wrote:
Is slightly more ore hold and 10% faster mining speed really worth the massive SP sink and significant ISK cost?

Am I missing something? Input from the miners please.


By staying in the retriever you are missing more yield. The SP investment is minimal. Mackinaw has more slots too.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#3 - 2014-09-11 15:15:40 UTC
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Aerie Evingod
Midwest Miners LLC
#4 - 2014-09-11 16:04:08 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


If you're losing them on a regular basis out doing risky mining then the cost of exhumers probably isn't worth it. But it all dependson where you mine.
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#5 - 2014-09-11 16:44:06 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


A good example of how out of balance this game is.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-09-11 17:01:35 UTC
I upgraded from a Retriever to a Mackinaw, and the change was pretty amazing from the very beginning. Also the skills allow you to fleet mine with Hulks & Orca's later in the future with your corp.

So yeah, it's worth it.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#7 - 2014-09-11 17:40:19 UTC
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


A good example of how out of balance this game is.


That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#8 - 2014-09-11 17:40:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Bronson Hughes
Aerie Evingod wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


If you're losing them on a regular basis out doing risky mining then the cost of exhumers probably isn't worth it. But it all dependson where you mine.

I should also have specified that I do not mine often on any of my accounts. If mining were a primary activity, I'd consider the investment in upgrading to Exhumers more appealing, but for a casual miner like me it doesn't make sense.

Sister Bertrille wrote:
A good example of how out of balance this game is.

I disagree. Like all things in EvE, going beyond T1 performance into T2 performance requires a much more substantial ISK investment for the hardware. I personally don't see most T2 hulls above frigate-class as being worth the risk, Exhumers included.

Look at HACs for example. You will pay up to 30x the cost of a basic cruiser hull for a relatively slight increase in performance and durability. Not worth it in my book, which is why I prefer T1 hulls unless I need something very specific that only the T2 hull can provide (HICs for example).

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2014-09-11 17:46:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I disagree. Like all things in EvE, going beyond T1 performance into T2 performance requires a much more substantial ISK investment for the hardware. I personally don't see most T2 hulls above frigate-class as being worth the risk, Exhumers included.

Look at HACs for example. You will pay up to 30x the cost of a basic cruiser hull for a relatively slight increase in performance and durability. Not worth it in my book, which is why I prefer T1 hulls unless I need something very specific that only the T2 hull can provide (HICs for example).

Funny. I came to the exact opposite conclusion. So did all those people who fly T3's in w-space or Ishtars/Eagles/Interceptors/Recons/Logi in PVP. Perhaps there are additional factors in play here that you have not accounted for in your assessment.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#10 - 2014-09-11 17:49:28 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
Funny. I came to the exact opposite conclusion. So did all those people who fly T3's in w-space or Ishtars in PVP. Perhaps there are additional factors in play here that you have not accounted for in your assessment.

Don't get me wrong, I definitely see the benefits of T2/T3. I just subscribe to the adage "only fly what you can afford to lose", and as a space-poor PvP'er, I prefer to have a dozen inexpensive hulls available instead of one expensive one.

Everything I've said in this thread is specific to my personal situation. YMMV.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#11 - 2014-09-11 18:09:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Sister Bertrille
Cipher Jones wrote:
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


A good example of how out of balance this game is.


That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.



No its not.
Its way out of balance.

Destroyer vs Hulk
Capable pilots in both ships.
Destroyer almost always wins.

Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.

To put it into another context:
What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two.
Makes no sense at all.
A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up.
CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#12 - 2014-09-11 18:17:21 UTC
Sister Bertrille wrote:

No its not.
Its way out of balance.

Destroyer vs Hulk
Capable pilots in both ships.
Destroyer almost always wins.

Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.

To put it into another context:
What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two.
Makes no sense at all.
A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up.
CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.

Destroyer almost always "wins" over a Hulk in combat ability, yes, because the Destroyer is a combat ship whereas the Hulk is not.

However, a Hulk will always outmine a Destroyer because the Hulk is a mining ship whereas the Destroyer is not.

By your logic, a battleship should never be able to be taken down by a smaller ship because the larger ship is more expensive and can "stand up" to smaller ships. This is the exact opposite of how EvE works. EvE is rock/paper/scissors, not more ISK = less risk.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#13 - 2014-09-11 18:26:33 UTC
No way...the skill point investment time that I pointed out is part of the imbalance.
I'm aware the Hulk is not a combat ship but the game has changed.
Hulks that undock in high sec are going into harms way whether they are classified as a combat ship or not.
Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#14 - 2014-09-11 18:43:21 UTC
Sister Bertrille wrote:
No way...the skill point investment time that I pointed out is part of the imbalance.
I'm aware the Hulk is not a combat ship but the game has changed.
Hulks that undock in high sec are going into harms way whether they are classified as a combat ship or not.
Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all.

