Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Alesha Kalishi
|
Posted - 2010.02.10 12:17:00 -
[61]
The hidden industrialist in me loves this idea.
Yeah.. although a T3 strat cruiser is almost twice the price of a hulk! it should mine at LEAST the ability of the hulk...
Yes.. it has three turrets! ... stick the same ability to use strip miners on it and its perfect. For the price of two hulks i want to be able to mine at LEAST the eqivalent of one!
Covert Mining Operation sounds like an interesting idea as well. Nice for Wormholes.
Anyway.. Nice idea i hope it gets noticed.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.10 13:22:00 -
[62]
Thanks for the support guys.
I appreciate the critiques. To address a few:
Why no strip miners?
I wanted the ship to have short cycle timers to force the pilot to be active. Also it is a cruiser sized vessel, strip miners are for dedicated mining barges and exhumers.
Ore yield vs. covert ops
Janeth if you look the covert ops subsystem does not provide the 25k m3, that is the ore yield (no cloak). The covert ops subsystem barely provides a few thousand m3 when configured for max hauling capacity.
Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuulk
Sorry, but I simply do not want to make a hulk replacement. The hulk should remain the premiere ore stripper. You can get some decently competitive ability with the ore yield subsystem, but I do not think it should mine as much and definitely not more than a hulk.
Mercoxit/Ice bonuses
Someone mentioned this before. The yield bonuses on both the ore yield and covert ops subsystems apply to all ores, including mercoxit. As for ice, I thought about making a subsystem for it, but I wanted the cycle durations for this thing to be small. Perhaps there can be a push in technology that introduces Ice Miners, which mine smaller chunks of ice that simply yield less product? I'd rather not dive into that realm but if someone else wants to take the lead be my guest
Keep it coming _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.02.11 07:48:00 -
[63]
Well ok, XXSketchxx, I think on several points we'll have to agree to disagree then. But, since this is your thread, and there was another with the "alternate view" on several of these issues, I encourage you to forge ahead and stat something out that accomplishes the nuance of your vision.
Regardless, we agree EVE would be better with a T3 industrial ship, and should (as we hope) CCP seize on this thought and bring it to implementation I am quite sure they will spend more time hashing out details and put their fingerprints all over the thing.
Peace, --Krum
--Krum |
Fernous
Gallente Section Eight LLC Omega Vector
|
Posted - 2010.02.11 10:57:00 -
[64]
Some very well thought out ideas in this thread. I hope CCP takes a good long look at this
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.12 17:34:00 -
[65]
Bump for the end of the week. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2010.02.16 19:23:00 -
[66]
Well I've been thinking about the ice mining problem, and I guess you'll have to wait for a fifth industrial subsystem but my proposed bonuses are
2 turrets 7.5% reduction in cycle time per level 99% reduction in CPU need for ice miners
This would make them different but not necessarily better than the Mackinaw with the additional boast of the shortest ice miner cycle time possible.
|
Beatson
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 13:20:00 -
[67]
Signed.
I like the general idea, but to be properly balanced, it must be better thought-out by CCP with respect to its future plans. Personally I see a T3 indy ship provide less yield than the hulk but provide enough tank that it can't be taken down by a ship with fittings totalling 10-15mil.
Regarding the ice mining, perhaps you can replace the Rapid Deployment sub-system with one benefiting ice mining? |
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 13:55:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Beatson Signed. Personally I see a T3 indy ship provide less yield than the hulk but provide enough tank that it can't be taken down by a ship with fittings totalling 10-15mil.
If configured properly and fit well, the T3 industrial cruiser can do this.
Quote:
Regarding the ice mining, perhaps you can replace the Rapid Deployment sub-system with one benefiting ice mining?
If anything it will be made into a new subsystem. I am reluctant however as I do not like the idea of putting ice harvesters on a cruiser. I was considering working out numbers for new modules + new, small chunks of ice; Ice Miner I and II to start. If someone wants to expand on this it'd be great, or provide reasons why ice harvesters would be okay...
_____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Xyfu
Minmatar Corporate Scum On the Rocks
|
Posted - 2010.02.17 17:38:00 -
[69]
Originally by: RalShae Marques
As I read your proposal.. I was trying to understand what you were trying to accomplish.. As I understand it, you want to: 1. Travel to the belt unseen. 2. Mine quietly unless somebody happens to warp into the belt.
No, not at all. That's one role it could possibly fill. It's a T3 ship, with 20 subsytems. That's 1024 different ways to configure the ship. (Or is it 625? I can never remember whether it's [number of possibilities per category]^[categories] or the other way around. (Looking into it, 2^3=8, so I guess it's 1024.))
There may not be 1024 useful configurations, but hey. _____ ^ That is a sig line. It should be there without me having to put one in. |
Mielono
Caldari SWARTA
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 14:20:00 -
[70]
I think that it is an excellent idea.
|
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 18:23:00 -
[71]
A true ninjaminer would be a welcome addition, as it gives mining an aspect that isn't mindblowingly dull. The yield wouldn't really matter all that much, but cargohold would, it would be a waste to get deep into enemy/WH space with only 500m3 of cargo to fill with ore.
Maybe something closer to about 2000-3000m3 at lvl 4/5 so it can really be fun and still profitable to ninja mine.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 19:27:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Veliria A true ninjaminer would be a welcome addition, as it gives mining an aspect that isn't mindblowingly dull. The yield wouldn't really matter all that much, but cargohold would, it would be a waste to get deep into enemy/WH space with only 500m3 of cargo to fill with ore.
Maybe something closer to about 2000-3000m3 at lvl 4/5 so it can really be fun and still profitable to ninja mine.
Fit for max low slots gives 7 slots. With the covert ops subsystem, that's 50% bonus to 500m3 base plus potential for 7 Expanded Cargohold IIs, 2 T2 cargo rigs and 1 T1 cargo rig, giving approximately 6800m3. Even sacrificing a few slots for mining upgrades lets you maintain a decent cargohold. Should be enough to get you by.
Thank you for bringing this up though. It forced me to see the potential for 7 low slot configuration which could potentially result in one of the mining subsystems or even both better than a max yield hulk (strip miners + T2 crystals and 2 mining upgrades). I might have to tweak some yield bonuses after I check some numbers. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 20:27:00 -
[73]
Okay, so contrary to my previous belief, Mining Laser Upgrades are not stacking penalized. However, they do hit CPU pretty hard.
After some calculations, it is clear that while a 7 low slot configuration may seem problematic in the fact that 7 MLU IIs would boost the mining of the Ore Yield configuration considerably, being able to do so should be impossible. The ship should be able to fit 1-2 MLUs on it, at which point it is still outmined by a Hulk and only slightly outmining a covetor (when 2 MLUs are in place versus the covetor's max potential of 1). Fitting 3 MLUs should IMO be possible if you fill the remainder of the ship's low slots with Co-Processors, but even then the ship it outmined by a Hulk with 2 MLUs.
So basically, as long as mining yield is balanced around CPU output, the ship should retain its position behind the Hulk in terms of mining yield. The Covert Ops configuration is not an issue, as it takes 7 MLUs to just about come close to the Hulk's max yield with 2 MLUs and this will not be possible due to CPU limitations.
Tl;dr CPU usage increase should balance extensive MLU usage and keep the mining yield hierarchy intact. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Destruction Theory
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 01:36:00 -
[74]
I agree. However, covert cloak is going JUST a bit too far. /Signed
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 02:04:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Destruction Theory I agree. However, covert cloak is going JUST a bit too far. /Signed
Care to explain your opinion why its too far?
Current T3 can be fit "decently" for PvE content and have a covert ops cloak. Why shouldn't a "ninja miner" be as viable as a "ninja plexer" _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Mielono
Caldari SWARTA
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 02:51:00 -
[76]
because they want to kill miners who cannot shoot back, its a super expensive omgwtf ship made for mining in lowsec and null trips... I think its almost a requirement to have those options.
|
Aleksey NB
Gallente Insidious Existence
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 06:57:00 -
[77]
I think adding just another (5-th) industrial sybsystems(ore/gas mining) to current t3 ships would be better way for that idea. (!) Also that subsystems must be balanced to use it in WH space mostly.
|
McDaddy Pimp
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 08:21:00 -
[78]
This sound fantastic. I too will resub my hulk alt if CCP decides to make a t3 indy cruiser.
Here are some more ideas:
Industrial Subsytem - Ore compression: PG reduction for Industrial Core mod. Ore compression can only be done in deployed mode. Maybe give it worse stats then roqual
Electronic Subsytem - survey/cargo scanner range
Defensive Subsytem - RR bonus both armor and shields
Engineering Subsytem - mass reduction (so it wont collapse tiny wormholes)
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 18:25:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Veliria on 19/02/2010 18:25:29 Considering the massive cost a T3 ship has to only use for Industrial purposes, I'd find it balanced at the very least that it would be very hard to catch.
First off all it should be a pain to scan down, it can't fight, it's expensive, a tank won't matter much if you can't fight back so all it can do is mine and run, so making it hard to scan down would force the opponent to try to find the target via the site, rather than the ship.
Secondly, CovOps cloak is fine if not almost mandatory. Again, T3 ship + no guns or huge tank means very juicy target. People willing to risk such a ship for Industrial purposes should be given a CovOps cloak as an option. I think the 30 second delay on it should be modified, taking off 3 seconds per level of the subsystem skill. If you do get scanned down, 30 seconds is a bit much.
The warp core stab subsystem is a bit out of place. If you get targetted, odds are they aren't alone and they'll find you again. ECM Drones and CovOps cloak tend to work just as well.
Instead, I'd propose a subsystem that boosts MWD and AB speed. It allows for more practical use of using a Cloak and MWD combo to get out of a bubble.
I'd love to see a Drone Mining bonus somewhere along the line as well.
The Engineering subsystems seem a little redundant. You're not gonna tank whole sleeper spawns, nor will you stick around when an enemy ship shows up. Maybe some systems aimed towards improving mining laser range, reducing the damage done to crystals, ore scanner and maybe that mining drone bonus.
Just a few thoughts
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 18:53:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Veliria
First off all it should be a pain to scan down, it can't fight, it's expensive, a tank won't matter much if you can't fight back so all it can do is mine and run, so making it hard to scan down would force the opponent to try to find the target via the site, rather than the ship.
dissolution sequencer + signature optimizer + ECCM modules
Quote: Industrial purposes should be given a CovOps cloak as an option. I think the 30 second delay on it should be modified, taking off 3 seconds per level of the subsystem skill. If you do get scanned down, 30 seconds is a bit much.
I'll think about this. I rather like the delay. It forces the pilot to be actively using the d-scanner and be ready to leave at a moments notice.
Quote: The warp core stab subsystem is a bit out of place. If you get targetted, odds are they aren't alone and they'll find you again.
This is going to be changed to a mass reduction bonus. I never liked this subsystem (read a comment I made on the first page). Mass reduction bonus fits in much better.
Quote:
Instead, I'd propose a subsystem that boosts MWD and AB speed. It allows for more practical use of using a Cloak and MWD combo to get out of a bubble.
I also considered this, but wasn't sure how much people would really want to fit an ab or mwd. I can see how it'd be useful though; I always fit a mwd on my blockade runners.
Quote:
I'd love to see a Drone Mining bonus somewhere along the line as well.
One of the subsystems had this initially but I modified it. I'll look into it, but honestly mining drones are pretty meh anyway.
Quote: The Engineering subsystems seem a little redundant.
I agree
Quote: Maybe some systems aimed towards improving mining laser range, reducing the damage done to crystals, ore scanner and maybe that mining drone bonus.
Some good ideas. I particularly like the mining laser range one; could be very handy.
Quote:
Just a few thoughts
Much appreciated _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 19:18:00 -
[81]
***Update***
Augmented Capacitor subsystem has been replaced by Mining Laser Field Enhancement (10% bonus to range of mining lasers and gas harvesters per level).
Harvester CPU Efficiency Gate has been given another bonus; 20% increase to range of survey scanners per level.
Warp Core Optimizer has been removed. It has been replaced by the Hull Construction Reconfiguration (5% reduction in mass per level).
Chassis Optimization has been boosted from 5% to 10%. This subsystem is meant to benefit both users of afterburners and microwarpdrives.
There are currently no plans for adding mining drone bonuses.
I am still looking for ideas for the ice mining subsystem. All ideas welcome. Thank you to all who have contributed so far. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 21:50:00 -
[82]
Originally by: XXSketchxx dissolution sequencer + signature optimizer + ECCM modules
Sounds good, but hopefully not all midslots will be taken to achieve an unscannable ship. Atleast one mid should be free for an ore scanner or MWD.
Originally by: XXSketchxx I'll think about this. I rather like the delay. It forces the pilot to be actively using the d-scanner and be ready to leave at a moments notice.
Fair enough, although a T3 ship used just for mining is an awfully tempting target on the d-scanner of the enemy.
Originally by: XXSketchxx This is going to be changed to a mass reduction bonus. I never liked this subsystem (read a comment I made on the first page). Mass reduction bonus fits in much better.
That's actually quite good as it will allow you to use the same wormhole longer. Do take care not to make the agility subsystem obsolete though.
Originally by: XXSketchxx I also considered this, but wasn't sure how much people would really want to fit an ab or mwd. I can see how it'd be useful though; I always fit a mwd on my blockade runners.
The mass reduction subsystem should give a decent enough boost compared to the velocity one.
Originally by: XXSketchxx One of the subsystems had this initially but I modified it. I'll look into it, but honestly mining drones are pretty meh anyway.
On that I'd have to disagree, Mining Drones actually bring in a good amount of ore and they do so every 1 min. From what I can tell they bring about as much as 50-60% of a strip miner (which cycles in 3 mins) if you park close to a roid. Add a mining bonus to that and you get some decent secondary support.
One more thing, what about Mercoxit? If the T3 ship is going to use regular turret miners, the Modulated Deep Core Miner II is what I'd use. I used them on my Rokh before I got my Hulk very effectively and from what I can tell they can mine Mercoxit very effectively. Seeing as how regular miners can't mine it (I think) and the Deep Core Strip Miner has less yield when compared to a Modulated Strip Miner, what would the yield be like when compared to a Skiff or Hulk?
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 22:11:00 -
[83]
Edited by: XXSketchxx on 19/02/2010 22:11:19
Originally by: Veliria
Sounds good, but hopefully not all midslots will be taken to achieve an unscannable ship. Atleast one mid should be free for an ore scanner or MWD.
a tengu can be made unprobable with dissolution sequencer (and electronics subsystem 4), 2 mid slot ECCM and 1 low slot ECCM
this would be doable with the T3 industrial as well, and when you throw in things like sensor implants, skirmish warfare boosts, x-instinct boosters, and halo implants, it is very much viable to achieve an unscannable ship and maintain functionality
Quote: On that I'd have to disagree, Mining Drones actually bring in a good amount of ore and they do so every 1 min. From what I can tell they bring about as much as 50-60% of a strip miner (which cycles in 3 mins) if you park close to a roid. Add a mining bonus to that and you get some decent secondary support.
I'll look into it. No promises though; the mining subsystems can already do fairly well on their own.
Quote: One more thing, what about Mercoxit? If the T3 ship is going to use regular turret miners, the Modulated Deep Core Miner II is what I'd use. I used them on my Rokh before I got my Hulk very effectively and from what I can tell they can mine Mercoxit very effectively. Seeing as how regular miners can't mine it (I think) and the Deep Core Strip Miner has less yield when compared to a Modulated Strip Miner, what would the yield be like when compared to a Skiff or Hulk?
/me runs to Excel. I'll check some numbers. May need to make some adjustments. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 22:43:00 -
[84]
Okay. Some conclusions:
Max skilled skiff, MDCSM with T2 crystal ~824m3/min - lower than both the Ore Yield and Covert ops Subsystem
Therefore, Ore Yield and Covert ops will not provide bonus to Deep Core Technology. Instead, I designed a new subsystem:
Deep Core Extraction - 25% bonus to Mercoxit Mining Crystal Yield multiplier and +2000m3 Mercoxit Storage Bay per level; 3/0/0 (3 turrets); 350m3 cargo
What this means:
633m3 per minute Yield when fitted with MDCM and Mercoxit Crystals and a 10k m3 storage bay for Mercoxit ore.
Thoughts? Too modest? Unbalanced? Will it work?
Still looking for input on the Ice Yield Subsystem.
_____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 23:47:00 -
[85]
Yeh seems good, seeing you could fit more MLUs on it than you could on a Skiff. Ice would be problematic as you need Ice Harvesters for that (which are strips) and a single unit is 1000m3. As well, Ice Mining isn't really all that useful on this ship, Ice does not appear in WHs and in 0.0/Low-sec you're better off mining ABC or Merc.
I'd say drop the whole subsystem, leaving mining Ice to the Mackinaw.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 01:26:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Veliria Yeh seems good, seeing you could fit more MLUs on it than you could on a Skiff.
Theoretical max MLU's that should be able to be fit on one of these is 3 (with very little CPU left). Skiff can fit 2. T3 industrial with Deep Core bonus and 3 MLU will still mine less than a Skiff with 2 MLU. However, as it stands, with only 3 MDCM IIs you may be able to fit a couple more MLUs than intended. Therefore, I am dropping the bonus down to 7.5% per level and increasing turret slots to 5.
This puts the T3 Industrial at 644m3/min which can be increased to 834m3/min with 3 MLUs in comparison to a Skiff with base 827m3/min and 982m3/min with 2 MLUs.
Quote:
Ice would be problematic as you need Ice Harvesters for that (which are strips) and a single unit is 1000m3. As well, Ice Mining isn't really all that useful on this ship, Ice does not appear in WHs and in 0.0/Low-sec you're better off mining ABC or Merc.
I agree that its problematic. The only practical solution I see is a complex one; introduce Ice Miner I, II and named variants, and smaller chunks of ice that yield smaller amounts of product. Its a complete overhaul and could have some very negative effects on the ice market. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 01:47:00 -
[87]
Minor Modification:
Added a 50% reduction in mining laser optimal range for the Deep Core Extraction subsystem.
Why? Well theoretically this would go in conjunction with a "boost" to those Mercoxit gas clouds that form. It would mean you have to be closer to the rocks (i.e. in more danger) and thus have to fit a tank. You also don't get the reduced chance of gas cloud forming so, be prepared .
Hopefully this provides some nice distinction from the Skiff. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 18:31:00 -
[88]
Originally by: XXSketchxx Minor Modification:
Added a 50% reduction in mining laser optimal range for the Deep Core Extraction subsystem.
Why? Well theoretically this would go in conjunction with a "boost" to those Mercoxit gas clouds that form. It would mean you have to be closer to the rocks (i.e. in more danger) and thus have to fit a tank. You also don't get the reduced chance of gas cloud forming so, be prepared .
Hopefully this provides some nice distinction from the Skiff.
There is one thing I would like to add to this then. If you decide to mine Merc over Ark (given your new stats), such a change would mean you're putting yourself in more harms way than you would mining regular ore. Mercoxit isn't hugely more profitable than Ark (if it even is), but mining Merc should still remain practical.
Seeing as Mercoxit means you only need one specific ore type, why not make the subsystem a tiny bit more towards a ninja miner? You could say that the 50% range reduction also reduces the CovOps cloak delay of 30 seconds by 50%. That way you can ninja mine Mercoxit up close (still having to beware of the gas) but being able to GTFO out a little quicker for being so close.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.20 19:08:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Veliria
There is one thing I would like to add to this then. If you decide to mine Merc over Ark (given your new stats), such a change would mean you're putting yourself in more harms way than you would mining regular ore. Mercoxit isn't hugely more profitable than Ark (if it even is), but mining Merc should still remain practical.
Seeing as Mercoxit means you only need one specific ore type, why not make the subsystem a tiny bit more towards a ninja miner? You could say that the 50% range reduction also reduces the CovOps cloak delay of 30 seconds by 50%. That way you can ninja mine Mercoxit up close (still having to beware of the gas) but being able to GTFO out a little quicker for being so close.
The Mercoxit subsystem is independent of the covert ops. The Mercoxit one will not be getting a bonus to cloaking. Remember that you could always fit a regular cloaking device, provided you have the spare high slot and you can also counteract the range reduction via the appropriate engineering subsystem.
Ideally, you could then use the interdiction nullifier subsystem + an improved cloak to move around null sec. Find a system you like, mine away. Hostile enters? Get safe and cloak. The fat mercoxit bay will allow reasonably prolonged ventures. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
Veliria
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 10:32:00 -
[90]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Veliria
There is one thing I would like to add to this then. If you decide to mine Merc over Ark (given your new stats), such a change would mean you're putting yourself in more harms way than you would mining regular ore. Mercoxit isn't hugely more profitable than Ark (if it even is), but mining Merc should still remain practical.
Seeing as Mercoxit means you only need one specific ore type, why not make the subsystem a tiny bit more towards a ninja miner? You could say that the 50% range reduction also reduces the CovOps cloak delay of 30 seconds by 50%. That way you can ninja mine Mercoxit up close (still having to beware of the gas) but being able to GTFO out a little quicker for being so close.
The Mercoxit subsystem is independent of the covert ops. The Mercoxit one will not be getting a bonus to cloaking. Remember that you could always fit a regular cloaking device, provided you have the spare high slot and you can also counteract the range reduction via the appropriate engineering subsystem.
Ideally, you could then use the interdiction nullifier subsystem + an improved cloak to move around null sec. Find a system you like, mine away. Hostile enters? Get safe and cloak. The fat mercoxit bay will allow reasonably prolonged ventures.
Fair enough, but keep in mind how heavy Mercoxit is and that you can't use mining drones to boost your yield. Mercoxit mining will have to remain a valid (and profitable) option to do over mining regular ore. I don't know the value of Merc and Ark by memory, but why would one mine Mercoxit if mining Ark was 20-40% more profitable. Mercoxit ofcourse also only appears where ABC also appears, so it's always a contest between them.
A huge cargobay I could actually see being a good reason to mine Mercoxit, but it would have to be huge to allow for a serious amount of Mercoxit, say atleast twice as much. Seeing as how heavy it is and the dangers of mining it up close, having a huge cargobay is quite fair. The larger it is, the more you need to mine and the longer you'll get hit by the damage clouds. Staying longer also increases the odds of being found.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |