These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

So, Barge Info?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#201 - 2016-08-18 17:07:27 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Elinarien wrote:


1. What would be the max EHP of a Skiff and how would that be achieved?


80-90k

T2 mods, much in the same way the eagle and cerb are set up. I could get higher results using cheap bling mods and thats omni resists so if you tank vs the most common gankers you will wind up with higher numbers. Important thing to note here is the fact you could finally fit large shield extenders under my plan.

Elinarien wrote:

2. What would you consider to be an appropriate yield be in m3 per 180 secs with that tank?


As its a shield tank the question would be it depends on if you go max yield (3 MTU) mad damage (3 DDU) a mix of both or cargo. A 3 MTU skiff would drag in the same as a 3 MTU mack. The hulk would have the 25% higher bonus.
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#202 - 2016-08-18 17:08:07 UTC
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
I have no particular problem with baltech's plan, it's another idea of how to deal with the issues that exist and will continue to exist despite the changes CCP is making.

Me neither, except for the whole remote rep thing, which wasn't really thought through wrt. highsec. I agree with his base concept however. Everything except for the Procurer/Skiff is in a horrible place. If he thinks basetank on Proc/Skiff should be lower in exchange for more slots and fitting I'm totally okay with that if I can still achieve the same result as today with these additional fitting options. I'm against lowering the tank (after fitting) as Procurer/Skiff have enabled new gameplay in other spaces than highsec that wasn't there before: you can now decide (without being a fool) to stay on grid and put up a real fight against larger targets than a single frig, depending on what's incoming. In turn an attacker has to decide if he really wants to fight several Procurers/Skiffs as that can turn sideways pretty quickly (especially with potential recons on the grid that he can't see on dscan Twisted).

As for the other barges/exhumers: fitting options are laughable at best. I can't even remember when I last saw a Covetor in the field because they're so bad (not only highsec, nullsec as well). Macks/Hulks have 4 mid slots and it's a challenge to find something usable for all 4 slots without plastering lowslots/rigs with fitting mods/rigs or go deadspace right away. With NPC caps that can show up at any time in null that's even more problematic now than it was before as they also need much longer to warp out than Procurers/Skiffs.

With what's currently on SiSi: the model itself looks cool but using basically the same model for all 3 ships is not cool. I'd have wished that their roles are somehow reflected in the model: proc/skiff looking much more like a tank and retriever/mack with visible additional oreholds. As for the stats: combined with the mining mod changes there isn't really much change at all, except for the yield of the Retriever/Mack. Certainly not what I had hoped for and expecially not the "significant overhaul" that's being advertized on the updates page.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#203 - 2016-08-18 17:10:27 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Kueyen wrote:
Batlec1, one issue I've not seen you address in your proposal is the problem that, if you give Barges and Exhumers more fitting options in return for lowered base stats, and *if* you allow (and I'm not sure you would) them to reach the same levels of tankiness the Procurer and Skiff do now through modules, these modules now become lootable. That would add to the profitability of suicide ganks and giving gankers even more incentive to go after vessels that through the very nature of their usage (having to sit still for hours on end) can never hope to enter fair combat against similarly-valued opponents.


The exhumers would have HAC likes tanks, the T1 barges would have cruiser level tanks. They will be as profitable to gank as those combat ships which is not at all.


Kueyen wrote:

It's the same problem with faction mining modules: even if I were willing to risk several hundred million isk worth of modules to my exhumer, I would only be providing the next ganker a rich buffet in my wreck, attracting them like bears to honey. And thus those modules go entirely unused.

While I'm out and about faction mining modules: why are ORE Ice Harvesters longer-ranged versions of T2 Ice Harvesters, but ORE Stripminers only longer-ranged versions of T1 Stripminers?


