| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
   |
Posted - 2012.06.17 14:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:i can't help but laugh at the baseless crying.
people will still be flying hulks in null for the yield, or procurers in highsec for the anti-gank, nobody in their right mind will mine in a mackinaw because a huge ore bay is useless. it's going to be quicker to mine 2-3 cans in a high yield ship and haul them all at once.
the only reason to use a mackinaw is if you don't own/can't fly a mammoth or itty V
They could be useful in quiet low sec system, ninja mining the more valuable ore. Then again, the efficiency loss might undo any value advantage you might get. |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 14:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
People seem to worry a lot about the AFK mining thing.
But I don't think they thought this one trough properly. The ORE hold is not the hold that mined ore automatically moves into. It comes into your cargo hold first and without player action to move it, stays there! Your cargo hold fills up so fast there is no AFK mining possible.
The only thing a large ore hold enables is that you can do without permanent jet cans and/or a dedicated hauling alt. Hence making solo mining actually worthwhile, which is a good thing!
|
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 15:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kelhund wrote:Inspiration wrote:People seem to worry a lot about the AFK mining thing.
But I don't think they thought this one trough properly. The ORE hold is not the hold that mined ore automatically moves into. It comes into your cargo hold first and without player action to move it, stays there! Your cargo hold fills up so fast there is no AFK mining possible.
The only thing a large ore hold enables is that you can do without permanent jet cans and/or a dedicated hauling alt. Hence making solo mining actually worthwhile, which is a good thing!
I believe you are misinformed, as it is clearly stated here that the ore automatically goes there when mining ^^ http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=72890I think this change is for the better. Its not about trying to get people to do away with the hulk, its about giving miners of all colors more options and ability to tailor a ship to their particular needs. I support this idea wholeheartedly :)
You are right, they described the behavior explicitly (yet incomplete). Maybe they intend on reducing the regular cargo hold at the same time. Even if they don't this actually constitutes a nerf for current hulk pilots using cargo expander rigs. Quite simply your looking at a 2k m3 or so reduction of mining hold buffer before you need to drag everything to a can. Unless ore spills over into cargohold when ore hold fills up, but it doesn't state any of the finer mechanics which are important. Loosing 20% capacity is quite a lot in my book.
Even so, it might work out well in that a hulk can fill up the cargo hold with crystals without compromising this buffer. Details,m we need details! |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 16:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ok, after searching I found the answers to my question directly from CCP!
Someone: WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE HULK AFTER THE CHANGE?
CCP Ytterbium: Exact modifications are still vague, but the plan is to quite reduce its cargo hold and add an ore bay of the same size than the removed cargo hold. That means cargo expanders and rigs wonGÇÖt affect the ore bay at all, requiring players to unload ore more frequently. This is by design, as we want the Hulk to be moved into a fleet purpose that has to rely on others to make proper use of its best mining output. That also means we will not be introducing items that affect the ore bay size.
So yes, it is now official, the hulk will be the only one of the mining ships that actually gets nerved!
With a reduced cargo hold, answer to the question if the ore hold will spill over to the cargo hold becomes redundant. Assuming an 8k ore hold and enough cargo hold to handle 1000m3 of crystals the actual nerf for ships with 2 x T1 cargo hold expander rigs is about 15% (in effective ore storage). |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 16:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Inspiration wrote: Right. But you're getting a new ship designed for AFK mining to compensate for that.
But what if you do not AFK mine eh? |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
22
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 16:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Inspiration wrote:RubyPorto wrote:[quote=Inspiration] Right. But you're getting a new ship designed for AFK mining to compensate for that. But what if you do not AFK mine eh? If you currently use Cargo expanders, the new Mackinaw/Retriever will be a huge boon to you. If you currently use MLUs, the Hulk/Covetor will be unchanged, since you're using a hauler. If you currently fit Tank, the new Procurer/Skiff will be a huge boon to you.
1. No it won't
2. Incorrect
3. At quite some cost (but i am fine with that)
What you are not considering is that the scenarios you provide are not exclusive. A hulk can have 2 x T1 (or even 2) cargohold expander rigs and 2 x MLU and a light form of active tank (sufficient for high sec NPC anyway).
The net effect of change in that circumstance is 15% ore storage nerf (now it can barely hold 3 minutes of ore, provided you perfectly space out the activation of your strip miners). It would be nice to see it able to hold 2 cycles of ore, which isn't really overpowered as it still requiring very active management of the ship.
The hulk choice would still be sacrificing everything for that last bit of improved extraction. The re-balance is to give the other ships a proper role, it should not be that the change make the hulk the ship that no1 really want to fly in return due to it being gimped! |
| |
|