Which is precisely why I don't fly them.

Risk vs. Reward. I'm not willing to take the risk. Others are.


Incidentally, skill point investment is not a guarantee of performance or survival. If it were, Marauders, BlackOps, Capital Ships, etc. would never die to more easily trained ship, yet they do all the time.

Your plight is not unique to Exhumers, which is why I say the situation is balanced.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
JAF Anders
Adenosine Inhibition
The Chicken Coop
#15 - 2014-09-11 19:24:14 UTC  |  Edited by: JAF Anders
The Skiff is an excellent choice of Exhumer. It's easy to manage and very durable.

Edit: addendum

Sister Bertrille wrote:

Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all.


They make sense when you don't plan on getting hit. Hulks were meant to give the performance edge, provided that they operated within the envelope of protection. At this point, you're substituting your tactical capacity for a strategic one, shifting the burden of defense entirely off the shoulders of the miner and into the capable charge of security forces.

As another illustration, frigate PvP sees a wide popularity in ships that have little to no "tank" because they rely on operating outside of their opponent's capability to do damage to them. The same moral applies.

The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#16 - 2014-09-11 19:29:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Cipher Jones
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


A good example of how out of balance this game is.


That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.



No its not.
Its way out of balance.

Destroyer vs Hulk
Capable pilots in both ships.
Destroyer almost always wins.

Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.

To put it into another context:
What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two.
Makes no sense at all.
A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up.
CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.



Which is why it IS balanced. The Dessie will not kill the retriever pilot unless he brings a gang, or the retriever pilot killed himself at the fitting screen.

And the Dessie won't kill the hulk when the hulk is in a (proper) gang and fit to survive.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#17 - 2014-09-11 20:11:08 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Sister Bertrille wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.


A good example of how out of balance this game is.


That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.



No its not.
Its way out of balance.

Destroyer vs Hulk
Capable pilots in both ships.
Destroyer almost always wins.

Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.

To put it into another context:
What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two.
Makes no sense at all.
A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up.
CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.



Which is why it IS balanced. The Dessie will not kill the retriever pilot unless he brings a gang, or the retriever pilot killed himself at the fitting screen.

And the Dessie won't kill the hulk when the hulk is in a (proper) gang and fit to survive.


You keep mentioning gangs.
That also makes no sense.
Gangs do not balance ships.
And not everyone "has a gang" at their disposal every time they want to visit a belt.
You're advocating some real pain in the butt restrictions.
Guys behind keyboards at CCP do the balancing.
The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#18 - 2014-09-11 20:15:56 UTC
Sister Bertrille wrote:
You keep mentioning gangs.
That also makes no sense.
Gangs do not balance ships.
And not everyone "has a gang" at their disposal every time they want to visit a belt.
You're advocating some real pain in the butt restrictions.
Guys behind keyboards at CCP do the balancing.
The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.

CCP has very clearly stated that the Covetor/Hulk are intended primary as gang ships, to be flown with appropriate support. It makes perfect sense.

If you want to mine solo, fly one of the other hulls. Retriever/Mackinaw for capacity, Procurer/Skiff for tank.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2014-09-11 20:25:00 UTC
Sister Bertrille wrote:
The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.

It can if you fit it correctly. The hulk has no place in hi sec anyway. It is meant for blue null. If you want to mine in dangerous space, such as hi sec, fly a properly tanked skiff.
Arn Stimy
Comms Black
Pandemic Horde
#20 - 2014-09-12 19:48:18 UTC
Quote:
That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.


No its not.
Its way out of balance.

Destroyer vs Hulk
Capable pilots in both ships.
Destroyer almost always wins.

Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.

To put it into another context:
What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two.
Makes no sense at all.
A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up.
CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.



What makes a destroyer crappy? Its having 8 turrets to blast you with or you having zero guns to fight back with?

I'm a nullsec player with 6 accounts and I pilot 5 hulks at a time in nullsec. I moved there because I can tell WHEN someone is going to come try to kill me. You carebears crying about highsec gankers should just move to nullsec where you can see them coming. Then you can pilot your hulks and learn how to play the game rather than crying on the forums about how your rock smasher cant smash combat fit destroyers. Also, MINERS ARE SITTING DUCKS. JUST GET USED TO IT. EITHER GET OUT OF THE WAY OR GET BLOWN UP. Its simple. There shouldn't be ANY balance WHATSOEVER between a combat ship and a miner. If you want some viability, get a skiff and watch them get bored shooting at your tank.

Also, who are you to think about engineering designs on spaceships and what people would or wouldn't do in this virtual pixilated universe. Seriously? Come on now! Geez some of you nerds need to get your tighty whities unbunched.
12Next page