Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Tl;dr; an objective review of the mackinaw shows it is not worth skilling for compared to a retriever for ore. In the authors opinion, I would never buy a Mackinaw and would never choose to train Exhumers solely to fly one.

First, this post is just going to compare the t1 mining barge with the t2 exhumer. No comments are being made about isk/hour, the value or fun of mining, survivability, etc. Strictly just answering the question "I have a barge, should I upgrade to an exhumer?"

The two ships

Retriever - Active aligned, at the computer, max yield

Role: Maximize your yield, who cares about tank because you're dead anyway, GTFO.
Caveat: It uses the drone bay for mining drones. You'll need to kill rats with one of your other mining alts.

---

[Retriever, LS Mining - T2]
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II

Survey Scanner II

Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II

Medium Higgs Anchor I
Medium Drone Mining Augmentor II
Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I

Mining Drone II x5

Yield - 1536
Ore Bay - 27,500
EHP - Meh, it's dead anyway

Mackinaw - Active aligned, at the computer, max yield

[Mackinaw, LS Mining]
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II

Survey Scanner II
EM Ward Amplifier II
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]

Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II

Medium Drone Mining Augmentor II
Medium Higgs Anchor I

Mining Drone II x5
Hobgoblin II x5

Yield - 1667
Ore Bay - 35,000
EHP - Meh

---

Retriever - 1536
Mackinaw - 1667

An +8.5% yield, 25m3 drone bay, mid slots it doesn't have enough CPU to use, and 7,500 ore bay (27% better) for the trouble of training Exhumers V (1,280,000 SP) and an extra 160-170 million isk.

Is that suitable compensation - incentive - for flying the ship? I can buy a 5% mining implant for 120 million to close most of that gap on a retriever. The best benefit of flying a mackinaw has nothing to do with mining, but drones - being able to use mining and combat drones.

---

Let's look at the other ships. I'm not listing the fits to save space, but you can infer what I did form the comments.

Skiff (tank, dc2, drones, extender rigs)

Yield - 1513
EHP - 93,000

Procurer

Yield - 1392
EHP - 56,000

Hulk (max yield, drone rigs, what tank?)

Yield - 2122

Covetor

Yield - 1744

---

The snap conclusions I can make is that the Skiff and Hulk compensate their pilots for flying them. The skiff tanks a lot more and has the drone bay to fit ECMs, Mediums, and Mining to further complement the combat ability. The hulk pulls 22% more than the covetor, which is consistent (literally) with eve's 80 / 20 balancing between the tiers and SP investment.

So, where does this leave the Mackinaw? The only thing I'm getting that a retriever cant do is 7500 ore bay and a fleet of light drones. That's an extra couple of minutes at the belt mining ore and ice. Just a couple. Objectively, I don't think that is worth it.

Proposed solution

1) Add an extra 80-100 CPU so I can actually use my mid slots. If I give up yield to fit the slots, then a skiff out mines the mackinaw and those two ships have their yield equalized between each other.

2) Increase the cargo bay from 35,000 to 45,000. It's supposed to be a ship that sacrifices tank for cargo hold, so widen the gap between the retriever and mackinaw.

3) Alternatively, nerf the retriever to a 20,000 ore bay and give it a 50m3 drone bay like the other barges. Preserves the balance between the exhumers and increase the value of the Mackinaws 35,000 bay.

Thoughts?

Editted - the author editted his post, making my snark unnecessary.

The main advantage of a Mack is it's ore hold, the increase is in line with your 80/20 statement, just because that is not good enough in your eyes doesn't mean it's not balanced.

Thank you for elaborating, certainly a valid opinion. You are correct that I do not value the 7,500 m3 increase from the retriever.

It can fit more tank too. You need a small gang to kill a fully tanked Mack in a 0.7

A mackinaw, as long as it mines while aligned with a anchor riggs, is valid for both high and null sec to me. In highsec I just use passive shield amplifier (TH and KIN for void), and in nullsec a gistum-c medium shield booster to be able to tank rats, and only use combat and ecm drones.

Of course it's a very expensive ship for "just" a larger ore hold, but for solo mining this is a beast

yeah the mack should have a little more than 100m3 difference in boost.
and to the passive align reference, a passive align is you are pointed to a station (or other warp point) with engines off
an active align is you have engines on and moving in the direction of a warp point.
Actives aligns are annoying with out the Higgs, which hasn't existed for years and now we have it.

Absolutely agreed. A Mack can tank 2 Catalyst gankers in 0.6 systems if you pilot and fit them correctly and if you have proper skills.