These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Initial mining barge changes are on the test server
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#261 - 2012-07-28 03:21:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Infinite Force wrote:
Yes, but the reload-option has this nasty tendancy to take unused crystals when it has the option - even when you select "used" ...

I tend to drag-and-drop crystals. I find it takes me too long to navigate the context menu, and it is error prone (click on wrong option).

Of course I also remove (at 39/40 damage) and later reprocess crystals before they pop, to recover all the Noxcium.

I sure would like to see crystal size reduced though, and I think it is more likely to happen than cargoholds being enlarged.
MunnyRabbit
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#262 - 2012-07-28 04:53:03 UTC
So im not sure if i missed it or not but are the values i am reading base values with skills? For instance the mack has 31k ore bay for ore with perfect exhumer 5 and MB 5 skills?? Can this go up with cargo expanders or are they introducing specific cargo expanders for the ore bay?

With the small cargo bays i don't see why anyone would bother to use cargo rigs or cargo in low slots unless you would need to hold more crystals but seems like waste to me.
Dave stark
#263 - 2012-07-28 05:30:01 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Zetaomega333 wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Zetaomega333 wrote:
Second this, Empire bears seem to be under the illusion that nullsec and wh miners will ONLY use the hulk when in a fleet, when in fact we use hulks to solo mine and will keep doing it.


Why? The Mackinaw will probably yield more once you take dropoffs into account.

37k m3 vs 7500 (or Jetcans and switching ships)



IM still gona fly a hulk cus it has the highest yeild, Them saying that its better for fleet ops doesnt mean it only works there. Titans are supposed to be good as support and command ships but all you see if them blobbing. Nothing ccp intends actually happens.


So you are going to take in less ore per hour because you want to see your hold fill faster?

The Mack is probably going to yield more Ore per hour if you take into account the time you take in warp with the Hulk or it's hauling ship.


that depends on how long you're mining for, and what you're hauling in. the mackinaw only really comes out ahead if you're mining less than 2-3 jetcans worth in 1 sitting. so if you're mining for over an hour, you're probably better off with the hulk.
Dave stark
#264 - 2012-07-28 05:30:53 UTC
MunnyRabbit wrote:
So im not sure if i missed it or not but are the values i am reading base values with skills? For instance the mack has 31k ore bay for ore with perfect exhumer 5 and MB 5 skills?? Can this go up with cargo expanders or are they introducing specific cargo expanders for the ore bay?

With the small cargo bays i don't see why anyone would bother to use cargo rigs or cargo in low slots unless you would need to hold more crystals but seems like waste to me.


the mack has 31k ore regardless of your skills. it's ore bay size is scaled with prerequisites which have to be at V in order to fly the ship.

no, there are no mods that increase ore bay size.
Infinite Force
#265 - 2012-07-28 06:22:27 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Infinite Force wrote:
It is true that everyone has a different mining style - however, CCP already has stated the cargoholds are being "nerfed" to avoid these specialized ships being used as haulers.


I suppose that creating a "crystals only" hold was too much of a challenge for CCP? That would fix the hauler cross over.

lol .. who knows. it certainly would have fixed several issues..

HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud

http://tinyurl.com/95zmyzw - The only way to go!
Dave stark
#266 - 2012-07-28 06:24:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Infinite Force wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Infinite Force wrote:
It is true that everyone has a different mining style - however, CCP already has stated the cargoholds are being "nerfed" to avoid these specialized ships being used as haulers.


I suppose that creating a "crystals only" hold was too much of a challenge for CCP? That would fix the hauler cross over.

lol .. who knows. it certainly would have fixed several issues..


there's no need for such a thing, they just needed to correctly split the cargo bay of the hulk to begin with. it was just a case of changing 2 numbers on the hulk's stats [in fact, they could have done it by changing 1 number really]. instead they went and changed 4 numbers on 4 things and did a worse job of it than if they'd changed 2 numbers.

i fully expect to see more cargo adjustments on sisi today when it updates.

edit; for ccp's benefit the only number that needed changing was the cargo bay to 2150 m3. (if you really wanted your 8k total then the ore bay should have gone to 5850, which is fine as the theoretical max yield is ~5.6k)
how much more effort did it take you to **** around with 4 things yesterday and NOT fix the problem than it would have took to do the above to 1 number on the hulk's stats?
Infinite Force
#267 - 2012-07-28 06:30:29 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Infinite Force wrote:
Yes, but the reload-option has this nasty tendancy to take unused crystals when it has the option - even when you select "used" ...

I tend to drag-and-drop crystals. I find it takes me too long to navigate the context menu, and it is error prone (click on wrong option).

Of course I also remove (at 39/40 damage) and later reprocess crystals before they pop, to recover all the Noxcium.

