Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 08:26:00 -
[61] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:wrong.
the hulk got buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo.
pre-patch, 8k cargo. post patch, 8.5k ore bay AND 350 cargo. do the maths.
No, it didn't. The hulk's absolute maximum cargo was cut by 45-50%, dependant on rigs, it's shield regeneration time was increased by roughly 60% (passive shield tank nerf), and its available cargo for crystals was significantly reduced as well. The overall net effect was a buff for the hulk, yes, but saying it was "buffed in every way" is incorrect. Hell, for that matter the effectiveness of damage controls on the hulk was nerfed because CCP reprioritized shield HP over hull HP for some strange reason. |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp.
449
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 08:46:00 -
[62] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Dave stark wrote:wrong.
the hulk got buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo.
pre-patch, 8k cargo. post patch, 8.5k ore bay AND 350 cargo. do the maths. No, it didn't. The hulk's absolute maximum cargo was cut by 45-50%, dependant on rigs, it's shield regeneration time was increased by roughly 60% (passive shield tank nerf), and its available cargo for crystals was significantly reduced as well. The overall net effect was a buff for the hulk, yes, but saying it was "buffed in every way" is incorrect. Hell, for that matter the effectiveness of damage controls on the hulk was nerfed because CCP reprioritized shield HP over hull HP for some strange reason.
**** fitting your hulk doesn't mean the hulk got nerfed.
also, the mackinaw has more ehp, yield and cargo than the shitfit hulk. again, how is there a nerf here? Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

ashley Eoner
43
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 09:09:00 -
[63] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Monsieur Leon wrote:Unlike you I have a life so I don't spend all my time on Eve.
The Hulk got nerfed its pretty much useless compared to pre-patch. They need to tweak it again at the very least expand the Ore hold to something a bit more useful.
As for being tired of posts about mining ships... well your in the wrong forum. Go read something else.
The hulk has been buffed in every way excluding the cargohold. It now yields more and has a better tank. Only people like you who are using it incorrectly could see it as a nerf. wrong. the hulk got buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo. pre-patch, 8k cargo. post patch, 8.5k ore bay AND 350 cargo. do the maths. I assumed he had full cargo hold expander rigs/mods.. |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp.
450
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 09:11:00 -
[64] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Dave stark wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:Monsieur Leon wrote:Unlike you I have a life so I don't spend all my time on Eve.
The Hulk got nerfed its pretty much useless compared to pre-patch. They need to tweak it again at the very least expand the Ore hold to something a bit more useful.
As for being tired of posts about mining ships... well your in the wrong forum. Go read something else.
The hulk has been buffed in every way excluding the cargohold. It now yields more and has a better tank. Only people like you who are using it incorrectly could see it as a nerf. wrong. the hulk got buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo. pre-patch, 8k cargo. post patch, 8.5k ore bay AND 350 cargo. do the maths. I assumed hehad full cargo hold expander rigs/mods..
yeah, fail fitting your hulk doesn't mean it got nerfed, especially when they added a ship that beats the shitfit hulk in every way. even more so when you already have the skills to fly said ship. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 14:51:00 -
[65] - Quote
chandraboy wrote:Ccp you suck seriously you removed 50percent of my capacity and i should be happy for you allowing me to pay to playi know peeps who are goiing to quit playing becauuse of your action why. Cant you leave the good thing alone why do you always mess them up 
It's funny when people don't read the release notes. Or the roughly 1,000 forum threads on this very issue. Or the help and mining channels in-game.
|

Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 14:53:00 -
[66] - Quote
ariel jade wrote:chandraboy wrote:Ccp you suck seriously you removed 50percent of my capacity and i should be happy for you allowing me to pay to playi know peeps who are goiing to quit playing becauuse of your action why. Cant you leave the good thing alone why do you always mess them up  I just noticed to day the te expanded Cargo was not working on my Hulk anymore.
It does work...for the cargo bay. Not for the ore bay.
|

Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 14:58:00 -
[67] - Quote
Sigras wrote:by that logic why not get a retriever? its got "about the same yield" and "about the same ore bay" or why ever get an implant? its "about the same as not having one"
Actually I think more miners ought to give the Retriever a serious look before heading directly for a Mack. First of all, a Retriever is still in the same ballpark yield-wise as a Mack, and has a huge ore bay as well (27.5 m3 versus 35K m3 on the Mack). It only has one mid, so you can't tank it much, but so what? Put some T1 Hobs in your drone bay and you can tank any belt rat in hisec Empire space. Rets cost about 1/10 of what a Mack will run you, so you can easily lose one or two without caring much.
You can also skill into a Retriever pretty quick -- Industry V, Astrogeology III, and MIning Barge I puts you into one.
|

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
37
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 19:44:00 -
[68] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:**** fitting your hulk doesn't mean the hulk got nerfed.
also, the mackinaw has more ehp, yield and cargo than the shitfit hulk. again, how is there a nerf here?
Your response only applies to maximum cargo fittings, it does not apply to the shield recharge nerf, the lower base cargo capacity for mining crystals, or the reduced effectiveness of damage controls due to the HP reprioritization. Even if you want to discount ship fittings that's two clear nerfs, and while it still needs one to count fittings it's also one meta-nerf. For that matter the shield resistance bonus was lowered which in turn lowers the effectiveness of flat HP boosting modules like shield extenders which is another meta-nerf.
So with two actual nerfs and two meta-nerfs how was the hulk "buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo" again? |

ashley Eoner
43
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 06:06:00 -
[69] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Dave stark wrote:**** fitting your hulk doesn't mean the hulk got nerfed.
also, the mackinaw has more ehp, yield and cargo than the shitfit hulk. again, how is there a nerf here? Your response only applies to maximum cargo fittings, it does not apply to the shield recharge nerf, the lower base cargo capacity for mining crystals, or the reduced effectiveness of damage controls due to the HP reprioritization. Even if you want to discount ship fittings that's two clear nerfs, and while it still needs one to count fittings it's also one meta-nerf. For that matter the shield resistance bonus was lowered which in turn lowers the effectiveness of flat HP boosting modules like shield extenders which is another meta-nerf. So with two actual nerfs and two meta-nerfs how was the hulk "buffed in every way INCLUDING cargo" again? Wait someone actually relied on the hulks natural shield recharge for a tank? Really?
|

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
37
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 06:56:00 -
[70] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:]Wait someone actually relied on the hulks natural shield recharge for a tank? Really?
I would imagine that just about every high-sec miner who didn't fit a shield booster and mined below .9 (or .8, I can never remember where rats start spawning) security and couldn't be arsed to deploy drones did. That said the fact is that people who tanked their hulks actually did rely on the ship's passive regeneration to offset at least some of the damage, especially in DPS-oriented builds like the catalyst's, from suicide gankers. It takes a bit longer for someone to chew through your 5k shields if your shield tank can regenerate enough to mitigate 15% of their damage than it does if your regeneration only mitigates 10%, possibly long enough for CONCORD to put down the donuts and step on the antimatter. /shrugs.
Deride the idea all you want, but folks did rely on it to one degree or another and in one way or another. |
|

Idris Helion
University of Caille Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 13:27:00 -
[71] - Quote
Shereza wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:]Wait someone actually relied on the hulks natural shield recharge for a tank? Really?
I would imagine that just about every high-sec miner who didn't fit a shield booster and mined below .9 (or .8, I can never remember where rats start spawning) security and couldn't be arsed to deploy drones did. That said the fact is that people who tanked their hulks actually did rely on the ship's passive regeneration to offset at least some of the damage, especially in DPS-oriented builds like the catalyst's, from suicide gankers. It takes a bit longer for someone to chew through your 5k shields if your shield tank can regenerate enough to mitigate 15% of their damage than it does if your regeneration only mitigates 10%, possibly long enough for CONCORD to put down the donuts and step on the antimatter. /shrugs. Deride the idea all you want, but folks did rely on it to one degree or another and in one way or another.
I've never seen a rat spawn in .9, and I rarely get one in .8. In .5 systems, I tend to get a spawn of two or three rats every half-hour or so. I throw up some Hobs in .6 and .7 systems and have some moderate shield tank, and I've never had rats take my shield below 50% before the drones popped them. That's why I prefer hardeners/extenders to shield regens in hisec -- you have plenty of time between rat spawns for your shield to crank back up. It's also good for ablating huge alpha hits by gankers.
In lowsec and null you obviously need more in-depth tank, both active and passive. |

ashley Eoner
44
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 22:31:00 -
[72] - Quote
Shereza wrote:ashley Eoner wrote:]Wait someone actually relied on the hulks natural shield recharge for a tank? Really?
I would imagine that just about every high-sec miner who didn't fit a shield booster and mined below .9 (or .8, I can never remember where rats start spawning) security and couldn't be arsed to deploy drones did. That said the fact is that people who tanked their hulks actually did rely on the ship's passive regeneration to offset at least some of the damage, especially in DPS-oriented builds like the catalyst's, from suicide gankers. It takes a bit longer for someone to chew through your 5k shields if your shield tank can regenerate enough to mitigate 15% of their damage than it does if your regeneration only mitigates 10%, possibly long enough for CONCORD to put down the donuts and step on the antimatter. /shrugs. Deride the idea all you want, but folks did rely on it to one degree or another and in one way or another. So only fail people relied on it. It's like the fail people who fitted cargohold expanders in their lows and are now complaining about the loss space. So is a nerf really a nerf if it effects something that doesn't matter?
Like the person said above .9 and up has no spawns and even the hardest high sec rat gets obliterated by hobgoblins well before they do anything.
EDIT : I actually like the increase in shield tank on the hulk. Yes it makes a DC unit a bit less effective but it also means my orca pilot's siege warfare has a bigger effect then before (harmonizer etc). |

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 00:12:00 -
[73] - Quote
Idris Helion wrote:I've never seen a rat spawn in .9, and I rarely get one in .8. In .5 systems, I tend to get a spawn of two or three rats every half-hour or so. I throw up some Hobs in .6 and .7 systems and have some moderate shield tank, and I've never had rats take my shield below 50% before the drones popped them.
Rats don't spawn in .9 systems, I said below .9 for a reason. As for popping them, I've found that in many situations, especially when multi-box mining, it's more efficient to ignore them if you can reasonably do so. Once spawned so long as none are killed the rats stick around attacking the same old target which means you can "safely" deploy mining drones with no fear of them being at risk until/unless some errant ratter blows up the NPCs attacking you.
ashley Eoner wrote:So only fail people relied on it. It's like the fail people who fitted cargohold expanders in their lows and are now complaining about the loss space. So is a nerf really a nerf if it effects something that doesn't matter?
Yup, only idiots relied on passive regeneration. Smart people, however, used it if they could reasonably do so given that smart people generally use every resource available to accomplish their goals.
You'd have to be a moron not to make use of free shield regeneration, but hey, if there are people out there who packed two expander rigs and two expander mods in the lows on hulks I'm sure there are people out there who didn't want the extra 100-300 HP their shield regeneration could get them if someone (please note the singular nature since "a gang" would rip through even a buffered hulk before shield regeneration was a factor worth noting) tried to gank them.
ashley Eoner wrote:EDIT : I actually like the increase in shield tank on the hulk. Yes it makes a DC unit a bit less effective but it also means my orca pilot's siege warfare has a bigger effect then before (harmonizer etc).
Unfortunately that "bigger effect" isn't all that much bigger. It's something like 104 EHP, 7.5%, when you compare buffer fits with orcas packing T2 harmonizing links using max skills and no siege mindlink.
TBH, it's annoying how quickly the hulk's EHP buff drops, percentage-wise, when you compare tanked builds from pre-1.2 and now.
[Hulk, EHP] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Medium Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I
Strip Miner I Strip Miner I Strip Miner I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
That build went from 36,381 "omni" EHP to 38,488, a 5.8% increase, and the shield regeneration dropped from 138 DPS to 93 DPS, 32.6% drop. Contrast that to the 18.whatever% increase in raw EHP hulks got and it's annoying. It's still an EHP buff, it's still good, it's just annoying how you go from 18% naked to 6% tanked. |

Pipa Porto
782
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 00:31:00 -
[74] - Quote
Shereza wrote: That build went from 36,381 "omni" EHP to 38,488, a 5.8% increase, and the shield regeneration dropped from 138 DPS to 93 DPS, 32.6% drop. Contrast that to the 18.whatever% increase in raw EHP hulks got and it's annoying. It's still an EHP buff, it's still good, it's just annoying how you go from 18% naked to 6% tanked.
The maximum amount of time a gank can take is ~26 seconds (this is assuming you're stupid enough not to rabbit when someone baits CONCORD away). A 45DPS reduced tank (assuming the entire thing happens at peak recharge ) loses you 1170 EHP regened during the gank. The change got you a 2107 EHP increase.
That's a net 937 EHP buff. That increases as the gank gets shorter because CONCORD's unspawned (who sticks around after CONCORD's been baited), or the gankers bring slightly more DPS than strcitly necessary.
So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough? EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
38
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 02:15:00 -
[75] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote: So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough?
I haven't actually complained about anything. All I did was point out that the statements that the hulk "got buffed in every way" were factually incorrect. |

Frostys Virpio
Profit's Prophets Strategic Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 17:56:00 -
[76] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Pipa Porto wrote: So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough?
I haven't actually complained about anything. All I did was point out that the statements that the hulk "got buffed in every way" were factually incorrect.
It got buffed in all the important way when you consider it's new intended role of fleet miner. For solo mining, it's definately NOT the ship to use and that is an intended result so nobody should be unhappy about it. The full cahnge at most require people who used to only own a hulk to buy a new ship if they used to mine solo in a hulk. If they didn't own one, they will ahve to choose what kind of mining they mostly intend to do. As an added bonus, if you plan to solo mine mostly and buy a mack, you can still do somewhat good if you happen to be in a fleet because the yields are not that far away.
The important point still stands tho. The hulk is NOT intended at all to be a solo miner now. NOT AT ALL. Thats why it does not have the right stats to solo mine efficiently. |

Zyella Stormborn
Alpha Strategy In Umbra Mortis
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 19:20:00 -
[77] - Quote
Pfffa. Mine solo mines quite efficiently. I just have to not be lazy and dump ore every 3 min. ;)
I will admit I usually bring my Orca alt, but not always. I do break out the Mack when I decide to play the semi-afk game though. |

Pipa Porto
794
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 19:26:00 -
[78] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Pipa Porto wrote: So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough?
I haven't actually complained about anything. All I did was point out that the statements that the hulk "got buffed in every way" were factually incorrect.
What's all this then?
Shereza wrote:Unfortunately that "bigger effect" isn't all that much bigger. It's something like 104 EHP, 7.5%, when you compare buffer fits with orcas packing T2 harmonizing links using max skills and no siege mindlink.
TBH, it's annoying how quickly the hulk's EHP buff drops, percentage-wise, when you compare tanked builds from pre-1.2 and now. EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |

ashley Eoner
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 20:20:00 -
[79] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Shereza wrote:Pipa Porto wrote: So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough?
I haven't actually complained about anything. All I did was point out that the statements that the hulk "got buffed in every way" were factually incorrect. What's all this then? Shereza wrote:Unfortunately that "bigger effect" isn't all that much bigger. It's something like 104 EHP, 7.5%, when you compare buffer fits with orcas packing T2 harmonizing links using max skills and no siege mindlink.
TBH, it's annoying how quickly the hulk's EHP buff drops, percentage-wise, when you compare tanked builds from pre-1.2 and now. How dare you use reality and facts against Shreza. I mean seriously this person thinks that the hulk lost 100-300hp shield regen after the buff or something. Which will somehow stop a gang of gankers from ganking a hulk but not a hp buffer fit... |

ashley Eoner
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 20:21:00 -
[80] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Shereza wrote:Pipa Porto wrote: So now you're complaining that the Hulk (not meant to be a tanky ship anymore) didn't get its tank buffed enough?
I haven't actually complained about anything. All I did was point out that the statements that the hulk "got buffed in every way" were factually incorrect. What's all this then? [quote=Shereza]Unfortunately that "bigger effect" isn't all that much bigger. It's something like 104 EHP, 7.5%, when you compare buffer fits with orcas packing T2 harmonizing links using max skills and no siege mindlink. TBH, it's annoying how quickly the hulk's EHP buff drops, percentage-wise, when you compare tanked builds from pre-1.2 and now. How dare you use reality and facts against Shreza. I mean seriously this person thinks that the hulk lost 100-300hp shield regen after the buff or something. Which will somehow stop a gang of gankers from ganking a hulk where as a buffer fit which has more HP will somehow be doomed.. |
|

Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 22:07:00 -
[81] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:What's all this then?
Stating facts.
ashley Eoner wrote:How dare you use reality and facts against Shreza. I mean seriously this person thinks that the hulk lost 100-300hp shield regen after the buff or something. Which will somehow stop a gang of gankers from ganking a hulk where as a buffer fit which has more HP will somehow be doomed..
The hulk lost shield regeneration due to the increased recharge time, that's a fact. I also don't recall saying or even implying that it was enough to "stop a gang of gankers." How you would come to that conclusion when I even pointed out that the EHP increase the hulk got when buffer tanked was in the 5-6% range is beyond me.
_____
Put words in my mouth all you want, ascribe motivations to my posts that don't exist all you care to, it doesn't change the fact that not every change made to the hulk was a buff. The overall effect was a buff, but not every change was a buff. Feel free to believe that the hulk was "buffed in every way" if you want to though. |

ashley Eoner
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 02:43:00 -
[82] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:What's all this then?
Stating facts. ashley Eoner wrote:How dare you use reality and facts against Shreza. I mean seriously this person thinks that the hulk lost 100-300hp shield regen after the buff or something. Which will somehow stop a gang of gankers from ganking a hulk where as a buffer fit which has more HP will somehow be doomed.. The hulk lost shield regeneration due to the increased recharge time, that's a fact. I also don't recall saying or even implying that it was enough to "stop a gang of gankers." How you would come to that conclusion when I even pointed out that the EHP increase the hulk got when buffer tanked was in the 5-6% range is beyond me. _____ Put words in my mouth all you want, ascribe motivations to my posts that don't exist all you care to, it doesn't change the fact that not every change made to the hulk was a buff. The overall effect was a buff, but not every change was a buff. Feel free to believe that the hulk was "buffed in every way" if you want to though. You're utterly failing at reading but that doesn't surprise me because only someone that is an utter failure would gripe that gaining shield health resulting in an overal EHP boost in a fleet vessel is a nerf because the regen went down 10 hps. |

Serena Serene
The Scope Gallente Federation
2978
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 06:03:00 -
[83] - Quote
Why are you people so eager on pushing Shereza in the "silly complainer" corner? What I've read from her in this thread sounds reasonable and not even like a complaint, not to speak of a silly one.
She says the hulk got buffed. She says there are some aspects where it got worse but other changes offset that, so that it got buffed over all. She's not saying "gaining shield hp is a nerf because regen went down" .. she says that regen went down, so the over-all buff when you account for regeneration, too, is not as big as looking at pure static ehp implies.
Maybe you all are too used to people like the OP whose complaints really sound very unreasonable so you understand everything as whining? I'm not sure, I just don't really see it in this case. It feels like you are overreacting here.
Edit: tried to clarify what I meant somewhat |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
203
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 01:07:00 -
[84] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:I have a noticeable increase in yield You and the other 5% who mine while present at your computer. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |

Herr Hammer Draken
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
90
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 06:29:00 -
[85] - Quote
Monsieur Leon wrote:Oh and CCP has something to say to you. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73098Quote: The goal here is to allow players to choose a barge that fits their specific play style rather than lead them on a journey from the worst barge to the best one.
The Covetor and Hulk cater to group mining operations due to their large mining capability, low EHP and storage, forcing them to rely on others to haul and resupply them with mining crystals. The Retriever and Mackinaw are specifically designed for autonomy purposes, as their large ore bays allow their pilot to stay inside an asteroid belt for longer without having to dock. The Procurer and Skiff are made for protection against suicide gank, or NPCs, by giving a large enough buffer to react to incoming attacks, while paying for that with a lower mining yield.
Pay attention to yields stated too Quote:Ship Veldspar/hour Mercoxit/hour Ice/hour Hulk 2,035,290 3,217 85 Covetor 1,846,763 2,916 80 Mackinaw 1,761,350 2,781 79 Retriever 1,677,477 2,650 75 Skiff 1,615,918 2,557 72 Procurer 1,538,971 2,432 68 Have a good day.
Wow how special... most miners run their own fleet. What would be the point otherwise.
As for CCP they can have their opinion, but the forums are for players to voice theirs.
The Hulk got nerfed - need to expanded the ore hold.
Cheers, Leon[/quote]
Here is a player that is stuborn to the last and refuses to adapt. Well then enjoy your Hulk. You could be having so much more fun in a Mack with a huge ore bay and a tank easily double what you had in your Hulk. And the Mack will mine just about as fast as your old Hulk did. But hey refuse to adapt and complain about the change. When you rage quit I will take your stuff.
Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet" |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
204
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 06:46:00 -
[86] - Quote
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:Here is a player that is stuborn to the last and refuses to adapt. Well then enjoy your Hulk. You could be having so much more fun in a Mack with a huge ore bay and a tank easily double what you had in your Hulk. And the Mack will mine just about as fast as your old Hulk did. But hey refuse to adapt and complain about the change. When you rage quit I will take your stuff.
This exactly.
I have mined in a retriever (when I do mine) since my first or second month in EVE. I'm just past 2 years now and still wasn't ready to train barges 5 before the changes were announced. My ship got a HUGE buff. I don't dispute that it needed a buff, but it's too much. It's just so darn easy to mine in this contraption that I really shouldn't have that insane output. I'd say give em these role bonuses and the problem will be fixed:
retriever/mackinaw: +25%
procurer/skiff: +100%
This would leave the small barges at a net mining yield of 200%/210% and the mediums at 250%/262.5%. The larges would have a base of 300% and a max of 345%/396.75%. This means at these amounts, even the procurer which is small and fast, has a big fat capacitor, has tons of HP and a pretty nice-sized ore bay, at mining barge skill level 1 would still mine more than half as fast as a max-skilled hulk. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |

Tassian Marrix
Spatial Interaction Ltd Sentinel Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 12:14:00 -
[87] - Quote
Ships are fine. I only mine 4100 m3 per cycle with my mack, it's 5200 per cycle with my hulk. Use the ship for the situation needed. I will stay in a hulk until my area gets dangerous then i will move to a mack or skiff. The changes were fairly balanced all around and dont really need any tweaking. |

Frostys Virpio
Profit's Prophets Strategic Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 13:34:00 -
[88] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Herr Hammer Draken wrote:Here is a player that is stuborn to the last and refuses to adapt. Well then enjoy your Hulk. You could be having so much more fun in a Mack with a huge ore bay and a tank easily double what you had in your Hulk. And the Mack will mine just about as fast as your old Hulk did. But hey refuse to adapt and complain about the change. When you rage quit I will take your stuff.
This exactly. I have mined in a retriever (when I do mine) since my first or second month in EVE. I'm just past 2 years now and still wasn't ready to train barges 5 before the changes were announced. My ship got a HUGE buff. I don't dispute that it needed a buff, but it's too much. It's just so darn easy to mine in this contraption that I really shouldn't have that insane output. I'd say give em these role bonuses and the problem will be fixed: retriever/mackinaw: +25% procurer/skiff: +100% This would leave the small barges at a net mining yield of 200%/210% and the mediums at 250%/262.5%. The larges would have a base of 300% and a max of 345%/396.75%. This means at these amounts, even the procurer which is small and fast, has a big fat capacitor, has tons of HP and a pretty nice-sized ore bay, at mining barge skill level 1 would still mine more than half as fast as a max-skilled hulk.
This automatically make the Hulk the default be all end all solution for mining which is exactly what CCP was trying to get away from. The problem is really easy to solve.
Use the Hulk when in a mining ops with orca support. Use the Mack when solo mining. Use the Skiff when mining in dangerous space.
Use thier related tech 1 version when you don't have the upfront isk or don't want to potential huge hit if you get blown up. |

Kelhund
Mars University Chained Reactions
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 16:02:00 -
[89] - Quote
Here I remember the days when the best mining ship out there was an Apocalypse with T2 mining lasers........I agree with the changes to the barges, and I think it brings a little more spice to them |

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
204
|
Posted - 2012.08.23 10:48:00 -
[90] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:-brilliant solutions- This automatically make the Hulk the default be all end all solution for mining You can say that all you want but history shows clearly that almost all miners disagree with you. Even now mackinaw prices are HIGHER than hulk prices, despite their mineral cost being substantially lower.
You're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong. Stop trying to defend your position with feelings and opinions, because the facts blatantly disagree with you. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |