Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Ouuh, you are looking at the wrong place. You only need 2-3 modules for a proper tank. One mid-slot and both lows.

If you want to push it, you need one mid-slot and 2 high-slots and another Porpoise for tanking.

About time we had something that at least ressembles a dedicated ninja-booster ship, but to be honest it felt short on my expectations.

With such a low value (~40-50 million is a bit too low IMO), it surely fits in the risk/value window where you can take the ship along sneaky mining ops in hostile systems. At first glance, cargo AND fleet hangar capacity looks fine too.

But I'd rather have a "half-Orca" (~half an Orca's price but lower mining boost, lower cargo capacity, etc) that came with truly COOL stuff for ninja industrialists like the abillity to fit Covert Ops Cloaking Device, scanning modules, improved mobility, maybe Covert Jump Portal, and things like that. Things that improved the time and effort it takes to get to the ore, and that is core to a ninja miner's experience. Hell, it would be fair if a ship like that was just about the same price or even more than an Orca, but it would certainly be funnier to fly too.

In time, the major letdown for me is the design... a green Noctis*? That's all? Nothing against the Noctis itself, but come on, CCP, you guys have been releasing awesome ship designs lately, specially for Caldari ships, why not on this one.

We can hope that they do a redesign like they have for other ships (griffin, blackbird, etc ) sooner rather than later. I understand they can get stretched with regards to working the designs in to the game so using the Noctis hull at present may just be a temporary placeholder until they have the time to make a proper design.

But like I said before: a streamlined, porpoise-like ship would be very appropriate. At least lose the extensions on the Noctis while keeping the industrial design (fitting in with the Orca and Bowhead being industrial in appearance) - just more streamlined.

Thank you CCP, this ship is a needed addition to the fleet.
The orca has become too expensive to field in dangerous environments, while this cruiser is essentially expendable.

600,000,000

No BSes don't, which further makes your attempted comparison less relevant. Also they tend to have lower raw HP values as a balance to their slightly better base resists, being geared more towards active tank than raw EHP.



Full brick tanks aren't really an instructive comparison here. A Battleship has more slots and fitting space so of course you can fit more tank onto it. If you fit the ships how they're actually flown though then the HICs come out ahead, especially after overheating. Most Battleships don't pass 100k in commonly flown fits, while most HICs easily pass that.

My point here is that there is no hard convention here regarding ship size and expected EHP values beyond those inherent in the speed vs raw hitpoints trade off that is inherent in Eve tanking. T1 and T2 Cruiser hulls range from 10k EHP for a reasonable fit to pushing 150k on a HIC or some bait tanked fits. Those are all for combat ships though, mining ships serve a different purpose and are therefore balanced along different lines, something I've said several times during this discussion thread, which is where the original size vs balancing issue came up.



As I said in response to the original post, and to you several times now, mining ships are not combat ships. They have different balance concerns and are designed to fill different roles. They make different trade-offs for different bonuses and it's absurd to claim that they should be balanced to the same standard or perform at the same level as a combat hull.

It's not like we're talking about a purely horizontal change here either, anything you could do to make them perform more like combat ships would be a raw buff to mining capability, whether it's more slots, more fitting, or just more raw HP.



You're saying these design decisions are an issue, but CCP have made it pretty clear through the last three rounds of tweaking these hulls have received that it's an intentional design decision on their part. Mining hulls making certain trade-offs to be able to mine which could be summed up as "they're mining ships, not combat ships."

It's also not a question of whether the changes you're proposing would be a buff or not, they absolutely would, and that's something CCP is very wary of since mining is the underpinning of the entire Eve economy. Any buffs or nerfs to mining affect the entire economy and thus the entire game.

Lastly there's nothing wrong with a lot of the function being baked into the hulls. The same thing happens with plenty of other hulls in choices about their capacitor, raw HP, resists, and other raw stats. That's why we have different classes of ships instead of a few hulls and a ton of modules. You may have an issue with this but it's the general design path Eve has gone down and it's worked just fine. You and others making these arguments aren't really presenting any case for changing this beyond vague allusions to more flexible hulls (when past experience has shown that this would largely just be used to min-max existing ship roles) and a seeming personal objection to this design philosophy, which while fair isn't going to change the minds of the design team that originally made the decision.

Marauders aren't a true tank class, they're never used as such except for PvE where their active tank is extremely strong, and even then they need a specific module to beat regular BS tank.

On top of that the numbers you provided for other hulls are all extremely unrealistic tank fits that never get used outside of extremely niche circumstances. In comparison a HIC is frequently fit to be extremely tanky since staying alive and running a bubble are generally the extent of its jobs.



First off most Incursion fits cap out around 100k EHP before fleet boosts. The only ones that go above that do so almost entirely due to the high base HP values for Pirate BSes. Lastly in order to hit that level of tank and mount any kind of utility they need to be faction fit, at which point with a comparable level of fitting the HIC will have significantly higher EHP.




I think I may be making some assumptions that you're missing here, so let me spell those out for you.

If you add slots to the ships then you need to add fittings to make them usable. If you add fittings to mining ships you buff base yield and probably also durability and gank resistance for a given mining yield. Even if you reduce base stats somewhere, which for mining yield you would have to do on the mining lasers, then you're still giving a net buff to the ships.

The end point here is that you're advocating for a change that isn't necessary since mining ships are more or less where CCP want them. What you're saying is that you want CCP to give you more slots, but re-balance around those slots so the ships stay more or less where they are, which is a giant waste of CCP's time that could be better spent doing something far less niche and pointless.



You're taking my words and twisting them hilariously out of context here. When the Skiff was introduced there was basically one option for mining, which was the Hulk. It won in tank and mining amount so that's what everyone used. When they tiericided the mining ships the Skiff didn't become something weird, it basically became a very tank-fit Hulk and a bit more. It wasn't particularly breaking the mold, it was just taking an old hull that no one used and giving it a role.

Also I'm really not seeing the assumptions you're referring to here.



Quite simply mining is raw economic activity, so if they get something wrong here the effects are greater than if they screw something up in the PvP space. On top of that there's just not any particular incentive on the designer's part to complicate their design space here, which is what you're proposing, on the off chance that it opens up some niche lol-fit options for players. The mining ships work fine as they are and those lol-fits already exist. CCP doesn't need to make more work for themselves so and spend a lot of time and effort balancing around extra mids just to get back to a point they were already at.

I stand somewhat corrected on that, I was thinking of a past version of the Marauders. That said they barely edge out a few ships on base HP and even get beaten out by a few T1 hulls. Calling them at all tank focused compared to something like the Skiff or the HIC class is ridiculous. For example the actually tank focused T1 Rokh is almost even with the T2 Golem even before taking into account its resist bonus.



First off, a PvP fleet BS will rarely if ever get close to 100k EHP. It's just not needed.

Beyond that your Incursion information is half accurate at best. First off, Gallente ships can generally tank Shield about as well as Armor, they don't really have a "Primary tank layer" they just have a slight bias towards Armor in slot layout. Beyond that I said that they couldn't hit those EHP numbers without faction fittings and maintain any reasonable degree of utility. A Hyperion fitted out with entirely T2 tank is going to be a block of shields and guns and not much else. In order to get large EHP values *and* utility modules you either need an armor fit (at which point you're trading heavily on DPS instead of utility) or faction mods.



I covered that in my comment that you just quoted, it's covered under "Even if you reduce base stats somewhere..." and goes from there.

Mining ships are, quite intentionally, very fitting crunched. They have trouble fitting a large tank and maxing out their mining capacity. If you add slots you make it *much* easier to min-max things and get both tank and mining yield. There is no way around this, when you add fitting space and slots to a ship the space of possible outcomes for the ship expands.

Even if you only add mid slots you're expanding the likely end result mining yield for a given tank since if it's reasonably possible to hit the old tank and yield with T2 then you can throw on some cheap faction and get a net buff to both, especially since fitting-focused faction is *really* cheap, for little cost or risk, because the extra fittings are very very useful on a mining ship.

Besides that you've completely ignored my point about essentially asking CCP to add two slots to everything and rebalance back to the point we're already at. There's no point in them spending the time to do that unless there's an actual need to shake up the mining fitting space. A desire for sillier gank-miner fits is far to niche to fit that requirement.



That was something of the point here. Give miners a high-tank and very hard to gank option at the expense of their yield. That gives miners something to retreat to to avoid suicide ganks so if those ganks become too much of an issue to the point that mining in a Hulk is no longer profitable everyone just runs Skiffs and the gankers run out of viable targets. In response we've gotten bumping but that's something else entirely and isn't a problem with any of the ships it's a core design issue in the game that needs its own solution.

While design intent is certainly malleable you need to provide an argument in favor of changing it, and no one pushing this idea of more slots has done that, you've just suggested that more slots and fitting options is an inherently good enough thing that it makes it's own argument, and that's just not the case. More fitting options comes at the cost of making the design space harder to balance in addition to the cost of making the change and balancing around it.

I'd quote your last bit here but there's not much point, everything there is already covered elsewhere. I'll just reiterate that I specified mining yield for a given EHP as a concern here, and you seem to have completely ignored that in favor of the idea that more fitting options on a ship is this inherent golden shining dream that the designers should aspire to at the expense of all else, which is patently ridiculous. Also just because you can't think of a specific issue with an idea doesn't make it good, you also need a specific benefit, and you don't have one here.

Just leaving one observation on the Porpoise here:

One damage control unit and one t2 bulkhead + 3 t2 hull rigs and one adaptive invulnerability field II gives that ship approximately 79.000ehp.

Looks like fitting is not your strong suit.

Hi there,

what about the announcement that the porpoise will fit in small wormholes? I have tried it out and i am not able to bring the porpoise in a C13. Bug? Works as designed?

Thank you...