I sure would like to see crystal size reduced though, and I think it is more likely to happen than cargoholds being enlarged.

I normally drag-n-drop as well - just because of the mis-click potentials. I don't think I've ever reprocessed my crystals - never really paid that close of attention to it .. lol

HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud

http://tinyurl.com/95zmyzw - The only way to go!
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#268 - 2012-07-28 08:29:17 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
edit; for ccp's benefit the only number that needed changing was the cargo bay to 2150 m3.


The only change that was ever needed was 10PG to the Hulk, then adjusting the base fittings, EHP and cargo of the other ships to fall in line with the specialist tank/capacity/yield roles that CCP had decided on. I like the split roles idea, it's just the execution was sloppy (typical CCP tweak finely balanced things with a 500lb hammer approach).

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Pipa Porto
#269 - 2012-07-28 08:31:37 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
that depends on how long you're mining for, and what you're hauling in. the mackinaw only really comes out ahead if you're mining less than 2-3 jetcans worth in 1 sitting. so if you're mining for over an hour, you're probably better off with the hulk.


I wan't the Mack to have enough Ore bay that it comes out ahead any time you don't have a second account hauling. That's what it's role is. It should be great at that role, just like the Hulk and Skiff are great at theirs (though the Mack is also great at the Skiff's role, and the Skiff good at the Mack's atm).

Oh well, I guess the Mack's gonna be a HS boat (can flip proof).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#270 - 2012-07-28 08:38:27 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
that depends on how long you're mining for, and what you're hauling in. the mackinaw only really comes out ahead if you're mining less than 2-3 jetcans worth in 1 sitting. so if you're mining for over an hour, you're probably better off with the hulk.


I wan't the Mack to have enough Ore bay that it comes out ahead any time you don't have a second account hauling. That's what it's role is. It should be great at that role, just like the Hulk and Skiff are great at theirs (though the Mack is also great at the Skiff's role, and the Skiff good at the Mack's atm).

Oh well, I guess the Mack's gonna be a HS boat (can flip proof).


assuming you mean "coming out on top" means having more m3 of ore in the station at the end of the session.

and the mack does come out on top; if you're not mining for extended periods of time. however that means the mack has more yield tank and cargo than a hulk. which is basically what the hulk is doing now and they want to move away from it. an issue hasn't been solved, the ships have just swapped between who's the king and who's the peasant.
Pipa Porto
#271 - 2012-07-28 08:53:26 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
that depends on how long you're mining for, and what you're hauling in. the mackinaw only really comes out ahead if you're mining less than 2-3 jetcans worth in 1 sitting. so if you're mining for over an hour, you're probably better off with the hulk.


I wan't the Mack to have enough Ore bay that it comes out ahead any time you don't have a second account hauling. That's what it's role is. It should be great at that role, just like the Hulk and Skiff are great at theirs (though the Mack is also great at the Skiff's role, and the Skiff good at the Mack's atm).

Oh well, I guess the Mack's gonna be a HS boat (can flip proof).


assuming you mean "coming out on top" means having more m3 of ore in the station at the end of the session.

and the mack does come out on top; if you're not mining for extended periods of time. however that means the mack has more yield tank and cargo than a hulk. which is basically what the hulk is doing now and they want to move away from it. an issue hasn't been solved, the ships have just swapped between who's the king and who's the peasant.


The tank issue is separate. If the Mack had a tank similar to the current SISI dump Hulk (topping at ~22k), the Skiff would be king. If the Skiff's ore bay was then reduced to ~2 un-gang-bonused cycles, it would be a toss up.

The Hulk has the most Yield Measured by Roid->Cargo. Which is nice, but you need a Hauler.
The Mack should have the most Yield when measured Solo, Roid -> Station.

Maybe getting the numbers right for the Ore hold would be too difficult, I don't know, but that's how I envision the yield-cargo balance between the Hulk and the Mack.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#272 - 2012-07-28 09:02:20 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
that depends on how long you're mining for, and what you're hauling in. the mackinaw only really comes out ahead if you're mining less than 2-3 jetcans worth in 1 sitting. so if you're mining for over an hour, you're probably better off with the hulk.


I wan't the Mack to have enough Ore bay that it comes out ahead any time you don't have a second account hauling. That's what it's role is. It should be great at that role, just like the Hulk and Skiff are great at theirs (though the Mack is also great at the Skiff's role, and the Skiff good at the Mack's atm).

Oh well, I guess the Mack's gonna be a HS boat (can flip proof).


assuming you mean "coming out on top" means having more m3 of ore in the station at the end of the session.

and the mack does come out on top; if you're not mining for extended periods of time. however that means the mack has more yield tank and cargo than a hulk. which is basically what the hulk is doing now and they want to move away from it. an issue hasn't been solved, the ships have just swapped between who's the king and who's the peasant.