Honestly the ore gear could do with being looked at.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#204 - 2016-08-18 17:18:23 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Elinarien wrote:


1. What would be the max EHP of a Skiff and how would that be achieved?


80-90k

T2 mods, much in the same way the eagle and cerb are set up. I could get higher results using cheap bling mods and thats omni resists so if you tank vs the most common gankers you will wind up with higher numbers. Important thing to note here is the fact you could finally fit large shield extenders under my plan.

Elinarien wrote:

2. What would you consider to be an appropriate yield be in m3 per 180 secs with that tank?


As its a shield tank the question would be it depends on if you go max yield (3 MTU) mad damage (3 DDU) a mix of both or cargo. A 3 MTU skiff would drag in the same as a 3 MTU mack. The hulk would have the 25% higher bonus.


That is a too low a tank, set to be within a Kusion, I knew that was what you were after, pretty damn obvious...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#205 - 2016-08-18 17:19:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Skiff and proc should get their base hp brought back down to normal levels, keep the combat bonus to drones, get a few more slots and fitting room to open up options and allow for a decent combat fit. They are now perfect mining escorts/defence boats for both fleet work and solo.

Retriever and mackinaw both need a good deal more slots and CPU/PG so they can actually have options when fitting them. CCP need to get creative here so I would say go radical. Give them two utility highs and a small bonus to remote shield boosters. Alter the cap to compensate. Again, they need the ability to actually fit a decent setup, 1 mid and 3 lows are next to useless.

Covetor and Hulk should be the go to strip miners, they also need more fitting slots and CPU/PG to actually fit things.

I would also alter the cargo expanders to also impact the ore hold and reduce the hold on barges to compensate. All barges would be able to hold at least two cycles as a base with the option of improving that if they so wish.



this is what im seeing in your post:
skiff - proc = lower the base tank, add more slots... results, right back were we started .. miners will fill those slots with tanky stuff, not offensive stuff.. and "other entities" will again ***** and complain that its too tanky... leave the skiff alone, its doing the job it was designed to do..

retr - makinaw = add more slots / more cpu/pg.. again, folks will fit tank... actualy, in theory, this possibility could result in tank almost as good as the skiff.. cause again, folks will fit tank tank tank

cov - hulk = same thing as the ret/mak

i only looked at the hulk / mak / skiff on test.... and if i recall correctly, the hulk / mak was 2high / 4medium / 3low, the skiff was 2high/6medium/3low
playing around with both the mak and the hulk... i could fit tank OR yield,, not both, and not realy a middle ground either, the tank is still insufficient for any dangerous mining

i did not mess with any of the T1 mining barges. from my observation and talking with people that fly them, they strictly use them as a throw away ship, fit bare minimum on it for max yield, and dont care if it gets ganked or not

the issue for fitting the ship and ballanceing between tank and yield . is the tank is shield tank goes in mid slots, and the yield boosting modules go in low slot... yea, would like to see a few more mid slots on the T1 mining barges to have the option to fit a tank OR fit for yield
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#206 - 2016-08-18 17:21:19 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


That is a too low a tank, set to be within a Kusion, I knew that was what you were after, pretty damn obvious...


If its enough for HACs when fighting several hundred people its enough for you vs highsec gankers.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#207 - 2016-08-18 17:25:51 UTC
Gunrunner1775 wrote:

the issue for fitting the ship and ballanceing between tank and yield . is the tank is shield tank goes in mid slots, and the yield boosting modules go in low slot... yea, would like to see a few more mid slots on the T1 mining barges to have the option to fit a tank OR fit for yield


Thats where I got crafty. Ore holds would be reduced to only allow 2-3 cycles, in return cargo expanders would impact the ore hold. This means you fit yield, cargo, damage (in the case of the skiff and proc) or utility such as warp core stabs, nanofibers etc. I would have gone with making them armour tankers but the instant hit from shield reps seems a better plan.
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#208 - 2016-08-18 17:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Gunrunner1775
i had thought of the cruiser thing.... give them the speed /agility / signature radius of a cruiser or HAC

but these ships are technicaly battlecruiser sized (mak has a signature rateing of 250, hulk is 200,... vs say a cerberus 195 or cyclone and hurricane both at 250), they also got almost as much volumn as the battlecruisers

they shoudl all have the speed / agility /signature radius ... and tank of battlecruisers

then give 1 yield bonus, 1 gets cargo bonus, and 1 gets "offensive" bonus with drones
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#209 - 2016-08-18 17:38:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


That is a too low a tank, set to be within a Kusion, I knew that was what you were after, pretty damn obvious...


