These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Ship Proposal] Skiff is overpowered & needs a rebalance.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ix Method
Doomheim
#21 - 2014-11-21 10:32:23 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I could see the Skiff losing a touch of Ore Hold to bring it more in line with Hulk, but having the same yield as the Mack is fine.

As much as the mining missioner in me would squeal this would be by far the most reasonable way of giving the Skiff a kick.

Travelling at the speed of love.
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#22 - 2014-11-21 12:41:12 UTC
wanting a nerf on a ship so you can suicide on it, that's like asking a baby for its pacifier. its sad

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Anthar Thebess
#23 - 2014-11-21 14:03:58 UTC
From my perspective all mining ships should have around 50k of structure.
This can be of course boosted by installing damage control.

Reason is very simple, they die to fast in nullsec.

When miners tells on TS :"I'm tackled on belt"
Before you can actually do something he is dead.

If he is still alive then there is big roaming gang waiting nearby on a noob spawn.

Will this boost to structure brake suicide gangs in higsec.
Yes.
But i think that this ehp boost (not tank related boost) could be good for eve.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
virgofire
Vay Mining Corporation
#24 - 2014-11-21 14:51:26 UTC
So change a ship that doesnt need changing? I would say lock the thread since it seems like nothing but a troll post.

Ship is balanced fine. Ore hold is fine. Nothing about the ship needs to be changed.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#25 - 2014-11-21 17:05:57 UTC
Ix Method wrote:
Bethan Le Troix wrote:
but that they have become the best ship to mine in and therefore the other mining vessels have become essentially surplus to requirements. This goes against CCP role-based system of ship types. If you can't see this you are blind

This is simply not true. 5 jumps from Jita perhaps but if you go out in to the arse end of highsec you still see AFK Macks and even Hulks. In Nullsec you still see Hulks if there's enough people to throw drones around. You're not wrong in that Skiffs are probably the goto because they feel like safe, decent allrounders with a brutal drone bonus but that's largely a result of player actions, not bad balance.

You seem (?) to be suggesting that good balance = seeing roughly equal numbers of each in space, which with things as they stand is just mental.


Retriever : Effectively a starter mining vessel. Very weak defensively - call it the glass cannon of mining if you will. Usually fitted for maximum yield on the basis of covering an occasional ship loss. Solo mining vessel with large ore hold.

Procurer : Cheaper vessel for mining with battleship sized tank. Overly low build requirements given the battleship sized tanking options. An additional choice for starter miners who find they are being targeted by gankers.

Covetor : Cheaper mining vessel designed for fleet mining. The smaller ore hold is part of the fleet mining role.

Mackinaw : More expensive mining vessel with intermediate tanking options. Large ore hold for solo mining.

Hulk : More expensive mining vessel with smaller intermediate level tanking options. Small ore hold to facilitate fleet mining. Larger mining yield to compensate.

Skiff : More expensive mining vessel. Best tanking options. Best drone damage options. Not far off the best yield. Good sized ore hold with possibility of solo mining capability. Also has fleet mining capability.

Point the best ship out >>> Skiff !!
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#26 - 2014-11-21 17:10:47 UTC
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Skiff, Mackinaw and Retriever should all lose a low.

Do the maths. Current yield is too close to Hulk and Coveter to be worth the extra mouse clicks or lack of tank.








The trouble with this idea is that then you would be reverting to the fleet mining ships being the 'best ships' to use. I am trying to get all the ships back to a role based system which CCP favours so there is not a 'best ship'.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#27 - 2014-11-21 17:19:58 UTC
Tabyll Altol wrote:
So a Mackinaw have 35.000 m³ Ore hold, the Skiff only have 15.000 m³ ore hold. So you have to warp your skiff twice as much as the mackinaw. Seems balanced to me, if your miner in a fleet you have a hauler so why should this not fair.

Seems that somebody just died trying to gang a skiff.

-1


Erm....no. Check my killboard if you like. I have never tried to gank a Skiff because I know it isn't possible for me to do it.

At the moment the Skiff is mostly found in the ice anomalies still and ore miners haven't realised how good the Skiff actually is compared to all the other ships. If, or once, they do cotton on to this fact you will definitely see CCP Fozzie et al arrive with a dev blog stating that everyone is using the Skiff so the mining ships need to be rebalanced. If you manage to spot Skiffs in space currently nie times out of ten they will will be fleet mining with a hauler and/or Orca.

I am trying to point out the discrepancy between the Skiff and the other mining vessels before everyone switches to them then a change has to be made.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#28 - 2014-11-21 17:25:53 UTC
Ix Method wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I could see the Skiff losing a touch of Ore Hold to bring it more in line with Hulk, but having the same yield as the Mack is fine.

As much as the mining missioner in me would squeal this would be by far the most reasonable way of giving the Skiff a kick.


Already pointed this one out. The Skiff is mostly used as a fleet mining ship so changing the ore hold capacity will not have any effect.
CaCi-A 001Me
Doomheim
#29 - 2014-11-21 17:26:21 UTC
you keep repeating best ship like a chant and say the skiff is the best ship as if it's a fact. but it's not, it's just your oppinion. if the skiff were in fact the best ship, as you claim, i doubt we would see any of the other exhumer types, except for a few fleet-mining hulks. but reality proves you wrong.

i don't play real life, the balancing sucks!
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#30 - 2014-11-21 17:38:13 UTC
CaCi-A 001Me wrote:
you keep repeating best ship like a chant and say the skiff is the best ship as if it's a fact. but it's not, it's just your oppinion. if the skiff were in fact the best ship, as you claim, i doubt we would see any of the other exhumer types, except for a few fleet-mining hulks. but reality proves you wrong.


Unless a miner does not have access to a hauler I don't understand why you cannot see that the Skiff is in fact the best ship for miners to use. I guess the main reason may be that the Skiff costs over 200 million ISK to purchase which for some miners will be a considerable outlay. But given the strengths of the Skiff in all its capabilities it is a no-brainer to purchase one especially if you are in a NPC corp which then confers near invulnerability.
Jackson Apollo
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2014-11-21 17:38:49 UTC
ummm no.

the skiff does not have the same yield as the mack.

the "stats" may be similar but mining yield is different over the course of a day.

-1 The barges are perfect as is.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#32 - 2014-11-21 17:43:36 UTC
Jackson Apollo wrote:
ummm no.

the skiff does not have the same yield as the mack.

the "stats" may be similar but mining yield is different over the course of a day.

-1 The barges are perfect as is.


Not if both ships are used in a mining fleet. Others have looked into it and the yield is the same.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2014-11-21 17:47:00 UTC
A nerf to the drone damage bonus would make sense, if and only if the Rorqlol was fixed Lol

Skiffs and Macks are vastly more useful than hulks. Honestly hulks are the least useful mining ship because of three lasers that all require crystals, an abysmal cargo hold and paper thin tank. Using hulks is rarely the best option.

Using hulks in null is just asking to get hot dropped every possible opportunity, and thus, rarely ever happens.

Also, mining crystals are quite possibly one of the worst ideas ever
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#34 - 2014-11-21 18:07:57 UTC
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Skiff, Mackinaw and Retriever should all lose a low.

Do the maths. Current yield is too close to Hulk and Coveter to be worth the extra mouse clicks or lack of tank.



So, assuming both the Hulk and the Mack have a DC2 on one of the lowslots, with MLU2 on the rest of them. After you factor in Orca boosts...

Hulk: 2682 m3/min
Mack: 2045 m3/min

That's roughly a 30% increase in yield, and you want to make that bigger?

If there were to be any changes made at this point to exhumers, I would like to see the Hulk's tank increased to match that of the Mack. The Hulk is about 15-20% less tanky than the Mack is, and I would like to see that closed up some.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#35 - 2014-11-23 09:58:36 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Skiff, Mackinaw and Retriever should all lose a low.

Do the maths. Current yield is too close to Hulk and Coveter to be worth the extra mouse clicks or lack of tank.



So, assuming both the Hulk and the Mack have a DC2 on one of the lowslots, with MLU2 on the rest of them. After you factor in Orca boosts...

Hulk: 2682 m3/min
Mack: 2045 m3/min

That's roughly a 30% increase in yield, and you want to make that bigger?

If there were to be any changes made at this point to exhumers, I would like to see the Hulk's tank increased to match that of the Mack. The Hulk is about 15-20% less tanky than the Mack is, and I would like to see that closed up some.


The Hulk probably could do with a little more EHP although you just know even more Hulk owners would just fill the lows with MLUs and put no or poor types of tank-based modules in the mid slots.

Giving another call out to the CCP Devs. Any chance of a comment on my proposal Question I will accept your answer as the final word. Blink
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2014-11-23 10:15:11 UTC
The OP is a butthurt fail-ganker; that much is obvious. That he's continuing to produce even more ludicrous reasons to justify the OP is farily good confirmation that he's a troll.

Forums 101: Do NOT feed the trolls
Meilandra Vanderganken
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2014-11-24 11:53:50 UTC
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:
come on ... but mackinav have the bigest ore hold and hulk mines the most ...


and skiff is the tankes one.



The problem is in how the 'main perks' of those ships compare. A Hulk has a 30% yield advantage over Skiff/Mack while the SKiff has up to 10+ times the tank of a Hulk depending on how you fit it.
Meilandra Vanderganken
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2014-11-24 12:13:14 UTC
Bethan Le Troix wrote:

The Hulk probably could do with a little more EHP although you just know even more Hulk owners would just fill the lows with MLUs and put no or poor types of tank-based modules in the mid slots.


Nah, that would only move us more towards the "all barges equal" situation at which point everyone chooses the ship that has even the slightest advantage over the others rendering those obsolete.

I firmly believe in giving barges and xumers a distinctive role.

High yield role: able to outmine the others by several orders of magnitude (not the case currently) while being paperthin and needing hauler support.

Solo role: able to be in space mining for a long time without need to dock up or have hauler support. Rets and macks currently match that role quite well.

High defense role: by far the lowest yield like 1/3 that of the Mack, having superb defensive capabilities in the form of tank and mobility. As it stands now the Skiff has all the perks and no drawbacks to speak off.

Give miners a REAL choice instead of having a clear 'winning' choice. Choose between much moniez but high risk, soloable mining with some risk and not much moniez but very low risk. Completely in the spirit of EVE :)
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#39 - 2014-11-24 12:16:32 UTC
Bethan Le Troix wrote:


a decent ore hold,


Bethan Le Troix wrote:
Decreasing the ore hold will not change anything as the Skiff is usually in a fleet with hauler support.




You cant tell me the ore hold is one of the advantages of a skiff and then a few lines later say its pointless nerfing it because ppl dont use it...

the skiff works for its job and clearly it doesnt overshadow the mack or hulk

Meilandra Vanderganken wrote:
The problem is in how the 'main perks' of those ships compare. A Hulk has a 30% yield advantage over Skiff/Mack while the SKiff has up to 10+ times the tank of a Hulkdepending on how you fit it.


wtf? so you even admit your making a flimsy argument?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Mehrune Khan
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#40 - 2014-11-24 12:59:08 UTC
The Skiff doesn't have the same yield as a Mackinaw. On paper, numbers-wise it looks like it, but the smaller ore bay means that solo miners will be making twice as many trips back to station to dump their ore. This is significant - when you get back to the belt you have to crawl your barge all the way back to the rocks again. I can tell you from experience that warping to 0 never takes your barge within range of the rocks you want.

Nerfing the skiff does not make things balanced, it just punishes miners who are afraid of losing their ships and are already choosing to mine with a less efficient ship. If you want more people to fly Mackinaws, I would suggest buffing the Mackinaw. Even then I think most players would still choose the inefficiency of the Skiff because of gankers.