The tank issue is separate. If the Mack had a tank similar to the current SISI dump Hulk (topping at ~22k), the Skiff would be king. If the Skiff's ore bay was then reduced to ~2 un-gang-bonused cycles, it would be a toss up.

The Hulk has the most Yield Measured by Roid->Cargo. Which is nice, but you need a Hauler.
The Mack should have the most Yield when measured Solo, Roid -> Station.

Maybe getting the numbers right for the Ore hold would be too difficult, I don't know, but that's how I envision the yield-cargo balance between the Hulk and the Mack.


the skiff's the most pointless mining ship for mining; it's giving up everything for a level of tank that simply isn't required. hence we go back to hulk vs mack, and unless you're doing some extremely long mining sessions the mack has the best of all 3 worlds so we're back in the situation we're in now.
Pipa Porto
#273 - 2012-07-28 09:15:03 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
The tank issue is separate. If the Mack had a tank similar to the current SISI dump Hulk (topping at ~22k), the Skiff would be king. If the Skiff's ore bay was then reduced to ~2 un-gang-bonused cycles, it would be a toss up.

The Hulk has the most Yield Measured by Roid->Cargo. Which is nice, but you need a Hauler.
The Mack should have the most Yield when measured Solo, Roid -> Station.

Maybe getting the numbers right for the Ore hold would be too difficult, I don't know, but that's how I envision the yield-cargo balance between the Hulk and the Mack.


the skiff's the most pointless mining ship for mining; it's giving up everything for a level of tank that simply isn't required. hence we go back to hulk vs mack, and unless you're doing some extremely long mining sessions the mack has the best of all 3 worlds so we're back in the situation we're in now.


Agreed. But the Skiff's level of tank isn't the problem, it's the Mackinaw's tank that causes the problem with the Skiff.

Like I said, I see no reason why the Mackinaw should have the Ore Bay AND enough Tank AND a better yield than the Skiff.

I think the Mack should have the same Yield (just give the Skiff a 3rd low), not enough Tank to be safe from ganks, and a CAVERNOUS Ore bay. Which means the Skiff steals its role with its Giant Ore bay, so that needs to shrink and we're fine.

Then all three get roles. If you want Safety, you pick the Skiff. If you want convenience, pick the Mack (gotta pay attention to the game you are in the process of playing though). If you have the support to use it efficiently, pick the Hulk.


If it takes a long time for switching to a hauler to beat the mack, that's gonna have to be good enough. I think the mack would be fine with a ~40k Ore hold, which would make it better than a hauler (it would haul better than the Itty V), meaning that the Hulk's not going to bring more ore to station SOLO than the Mack.

With a dedicated Hauler, the Hulk will bring more Ore back than a Mack, because it pulls more from the belt.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#274 - 2012-07-28 09:28:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
i definitely agree that the barges are stepping on each other's toes in terms of their unique roles. there's no need for the skiff to have an ore bay as large as it is, that's for certain.

i think the hulk/mack did need tank buffs however else they simply wouldn't be viable in 0.0 space where the rats would tear them to shreds without deadspace/faction modules. however in keeping them 0.0 sec viable they also become unprofitable to gank which renders the skiff redundant in high sec. either way some of the ships will never see a use in some parts of space.
Pipa Porto
#275 - 2012-07-28 09:33:18 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
i definitely agree that the barges are stepping on each other's toes in terms of their unique roles. there's no need for the skiff to have an ore bay as large as it is, that's for certain.

i think the hulk/mack did need tank buffs however else they simply wouldn't be viable in 0.0 space where the rats would tear them to shreds without deadspace/faction modules. however in keeping them 0.0 sec viable they also become unprofitable to gank which renders the skiff redundant in high sec. either way some of the ships will never see a use in some parts of space.


Give 'em an active tank bonus and they'll be fine in 0.0 or give them a resist bonus and further reduce their raw HP.

There are bunches of ways to make them tanky vs rats but flimsy v people.

From the look of it, I don't think the Hulk's losing any of its ability to tank rats (I could easily be wrong. I don't have SISI installed due to space constraints, and I'm way too stupid to try modding Pyfa)

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#276 - 2012-07-28 09:35:04 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
i definitely agree that the barges are stepping on each other's toes in terms of their unique roles. there's no need for the skiff to have an ore bay as large as it is, that's for certain.

i think the hulk/mack did need tank buffs however else they simply wouldn't be viable in 0.0 space where the rats would tear them to shreds without deadspace/faction modules. however in keeping them 0.0 sec viable they also become unprofitable to gank which renders the skiff redundant in high sec. either way some of the ships will never see a use in some parts of space.