If its enough for HACs when fighting several hundred people its enough for you vs highsec gankers.


Its a mining ship not a HAC in a fleet battle, bluntly that level of tank enables multi boxer solo gankers to kill every single mining ship no matter the tank.. From my perspective that is too low.

And the 2 to 3 cycles, wow you really hate solo miners don't you.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#210 - 2016-08-18 17:42:17 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


Its a mining ship not a HAC n a fleet battle, bluntly that level of tank enables multi boxer solo gankers to kill every single mining ship no matter the tank.. From my perspective that is too low.


Using your logic even the veldnought can be killed. They have more than enough tank.

Dracvlad wrote:

And the 2 to 3 cycles, wow you really hate solo miners don't you.


So fit cargo expanders.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#211 - 2016-08-18 17:45:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


Its a mining ship not a HAC n a fleet battle, bluntly that level of tank enables multi boxer solo gankers to kill every single mining ship no matter the tank.. From my perspective that is too low.


Using your logic even the veldnought can be killed. They have more than enough tank.

Dracvlad wrote:

And the 2 to 3 cycles, wow you really hate solo miners don't you.


So fit cargo expanders.


I am talking about Catalysts used by the Kusions as a base line, what the hell relevance does a dreadnought in hisec have to this?

And reduce its tank even further, yeah you will be happy.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#212 - 2016-08-18 17:48:08 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Gunrunner1775 wrote:
i had thought of the cruiser thing.... give them the speed /agility / signature radius of a cruiser or HAC

but these ships are technicaly battlecruiser sized (mak has a signature rateing of 250, hulk is 200,... vs say a cerberus 195 or cyclone and hurricane both at 250), they also got almost as much volumn as the battlecruisers

they shoudl all have the speed / agility /signature radius ... and tank of battlecruisers


They are larger due to being industrial but the base is cruiser line hence the original stats. I would leave their mobility/agility/signature as is for now.

Gunrunner1775 wrote:

then give 1 yield bonus, 1 gets cargo bonus, and 1 gets "offensive" bonus with drones


I would say that leaves with the same issues we currently have with mining ships. Ganking is a minor issue, the real problem comes with what happens outside of highsec. That's why I went with a logi specialisation for the mack and retriever so the mining fleet can hold its ground better.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#213 - 2016-08-18 17:53:23 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


I am talking about Catalysts used by the Kusions as a base line, what the hell relevance does a dreadnought in hisec have to this?


Anything can be ganked with enough bodies, the amount it will take to kill an overheating skiff with the tank of a HAC is rather high.
Dracvlad wrote:

And reduce its tank even further, yeah you will be happy.


If you are entering structure you are dead anyway.
Gunrunner1775
Empire Hooligans
#214 - 2016-08-18 18:05:16 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Ganking is a minor issue, the real problem comes with what happens outside of highsec. That's why I went with a logi specialisation for the mack and retriever so the mining fleet can hold its ground better.



ganking is the only issue realy... its ganking that lead to this imballance to begin with....

ive mined in wormholes, ive mined in nullsec, this imballance in type of ships used in mining has nothing to do with null sec or wormhole mining... in null/wh i would mine in a skiff if rest of my mates were not online, then we would form a small fleet and shift to hulks, and have 1 or 2 ships on combat air patrol provideing security ect

haveing a protective ship in fleet does not work in high sec due to the nature of criminal flags ect.... the protector can not do anything at all until the aggressor has suspect or criminal flag, and by that time, its too late... the advantage rests totaly in the hands of the aggressor... the only defense a miner has in high sec, is eyes on local and maximum tank possible

this is not the case of the ishtar were everyone was flying it, so nurf it and then people will fly other things

nurfing the tank on the skiff will not solve the problem,

lets hypotheticaly consider that they do nurf the tank on the skiff.. to the point were its significantly easier to gank.... what do you think the miners are going to do??? also, consider the bigger picture of the in game economy if such were to happen. how will this alter the nature of the game..... this is not a small ballance change your talking,
Viktor Amarr
#215 - 2016-08-18 18:16:00 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


That is a too low a tank, set to be within a Kusion, I knew that was what you were after, pretty damn obvious...


If its enough for HACs when fighting several hundred people its enough for you vs highsec gankers.


Its a mining ship not a HAC in a fleet battle, bluntly that level of tank enables multi boxer solo gankers to kill every single mining ship no matter the tank.. From my perspective that is too low.

And the 2 to 3 cycles, wow you really hate solo miners don't you.


No just non-effort afk ones.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#216 - 2016-08-18 18:36:39 UTC
Gunrunner1775 wrote:



ganking is the only issue realy... its ganking that lead to this imballance to begin with....


You would think that looking at the forums but in reality more are killed outside of highsec than in it. If we then add in barges that die to wars too then the numbers ganked are tiny.

Whining about ganking might have brought about the changes but the problem with the ships is, as always, much wider than just a niche group in highsec.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#217 - 2016-08-18 18:43:05 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Gunrunner1775 wrote:
ganking is the only issue realy... its ganking that lead to this imballance to begin with....

You would think that looking at the forums but in reality more are killed outside of highsec than in it. If we then add in barges that die to wars too then the numbers ganked are tiny.

Whining about ganking might have brought about the changes but the problem with the ships is, as always, much wider than just a niche group in highsec.

Oddly...I've never seen a pilot outside of high sec complaining that they died because their mining ship was under-powered for the task at hand...

Nor have I seen a mining ship killed during war-time that would have been aided by any kind of fitting rebalance...

Just saying... Roll

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#218 - 2016-08-18 18:49:13 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:

Oddly...I've never seen a pilot outside of high sec complaining that they died because their mining ship was under-powered for the task at hand...

Nor have I seen a mining ship killed during war-time that would have been aided by any kind of fitting rebalance...

Just saying... Roll


Just because they ***** less doesn't mean they don't see the ships as pathetic.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#219 - 2016-08-18 18:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
baltec1 wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:

Oddly...I've never seen a pilot outside of high sec complaining that they died because their mining ship was under-powered for the task at hand...

Nor have I seen a mining ship killed during war-time that would have been aided by any kind of fitting rebalance...

Just saying... Roll


Just because they ***** less doesn't mean they don't see the ships as pathetic.

It doesn't mean they *do* see the ships as pathetic either...

edit:
Indeed the roaming/camping skiff/procurer combat fleets would seem to indicate that they do *not* consider current mining ships to be too weak - rather they are fun ships to kill people with.


Also the truly weak ships are good for *BAIT* - and they will hate you if you take that away from them.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#220 - 2016-08-18 19:16:22 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:

Oddly...I've never seen a pilot outside of high sec complaining that they died because their mining ship was under-powered for the task at hand...

Nor have I seen a mining ship killed during war-time that would have been aided by any kind of fitting rebalance...

Just saying... Roll


Just because they ***** less doesn't mean they don't see the ships as pathetic.

It doesn't mean they *do* see the ships as pathetic either...

edit:
Indeed the roaming/camping skiff/procurer combat fleets would seem to indicate that they do *not* consider current mining ships to be too weak - rather they are fun ships to kill people with.


Also the truly weak ships are good for *BAIT* - and they will hate you if you take that away from them.


You're seriously defending the covetor?