Assembly Hall

Now before anyone gets out the torches on this one please hear me out.

I know that they already did a rebalance of the Mining Barges and Exhumers but I feel that there was a minor error that I would like to ask to be considered for correction.

Before they changed them Covetors and Hulks ruled the mining especially in highsec and required med sized ganker fleets to take them down. Which spawned events such as Hulkaggedon as groups sought to shake AFK miners out of their apathy.
But in those days Miners either flew Covetor/Hulk or Retreiver/Machinaw while waiting to afford/Skill up to the larger ships.

But few ever flew the poor little Procurer/Skiff as they were deemed not worth the money except under special/uncommon conditions.

So I was happy when I heard that they would rebalance them and largely was happy with the results...

The Procurer/Skiff became small tuff little ships capable of mining in slightly hostile environments

The Retreiver/Mackinaw became like the solo miners bread and butter

The Covetor/Hulk were supposed to become specialized fleet miners... But few if any fleets actually use them... Why? because they are terrible, too frail to survive if the fleet they are in gets attacked, too small of an ore hold to use without orca support, too expensive to make worth while. So fleets instead use Skiffs and/or Machinaws or their T1 kin.

I think that some discussion should be opened on how best to make the Covetor/Hulk an attractive option without overshadowing the benefits of using the other two ships.

My personal opinion is that it with minor tweaks to armor/shield/OreHold values (say 40% increase to each) they would become more attractive to players.

But I would like to hear other peoples opinion regarding this

I can assure you that plenty of players are using Hulks.

While I don't support an increase of Hulk and Covetor tank for the reasons given by earlier posters I do agree that there is an inbalance in the numbers of different types of mining ships in use.... in highsec. Its certainly possible that the Hulks and Covetors are mainstays in null. My experience there is low but I have noticed an occasional large Covetor fleet in Providence while passing though. (Obviously, to a player like myself, seeing a giant Covetor fleet brings on the same reaction as going into a Golden Corral.)

However, in highsec, its all Skiff and Procurers with the occasional Retriever, the somewhat rarer Hulk and the less-seen-than-Bigfoot Covetor. Usually when the Eve community makes an overwhelming choice for one platform that platform is due for a nerf (see Drakes and Hurricanes). However, it CAN be done with buffing....

Now, carebears have always been extremely risk adverse but not more than three years ago, before the ships were redone, there were lots of Retrievers and Mackinaws, despite their relative gankability. This reflected the state of ganking at the time but also the calculation of mining efficiency versus tank. This leads to what my actual point is. Its not that the Covetors and Hulks have too little tank, its that the Procurers and Skiffs are too productive relative to their less tanky bretheren.

So, maybe instead of making the Cov/Hulk safer, they make the Proc/Skiff less productive (or if you prefer buffs, make the other mining ships MORE productive and leave the mining battleships where they are). Then there is a real tradeoff. A miner could sit safely in his Procurer and watch a more daring competitor melt the ice away at a much faster pace. A safe carebear is a happy carebear but to some miners the loss of income would matter and they would use some of the other ships,.

I realize the self-serving nature of incentivizing miners to get out of Procurers and Skiffs but anyone who visits a highsec ice field can see in an instant that there is no variety of choice among the miners. No tradeoffs, no calculations, just an attempt at safety (and with it AFK mining, silent local chat and general non-interadtion). Thats bad.

TLDR: The massive over representation of Procurers and Skiffs in highsec mining is proof that there is an unbalance and it should be addressed. By buffing if possible, by nerfing if necessary.

Highsec is worth fighting for.

Such as he predominate use of the catalyst for ganking over the other destroyers?

Both the Procurer and Retriever previously received a 25% reduction in yield. I disagreed with the retention of the procurer and retriever in the first place. They should have been retired, instead of shoe-horning yield bonus to replicate 3 strips. Give the coveter 4 mids and enough grid for 2 LSE, and the hulk 5 mids. Preserving the legitimate fitting choice, which the major of ships follow.

Fitting is the not the issue for the catalyst. It is pointing that the catalyst "an overwhelming choice for one platform".

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=462381

The bright end of destroyers on the graph is hybrids. So, it time to nerf the catalyst or buff the rest. It was the excuse to nerf the drake and 'cane and it was the excuse to nerf the procurer and retriever.

What ******* game are you playing wherein 40% is a minor tweak?

Tell me. I find this fascinating.

You know, with innate hull resists becoming a thing, maybe catalysts need a minor tweak to their DPS? Say, +40%?

No, OP, just no.

I'm a miner myself and Hulk has ALWAYS BEEN the KING of yield. And that's why it has so many disabilities compared to other Exhumers/barges.

It's fine the way it is. Hulk has always been the strip miner of choice where you want the biggest yield. Skiff/Procurer, Mackinaw/Retriever were more catered to solo mining.