Give 'em an active tank bonus and they'll be fine in 0.0 or give them a resist bonus and further reduce their raw HP.

There are bunches of ways to make them tanky vs rats but flimsy v people.

From the look of it, I don't think the Hulk's losing any of its ability to tank rats (I could easily be wrong. I don't have SISI installed due to space constraints, and I'm way too stupid to try modding Pyfa)


the hulk is losing a bit of resists and some shields/armour/structure i think.

and yeah, those changes would be good to let it tank rats well enough but still be vulnerable to gankers if poorly fit.
Pipa Porto
#277 - 2012-07-28 09:42:13 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
i definitely agree that the barges are stepping on each other's toes in terms of their unique roles. there's no need for the skiff to have an ore bay as large as it is, that's for certain.

i think the hulk/mack did need tank buffs however else they simply wouldn't be viable in 0.0 space where the rats would tear them to shreds without deadspace/faction modules. however in keeping them 0.0 sec viable they also become unprofitable to gank which renders the skiff redundant in high sec. either way some of the ships will never see a use in some parts of space.


Give 'em an active tank bonus and they'll be fine in 0.0 or give them a resist bonus and further reduce their raw HP.

There are bunches of ways to make them tanky vs rats but flimsy v people.

From the look of it, I don't think the Hulk's losing any of its ability to tank rats (I could easily be wrong. I don't have SISI installed due to space constraints, and I'm way too stupid to try modding Pyfa)


the hulk is losing a bit of resists and some shields/armour/structure i think.

and yeah, those changes would be good to let it tank rats well enough but still be vulnerable to gankers if poorly fit.


The Hulk should be vulnerable to gankers unless actively flown. It should not be able to tank a gank. That's the Skiff's job.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#278 - 2012-07-28 09:46:01 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
i definitely agree that the barges are stepping on each other's toes in terms of their unique roles. there's no need for the skiff to have an ore bay as large as it is, that's for certain.

i think the hulk/mack did need tank buffs however else they simply wouldn't be viable in 0.0 space where the rats would tear them to shreds without deadspace/faction modules. however in keeping them 0.0 sec viable they also become unprofitable to gank which renders the skiff redundant in high sec. either way some of the ships will never see a use in some parts of space.


Give 'em an active tank bonus and they'll be fine in 0.0 or give them a resist bonus and further reduce their raw HP.

There are bunches of ways to make them tanky vs rats but flimsy v people.

From the look of it, I don't think the Hulk's losing any of its ability to tank rats (I could easily be wrong. I don't have SISI installed due to space constraints, and I'm way too stupid to try modding Pyfa)


the hulk is losing a bit of resists and some shields/armour/structure i think.

and yeah, those changes would be good to let it tank rats well enough but still be vulnerable to gankers if poorly fit.


The Hulk should be vulnerable to gankers unless actively flown. It should not be able to tank a gank. That's the Skiff's job.


i'd say that depends entirely upon what's trying to gank it.
a 'nado, or a battleship? sure exhumer wrecks everywhere!
some thing i was given for free in the tutorial? no, not a chance.
Pipa Porto
#279 - 2012-07-28 09:48:19 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
The Hulk should be vulnerable to gankers unless actively flown. It should not be able to tank a gank. That's the Skiff's job.


i'd say that depends entirely upon what's trying to gank it.
a 'nado, or a battleship? sure exhumer wrecks everywhere!
some thing i was given for free in the tutorial? no, not a chance.


You got a T2 fit Catalyst in your tutorial?

It should be profitable to gank a Hulk. Otherwise the tanky ship is worthless.

Bring back insurance and we'll be doing it in Cruisers and BCs. Until then, it's Dessies all the way.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Dave stark
#280 - 2012-07-28 09:53:33 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
The Hulk should be vulnerable to gankers unless actively flown. It should not be able to tank a gank. That's the Skiff's job.


i'd say that depends entirely upon what's trying to gank it.
a 'nado, or a battleship? sure exhumer wrecks everywhere!
some thing i was given for free in the tutorial? no, not a chance.


You got a T2 fit Catalyst in your tutorial?

It should be profitable to gank a Hulk. Otherwise the tanky ship is worthless.

Bring back insurance and we'll be doing it in Cruisers and BCs. Until then, it's Dessies all the way.


it shouldn't be profitable to gank a hulk; ccp said so.
the size of the ship isn't really the issue, it's the loss incurred by the ganker. in empire space the ganker's loss should be greater than their gain, that's why an exhumer should be able to repel a destroyer. null sec and low sec are for profitable ganks.

nothing is stopping you destroying an exhumer with a bigger ship. of course i'll wager when the profit dries up so does people's motivation to gank.