Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DS S
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 05:08:00 -
[1]
The mackinaw needs its cargohold increased by 65m3.
I Say this, because when you put 2x cargohold optimization rigs on the mackinaw it has 7935 m3 of space, and needs 8000m3 to hold 8 blocks of ice, which is 2x cycles (8 blocks of ice)
i know peopole will say put 1x cargohold expander II on it, but to have the most efficient use of the mackinaw, you need your cargo in multiples of 4k m3.
2x ice harvester II's 2x Ice upgrades II's with 2x medium expanded cargohold II's would be the best fit if it only had 65 m3 more cargo.
|
Rupicolous
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 05:25:00 -
[2]
- I agree -
Without question I miscalculated the cargo stacking on the Mackinaws for serveral players and fitted 10 T1 rigs in total on 5 ships only to realize it was all for next to nothing considering they cannot handle 2 full cycles.
Had I realized this error from the get go, I still would not have purchased T2 rigs simply because the cost does not line up with the risk involved in losing them.
I do enjoy 2x upgrades in the low slots and am very happy to fit a modest tank with the Zainou 'Gypsy' KMB-75 for CPU but for the love of christ, please give us a bit more cargo space.
I lose a unit all the time because the timer on the Ice Harvester runs out before I get to tranfering the cargo.
|
Aranis Nax
Minmatar Seraphim Blades
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 05:59:00 -
[3]
for T2 you don't need any changes? 6000 m¦ * 1.2^2 = 8640 m¦ 1 T2 one T1 cargohold optimization rig would be 8280m¦
For 2 T1 though you're short 65 m¦ expanded 50m¦ extra on base would be enough to get your 8000m¦ though. 6050 m¦ * 1.15^2 = 8001.125 m¦
However, why do you need to have room for 2 cycles in cargo while being fitted for the fastest possible ice mining speed? You want to have more cargo, you're going to have to compromise.
|
Sir Substance
Minmatar MagiTech Alliance Inc. MagiTech Corp
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 06:07:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Aranis Nax for T2 you don't need any changes? 6000 m¦ * 1.2^2 = 8640 m¦ 1 T2 one T1 cargohold optimization rig would be 8280m¦
For 2 T1 though you're short 65 m¦ expanded 50m¦ extra on base would be enough to get your 8000m¦ though. 6050 m¦ * 1.15^2 = 8001.125 m¦
However, why do you need to have room for 2 cycles in cargo while being fitted for the fastest possible ice mining speed? You want to have more cargo, you're going to have to compromise.
i strongly disagree. it makes a lot of sense that people willing to shell out a third of the ships cost in rigs should be able to ahve the best of both worlds. ------ I, for one, welcome our new console overlords! |
Aranis Nax
Minmatar Seraphim Blades
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 06:56:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Sir Substance
Originally by: Aranis Nax for T2 you don't need any changes? 6000 m¦ * 1.2^2 = 8640 m¦ 1 T2 one T1 cargohold optimization rig would be 8280m¦
For 2 T1 though you're short 65 m¦ expanded 50m¦ extra on base would be enough to get your 8000m¦ though. 6050 m¦ * 1.15^2 = 8001.125 m¦
However, why do you need to have room for 2 cycles in cargo while being fitted for the fastest possible ice mining speed? You want to have more cargo, you're going to have to compromise.
i strongly disagree. it makes a lot of sense that people willing to shell out a third of the ships cost in rigs should be able to ahve the best of both worlds.
Doesn't answer the initial question: Why is it needed to have room for 2 cycles? But as my numbers showed it's possible now to have 2 cycles in hold. It just doesn't work with 2 tech 1 rigs. So one can have the best of both worlds, it'll just cost more. Why should it cost less? You'll either have to compromise on the fit or pay up to get the desired result.
|
DS S
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 07:47:00 -
[6]
so, for a 76mil ship (mackinaw) you want me to put up 140 million isk for the t2 medium rig so i can have room for 2x cycles?
its not worth the risk. the 50m3 extra is though.
|
Max Tux
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 08:39:00 -
[7]
i say increase it so that they are 1m^3 short .... but i'm not a nice guy :P
|
Lifelongnoob
Caldari Final Conflict UK
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 13:21:00 -
[8]
signed a 50m3 base cargo hold increase would work
|
Lindsay Logan
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 13:36:00 -
[9]
Alternatively you can mine in a gang with haulers...
|
Sister Vengeance
Sisters of Agony
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 14:41:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Lindsay Logan Alternatively you can mine in a gang with haulers...
That would make the most sense. at 1000 M3 per unit, Ice mining really isn't well suited for the solo miner (Doable, but just not efficient) :) CEO - Sisters of Agony |
|
DS S
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 02:28:00 -
[11]
Well even at 1000 m3/unit, the mackinaw gets 4000 units/cycle with 2x ice harvesters, yet only has 6000m3 total cargohold, which is 1.5 cycles. even with 2x t1 rigs, its only 7935, it needs the extra 50m3 base so that it can hold 2x cycles with the rigs.
|
Chidori Yashima
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 02:35:00 -
[12]
No decent mining ship can hold 2 cycles worth of ore, why does it matter if the ice miner can? Especially since their cycle time is much longer than ore mining anyways.
|
Sir Substance
Minmatar MagiTech Alliance Inc. MagiTech Corp
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 03:48:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Chidori Yashima No decent mining ship can hold 2 cycles worth of ore, why does it matter if the ice miner can? Especially since their cycle time is much longer than ore mining anyways.
have you never used a hulk?
or a covetor for that matter.
hell, im pretty sure even a rettie would hold two cycles if you double-rigged it with cargo hold optimization rigs. ------ I, for one, welcome our new console overlords! |
Orb Lati
Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 22:25:00 -
[14]
Just a minor point ill put out there. While i do agree i might be somewhat nice to have just a bit more space, has anybody yet done a price check on the t2 cargo optimization rig now with the new rig patch and the fact you'll only need a medium sized rig. (assuming 1/4 the cost)
"We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible" |
DS S
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 23:32:00 -
[15]
Originally by: DS S so, for a 76mil ship (mackinaw) you want me to put up 140 million isk for the t2 medium rig so i can have room for 2x cycles?
its not worth the risk. the 50m3 extra is though.
As stated in my above post.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |