More than 1 because the Hulk has 3 strip miners and I don't want to be continually dragging one cycle of ore to the Orca's corp hangar every minute. That's far too much attention to a task which takes my mouse away from the "warp the hell out of here" button . 6000m3 is a decent size. People with ultimately maxed out yield can learn to stagger their strip miners. Being required to stagger strip miners because the ore bay isn't even big enough for min yield Strip Miner Is cycling simultaneously would be a pain in the neck.

Of course, I would very happily trade a 5% yield bonus for a 5% cycle time bonus. Change the Mining Foreman Mindlink from a 15% yield to a 5% cycle time on all mining lasers and I'd be a happy miner.

Are you the new Ruby Porto alt?
Only him could justify a larger crystal bay in ships intended to have worse efficiency and less turrets while having it smaller in the top of the line efficiency ship. This not even including the factor that the new ore + hold is now less than the old all purpose hold.

The Hulk is designed to be efficient only when properly supported by haulers (who can drop crystals off for you).

The Mack and Skiff are designed to be more self sufficient. Situational Efficiency is the watchword of tiericide.

I totally disagree. The Hulk cannot be efficient if its fleet depenency is hardwired into 3rd party providing such efficiency.
Hulk should and has to rely on fleet because of limited cargo hold and thin hull already.

Try making Hulk efficient when mission mining, let's see how fast that Orca will get to give him the crystals at the 3rd pocket, 80km off the warp in point.

Your missing the point.


The Hulk is redesigned for basic fleet mining ops. Thats it. Not solo mining. Not deadspace pocket mining. Fleet ops.

Your missing the point.


The Hulk is redesigned for basic fleet mining ops. Thats it. Not solo mining. Not deadspace pocket mining. Fleet ops.

I totally disagree. The Hulk cannot be efficient if its fleet depenency is hardwired into 3rd party providing such efficiency.
Hulk should and has to rely on fleet because of limited cargo hold and thin hull already.

it hasn't been redesigned at all. all they've done is created a crystal issue, lowered the resist bonus and gone "there we go". it has been given no bonuses for being in a fleet what so ever.

~20% yield over the Mackinaw isn't a bonus now?

in comparison to a 50+% yield bonus from simply having an extra strip miner?
that's the bonus it previously had.

Limited Storage space and protection are the only reasons it has to rely on the fleet. What are you talking about?

The Hulk is more useful than the Mack IFF it has enough hauler support to keep up with its yield because it can't store anything significant locally. If else, the Mack is more useful. Atm, the Skiff is out in the cold.

Covetor/hulk: ore bay is identical to its current cargo hold, little to average EHP, but best mining output. Basically made for group operations when players have industrials and protection to back them up

The developers did not talk about *crystals* space.

Seriously? Come now.

oh my god, they changed their mind on something, it's the end of the world

Vaerah, stop whining and just HTFU already

you made a comment that it mines better than the mack, i reminded you it mined better before the changes. you still haven't made a comment on why it's better in a fleet [which, it isn't as it has no bonuses for being in a fleet]

oh my god, they changed their mind on something, it's the end of the world

Vaerah, stop whining and just HTFU already

CCP decided they wanted the Hulk to not be the end all of mining ships. So they gave it drawbacks so that it must be part of a fleet op to be useful. And in that area, it is more useful than any of the other barges.

I love reading posts in which people can't put out a well reasoned thought - instead, they have to end in personal insults and petty name calling.

Your cogent and detailed reasoning totally convinced me. Not.

you made a comment that it mines better than the mack, i reminded you it mined better before the changes. you still haven't made a comment on why it's better in a fleet [which, it isn't as it has no bonuses for being in a fleet]

It should be painfully clear why it functions better in a fleet environment. It mines more and with proper support cargo restrictions become irrelevant.

you made a comment that it mines better than the mack, i reminded you it mined better before the changes. you still haven't made a comment on why it's better in a fleet [which, it isn't as it has no bonuses for being in a fleet]

except having a 3% yield modifier/level does not mean it mines more. i love my spread sheets as much as the next person but just because the paper says it's a bigger number doesn't mean it works like that.

Because it's able to make effective use of it's ~20%(25% now) yield bonus over a Mackinaw/Skiff.

That's why it's better than a Mack/Skiff in a fleet.

except it isn't more useful than another type of barge in a fleet. in fact you're just an imposed burden upon the other fleet members constantly having to be resupplied with crystals etc. if you're constantly dicking around with crystals instead of mining you may as well just turn up in mackinaws and keep the boosting ship in a pos which gives it extra safety for no loss in yield because the macks aren't knobing around with crystals and can haul their own ****.

in their current state hulks are far more hassle than their yield bonus is worth.

except with constantly ******* around with crystals; it's not able to make use of that bonus as efficiently as it needs to to make it really worth using.

sure when(if) that extra 10% yield bonus hits sisi i might agree that the extra logistics are worth it until then though, it's really not.
i guess we'll see tomorrow.

Sure it is. It's a 20-25% yield bonus over a Mackinaw/Skiff (even bigger when you remember that gang links stack with that). If that's not worth it to you, that's fine, don't use it.
But VV was complaining that fitting a Brick Tank gimps the TQ Hulk's yield too much, and that reduces the yield less than switching to a SISI Mackinaw will.

As for constantly switching out Crystals, I'll ask something again that you still haven't answered: How long does it take to burn out a set of crystals?