Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Fancy Bear
Cause for Prosperity
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 13:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Is slightly more ore hold and 10% faster mining speed really worth the massive SP sink and significant ISK cost?
Am I missing something? Input from the miners please. |
Aerie Evingod
Midwest Miners LLC
64
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
Fancy Bear wrote:Is slightly more ore hold and 10% faster mining speed really worth the massive SP sink and significant ISK cost?
Am I missing something? Input from the miners please.
By staying in the retriever you are missing more yield. The SP investment is minimal. Mackinaw has more slots too. |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
397
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
Aerie Evingod
Midwest Miners LLC
64
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 16:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.
If you're losing them on a regular basis out doing risky mining then the cost of exhumers probably isn't worth it. But it all dependson where you mine. |
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 16:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets.
A good example of how out of balance this game is. |
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
89
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 17:01:00 -
[6] - Quote
I upgraded from a Retriever to a Mackinaw, and the change was pretty amazing from the very beginning. Also the skills allow you to fleet mine with Hulks & Orca's later in the future with your corp.
So yeah, it's worth it. |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
1198
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 17:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. A good example of how out of balance this game is.
That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing. Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
397
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 17:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Aerie Evingod wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. If you're losing them on a regular basis out doing risky mining then the cost of exhumers probably isn't worth it. But it all dependson where you mine. I should also have specified that I do not mine often on any of my accounts. If mining were a primary activity, I'd consider the investment in upgrading to Exhumers more appealing, but for a casual miner like me it doesn't make sense.
Sister Bertrille wrote:A good example of how out of balance this game is. I disagree. Like all things in EvE, going beyond T1 performance into T2 performance requires a much more substantial ISK investment for the hardware. I personally don't see most T2 hulls above frigate-class as being worth the risk, Exhumers included.
Look at HACs for example. You will pay up to 30x the cost of a basic cruiser hull for a relatively slight increase in performance and durability. Not worth it in my book, which is why I prefer T1 hulls unless I need something very specific that only the T2 hull can provide (HICs for example). CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
652
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 17:46:00 -
[9] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:I disagree. Like all things in EvE, going beyond T1 performance into T2 performance requires a much more substantial ISK investment for the hardware. I personally don't see most T2 hulls above frigate-class as being worth the risk, Exhumers included.
Look at HACs for example. You will pay up to 30x the cost of a basic cruiser hull for a relatively slight increase in performance and durability. Not worth it in my book, which is why I prefer T1 hulls unless I need something very specific that only the T2 hull can provide (HICs for example). Funny. I came to the exact opposite conclusion. So did all those people who fly T3's in w-space or Ishtars/Eagles/Interceptors/Recons/Logi in PVP. Perhaps there are additional factors in play here that you have not accounted for in your assessment. |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
397
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 17:49:00 -
[10] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:Funny. I came to the exact opposite conclusion. So did all those people who fly T3's in w-space or Ishtars in PVP. Perhaps there are additional factors in play here that you have not accounted for in your assessment. Don't get me wrong, I definitely see the benefits of T2/T3. I just subscribe to the adage "only fly what you can afford to lose", and as a space-poor PvP'er, I prefer to have a dozen inexpensive hulls available instead of one expensive one.
Everything I've said in this thread is specific to my personal situation. YMMV. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
|
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 18:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Sister Bertrille wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. A good example of how out of balance this game is. That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.
No its not. Its way out of balance.
Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins.
Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.
To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats. |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
398
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 18:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote: No its not. Its way out of balance.
Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins.
Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.
To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.
Destroyer almost always "wins" over a Hulk in combat ability, yes, because the Destroyer is a combat ship whereas the Hulk is not.
However, a Hulk will always outmine a Destroyer because the Hulk is a mining ship whereas the Destroyer is not.
By your logic, a battleship should never be able to be taken down by a smaller ship because the larger ship is more expensive and can "stand up" to smaller ships. This is the exact opposite of how EvE works. EvE is rock/paper/scissors, not more ISK = less risk. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 18:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
No way...the skill point investment time that I pointed out is part of the imbalance. I'm aware the Hulk is not a combat ship but the game has changed. Hulks that undock in high sec are going into harms way whether they are classified as a combat ship or not. Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all. |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
399
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 18:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:No way...the skill point investment time that I pointed out is part of the imbalance. I'm aware the Hulk is not a combat ship but the game has changed. Hulks that undock in high sec are going into harms way whether they are classified as a combat ship or not. Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all. Which is precisely why I don't fly them.
Risk vs. Reward. I'm not willing to take the risk. Others are.
Incidentally, skill point investment is not a guarantee of performance or survival. If it were, Marauders, BlackOps, Capital Ships, etc. would never die to more easily trained ship, yet they do all the time.
Your plight is not unique to Exhumers, which is why I say the situation is balanced. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
JAF Anders
Quantum Cats Syndicate
317
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 19:24:00 -
[15] - Quote
The Skiff is an excellent choice of Exhumer. It's easy to manage and very durable.
Edit: addendum
Sister Bertrille wrote: Ships of that type that have paper thin shields do not make any sense at all.
They make sense when you don't plan on getting hit. Hulks were meant to give the performance edge, provided that they operated within the envelope of protection. At this point, you're substituting your tactical capacity for a strategic one, shifting the burden of defense entirely off the shoulders of the miner and into the capable charge of security forces.
As another illustration, frigate PvP sees a wide popularity in ships that have little to no "tank" because they rely on operating outside of their opponent's capability to do damage to them. The same moral applies. The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts. |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
1200
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 19:29:00 -
[16] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:Cipher Jones wrote:Sister Bertrille wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. A good example of how out of balance this game is. That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing. No its not. Its way out of balance. Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins. Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot. To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.
Which is why it IS balanced. The Dessie will not kill the retriever pilot unless he brings a gang, or the retriever pilot killed himself at the fitting screen.
And the Dessie won't kill the hulk when the hulk is in a (proper) gang and fit to survive. Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á |
Sister Bertrille
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 20:11:00 -
[17] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Sister Bertrille wrote:Cipher Jones wrote:Sister Bertrille wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. A good example of how out of balance this game is. That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing. No its not. Its way out of balance. Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins. Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot. To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats. Which is why it IS balanced. The Dessie will not kill the retriever pilot unless he brings a gang, or the retriever pilot killed himself at the fitting screen. And the Dessie won't kill the hulk when the hulk is in a (proper) gang and fit to survive.
You keep mentioning gangs. That also makes no sense. Gangs do not balance ships. And not everyone "has a gang" at their disposal every time they want to visit a belt. You're advocating some real pain in the butt restrictions. Guys behind keyboards at CCP do the balancing. The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.
|
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
400
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 20:15:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:You keep mentioning gangs. That also makes no sense. Gangs do not balance ships. And not everyone "has a gang" at their disposal every time they want to visit a belt. You're advocating some real pain in the butt restrictions. Guys behind keyboards at CCP do the balancing. The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.
CCP has very clearly stated that the Covetor/Hulk are intended primary as gang ships, to be flown with appropriate support. It makes perfect sense.
If you want to mine solo, fly one of the other hulls. Retriever/Mackinaw for capacity, Procurer/Skiff for tank. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
654
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 20:25:00 -
[19] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer. It can if you fit it correctly. The hulk has no place in hi sec anyway. It is meant for blue null. If you want to mine in dangerous space, such as hi sec, fly a properly tanked skiff. |
Arn Stimy
United Earth Space Council Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 19:48:00 -
[20] - Quote
Quote:That's actually an indicator of excellent balancing.
No its not. Its way out of balance.
Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins.
Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot.
To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats.
What makes a destroyer crappy? Its having 8 turrets to blast you with or you having zero guns to fight back with?
I'm a nullsec player with 6 accounts and I pilot 5 hulks at a time in nullsec. I moved there because I can tell WHEN someone is going to come try to kill me. You carebears crying about highsec gankers should just move to nullsec where you can see them coming. Then you can pilot your hulks and learn how to play the game rather than crying on the forums about how your rock smasher cant smash combat fit destroyers. Also, MINERS ARE SITTING DUCKS. JUST GET USED TO IT. EITHER GET OUT OF THE WAY OR GET BLOWN UP. Its simple. There shouldn't be ANY balance WHATSOEVER between a combat ship and a miner. If you want some viability, get a skiff and watch them get bored shooting at your tank.
Also, who are you to think about engineering designs on spaceships and what people would or wouldn't do in this virtual pixilated universe. Seriously? Come on now! Geez some of you nerds need to get your tighty whities unbunched. |
|
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
1201
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 05:21:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:You keep mentioning gangs. That also makes no sense. Gangs do not balance ships. And not everyone "has a gang" at their disposal every time they want to visit a belt. You're advocating some real pain in the butt restrictions. Guys behind keyboards at CCP do the balancing. The Hulk should be able to hold its own vs a crappy little destroyer.
The hulk can hold its own against a crappy little destroyer. You have no clue about ganking mechanics.
Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á |
CaiJi Du
NyxCai Manufacturing and Retail Corp.
2
|
Posted - 2014.09.13 07:07:00 -
[22] - Quote
Personally, I'd recommend the Procurer, or Skiff if you want to invest that far.
Yes, it has a smaller hold, and yes, it is a little slower than a Covetor or Hulk. The difference is not huge, however, in how much ore you put in the hangar.
But the real issue (I believe) is gankers. Covetors and Hulks are like foil and fold in seconds. Very little effort required by gankers. Retrievers and Mackinaws are a bit better, but still cheaply destroyed by a pretty small group of Catalysts (usually, 3 or 4 will burn a retriever before Concord arrives).
Procurers and Skiffs have the best tank by far. Sure, they are not invulnerable, and I won't claim they never get ganked, but in months of mining rather often, my experience has been it is ALWAYS one of te other 4 that get hit; the Procurers and Skiffs take a significantly greater investment in ships to kill in time.
Survivability before greed :) |
Steppa Musana
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
70
|
Posted - 2014.09.14 15:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:I will likely never have any of my miners use Exhumers: their cost-to-durability ratio is far to high to justify the extra yield in my eyes. Cheaper hulls are far less expensive to replace and make far less appealing targets. This.
Get in a Retriever, and accept the losses as/if they come. Easy enough to replacement. If you want to go T2, grab a Skiff.
Assuming high-sec here. In null, all the classes have their use, and if you're docking upon neuts in local the Mack is fine.
|
Iain Cariaba
319
|
Posted - 2014.09.14 20:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
Sister Bertrille wrote:No its not. Its way out of balance. Mining barges are probably the most balanced ships in the game right now, provided you use them for their intended roles.
Sister Bertrille wrote:Destroyer vs Hulk Capable pilots in both ships. Destroyer almost always wins. Trying to compare combat ships to mining ships in this aspect is like trying to compare a lilly pad to the Loch Ness Monster. Sure both exist in the water, but that's the only comparison between the two.
Sister Bertrille wrote:Skill time to use that destroyer equals doodley squat compared to the skill time of takes to be that Hulk pilot. As it should, the Hulk being a t2 ship and all. You'll find the train time between a destroyer and a Covetor to be comparable though.
Sister Bertrille wrote:To put it into another context: What sane ORE manufacturer is going to design/build a ship that is that expensive and cant even stand up to a cheap little destroyer or two. Makes no sense at all. A ship of that stature should only have to worry about battlecruisers and up. CCP need to make some serious changes to ORE boats. Nope, makes perfect sense. Who would make a ship that expensive that can't stand up to a cheap little destroyer? The people who make the Procurer and the Skiff, which can stand up to stuff a lot meaner than a destroyer. Each mining barge and exhumer has a role it fills. If you fly them inside that role, then they are awesome ships. Fly them outside that role, however, and you're just another carebear waiting to get ganked. Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
168
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 02:19:00 -
[25] - Quote
Fancy Bear wrote:Is slightly more ore hold and 10% faster mining speed really worth the massive SP sink and significant ISK cost?
Am I missing something? Input from the miners please. The answer for a dedicated miner is yes, it's worth it. The answer for somebody who wants to try other aspects of Eve is no, spend your SP on something else for now.
The way you phrase the question makes me think that the answer for you is no. |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
1205
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 04:16:00 -
[26] - Quote
Let's clarify this once more;
A hulk can tank a dessie.
Accounts may not be used for business purposes. Access to the System and playing EVE is intended for your personal entertainment, enjoyment and recreation, and not for corporate, business, commercial or income-seeking activities.-á |
Andrew Indy
Four Pillar Production Headshot Gaming
99
|
Posted - 2014.09.15 07:43:00 -
[27] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Let's clarify this once more; A hulk can tank a dessie.
As with most things it depends.
If its a no tank, 3 Upgrades Hulk no. If it has a DC2 ect ect them most likely (System sec also have a big effect) .
As for Mack vs Ret. There are a lot of small things that make a Mack with it.
More Tank , you can tank belt rats in a 0.5 system (faction spawn and all). Less worrying about killing the rats. More Yield. Speaks for itself. More drones. you can have a flight on mining drones and combats - more yield. Bigger hold - more yield indirectly.
With 10% more yield , 20% more space and the yield from drones you could easily make 20-50% more than a Ret.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |