EVE Search - Fix the Hulk(ageddon)

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fix the Hulk(ageddon)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Extreme Eye of God Circle-Of-Two 18	Posted - 2014.12.29 00:32:56 - [1] - Quote The hulk should had been the number 1 miner, at least it still is when you see the total costs for costruction parts, but it got badly nerfed by poor cargohold. So for a few years now the Mackinaw has become the most populair miningship just because the cargohold is better and way cheaper to build and way nicer profits to make. But Mackageddon? Seriously, the Hulk should get some love from CCP and so do the 'Hulka Gankers' CCP make Hulkageddon possible again, fix what you broke 2.5 years ago! /Extreme
Steppa Musana Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2014.12.29 00:47:20 - [2] - Quote It needs 500m3 more so it can take 3 rounds of ice. the mechanics on mining need to also change to keep running for one more cycle after the cargo is full if its not overloaded This would give you 1.999999999999 full cycles extra before you have to jet it
Gawain Edmond Angry Mustellid The Periphery 159	Posted - 2014.12.29 00:54:45 - [3] - Quote you're wrong.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 1893	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:12:27 - [4] - Quote Your first false assumption was that the hulk should be the number one miner. They have roles now, not tiers.
Gawain Edmond Angry Mustellid The Periphery 159	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:19:09 - [5] - Quote the hulk is still the best mining ship, pulls in more ore than the others, the other ships have things that are better than the hulk like tank and cargohold but the hulk still mines more than the others. Want to mine lots use a hulk. Want to mine afk while watching tv use a different one. Want to not get suicide ganked use the other one. Only one of those three is best at mining the others are better at not mining.
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 18987	Posted - 2014.12.29 01:32:21 - [6] - Quote Hulk is king of the miners. They just require you to be at the computer and use and orca and/or other support to haul. Mack just became popular because of the uberoreholds and the buffed tank which made them better for AFK miners. If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
shimiku Black VooDoo Asassins The Kadeshi 28	Posted - 2014.12.29 02:29:15 - [7] - Quote hulk is for group mining it got a small ore hold so it relies on other to do the hauling mack is for solo because it got a bigger ore hold so you can stay in belt longer skiff is for ppl that think they might get attacked it got the best tank of them all
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 521	Posted - 2014.12.29 03:01:05 - [8] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Hulk is king of the miners. They just require you to be at the computer and use and orca and/or other support to haul. Mack just became popular because of the uberoreholds and the buffed tank which made them better for AFK miners. If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. Noooes.. The idea was that all barges and exhumers would mine more or less the same amount of ore per time, so you wouldn't be "yield punished" by choosing one over the over three. If anything we would need a gas harvester module. signature
Gawain Edmond Angry Mustellid The Periphery 159	Posted - 2014.12.29 03:12:12 - [9] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Hulk is king of the miners. They just require you to be at the computer and use and orca and/or other support to haul. Mack just became popular because of the uberoreholds and the buffed tank which made them better for AFK miners. If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. Noooes.. The idea was that all barges and exhumers would mine more or less the same amount of ore per time, so you wouldn't be "yield punished" by choosing one over the over three. If anything we would need a gas harvester module. that was never the idea ever in any of the patches even a little bit. you're so wrong i feel ashamed that i'm telling you that you're wrong but you are so wrong if you were even a little bit more wrong you'd be right
Hopelesshobo Tactical Nuclear Penguin's 381	Posted - 2014.12.29 04:58:51 - [10] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. Well, according to CCP, nobody was using the Skiff when it mined less then the Mach. So they buffed the yield so more people would use it. I am curious as to where they stand now in reference to what area of space. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1843	Posted - 2014.12.29 10:08:35 - [11] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Hulk is king of the miners. They just require you to be at the computer and use and orca and/or other support to haul. Mack just became popular because of the uberoreholds and the buffed tank which made them better for AFK miners. If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. Skiff does not have BS tank. Unless you are talking about an active tanked BS while measuring it against a passive tanked skiff. It would be far more reasonable to say it has BC sized tank. Also it has weaker than cruiser level drones due to the limited bandwidth available to it. And it doesn't have good yield, especially not if you want to have any kind of DPS on the drones, control range is limited, no utility and no tracking or speed mods for drones either unless you have no tank. Macks tank also received virtually no buff at all in the changes.
Extreme Eye of God Circle-Of-Two 18	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:51:17 - [12] - Quote When CCP, 2.5 years ago, made new roles for Skiff, Mack and Hulk they "forgot" to take a look at the build requierements/ the total cost of build vs time to build vs market demand vs profit per ship. This is really unbalanced and should be reviewed by CCP. The Hulk cost way more to build, takes way longer to build but meanwhile there is way less market demand vs the Mack. You can produce 50 Macks a month vs 21 Hulks a month. Profit for a Mack is around 70M isk vs 8M isk for a Hulk. So even if the mining / cargo outcome is ok to some, CCP really have to look over the cost to build/ time to build. 8M profit for a Hulk while only 21 can be produced a month vs a Mack 70M profit while able to produce 50 and then also take into notice the number of sales per month 50 hulks vs 200 Macks tells me there is something broken here!
Velicitia Arma Artificer 2654	Posted - 2014.12.29 13:55:54 - [13] - Quote Extreme wrote: When CCP, 2.5 years ago, made new roles for Skiff, Mack and Hulk they "forgot" to take a look at the build requierements/ the total cost of build vs time to build vs market demand vs profit per ship. This is really unbalanced and should be reviewed by CCP. The Hulk cost way more to build, takes way longer to build but meanwhile there is way less market demand vs the Mack. You can produce 50 Macks a month vs 21 Hulks a month. Profit for a Mack is around 70M isk vs 8M isk for a Hulk. So even if the mining / cargo outcome is ok to some, CCP really have to look over the cost to build/ time to build. 8M profit for a Hulk while only 21 can be produced a month vs a Mack 70M profit while able to produce 50 and then also take into notice the number of sales per month 50 hulks vs 200 Macks tells me there is something broken here! or, perhaps the problem is that there's a glut of hulks on the market still, because they're perceived to be less good than said macks. A solution therefore is "don't produce the damn hulk" until such time that the hulk approaches a better profit point for you (note, it might not ever do that). One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Jean Luc Lemmont Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 511	Posted - 2014.12.29 14:42:14 - [14] - Quote Damn you CCP and your player driven economy. Oh..wait... Will I get banned for boxing!?!?! This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Extreme Eye of God Circle-Of-Two 18	Posted - 2014.12.29 21:10:24 - [15] - Quote Jean Luc Lemmont wrote: Damn you CCP and your player driven economy. Oh..wait... Totally missing the point here
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2147	Posted - 2014.12.30 00:10:07 - [16] - Quote Mackinaw is better. Solution: nerf its yield. Hulk is fine. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 194	Posted - 2014.12.30 00:23:40 - [17] - Quote The Hulk is supposed to be used alongside a Orca for fleet mining, whereas the Skiff and Mackinaw are better used for solo mining. The Hulk, nor the other, need a "fix" for anything since they all three do their job remarkable.
Gabriel Elarik Celestiel Rams 1	Posted - 2014.12.30 13:25:40 - [18] - Quote the one and only thing ccp needs to do is get back to hulk ore mack ice skiff mercoxid i know i know they have roles now they had roles perfect fine the only thing they had todo is give the same roles the t1 counterpart and adjust the skills well its my opinion since i hate the changes they made
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2148	Posted - 2014.12.30 14:17:41 - [19] - Quote Gabriel Elarik wrote: hulk ore mack ice skiff mercoxid I have to disagree. Streamlining a ship into a single use isn't a role. It's just lazy design work. With the new barge roles, you can pick your favorite and use it to mine ore, ice, and mercoxit. Now what you mine doesn't choose your ship for you. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
Gabriel Elarik Celestiel Rams 1	Posted - 2014.12.30 14:49:18 - [20] - Quote in my eyes there is no difference between the ability to chose a ship with more tank or a ship with the ability to mine ice better its true you had only the hulk for ore but you could chose your playstyle while doing so TankHulk / CargoHulk / YieldHulk and now all ships can mine all things but your playstyle choses the ship no difference to the system before now you need a ship for fleet mining and solo if you want the best yield and before a ship for ore and ice in my eyes the exumers had more character before the changes in my opinion the balancing was at the wrong end not 6 ships that can mine all things with nearly the same yield more ships and more content for miners moon mining or ring mining comet mining there are so many ideas out there and every one could be the steping stone for more ships and more choices for miners Empire vs 0.0 Tank vs Cargo and now add fleet or solo and 90% of all miners know what ship to fly you have many choices as miner NOT
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2148	Posted - 2014.12.30 15:01:44 - [21] - Quote Gabriel Elarik wrote: its true you had only the hulk for ore but you could chose your playstyle while doing so TankHulk / CargoHulk / YieldHulk You can still fit the ship. The big change now is that there is an even wider gap between tank Skiff and yield Hulk than there ever was previously between tank Hulk and yield Hulk. It'd be nice, though, if cargo expanders could increase the ore hold size. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
Gabriel Elarik Celestiel Rams 1	Posted - 2014.12.30 15:18:24 - [22] - Quote the thing is the fitting dosnt matter much you will never get a Hulk with enough tank that you would not chose the skiff if you want tank and you would never get a skiff with the yield of a hulk and vice versa the gap is wider dosnt mean its better an example before the ganker had to scan the ship before he attempts the gank he could not see if the hulk is tank fittet or for yield or cargo know he knows Procurer and skiff is off limits alone and covetor and hulk retriever are easy targets the fit does nott matter most of the time because they cant fit enough tank to survive
Ronny Hugo Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Redux 74	Posted - 2014.12.30 15:49:10 - [23] - Quote Yeah I consider the hulk OK as is, I mine quite effectively with it even if I just mine into cans and change to hauler and go pick it up when the field is cleared. I'm also less of a target to ganks, since I'm obviously not AFK mining when I'm updating jetcans to new cans and so on. But the hulk needs to be able to jettison sooner than 2 minutes between each can. And maybe a timer on how long hulk cans last?
Amak Boma Dragon Factory 53	Posted - 2014.12.30 17:17:42 - [24] - Quote skiff no need any nerfing , its good lvl3 mission boat the yield can be reducd but the tank, damage from drones - increased by 5%
Joe Risalo State War Academy Caldari State 753	Posted - 2014.12.30 17:30:11 - [25] - Quote I think I understand where the OP is coming from. I don't think it's a matter of what the ships are capable of, but more a matter on, since they're all pretty well balanced, why does the Hulk still require substantially more time and costs to produce? If they all have even trade-offs, why do they not cost the same general amount of time and isk to produce? There's always going to be a bit a variables when it comes to production costs, but they should be more evenly balanced. Perhaps the Hulk should mine everything better, and cost slightly more to produce, and maybe even slightly longer to produce. But the key word there is slightly.... If you did this, then the profit margin would be determined by supply and demand instead of manufacturing costs and time.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2150	Posted - 2014.12.30 23:46:32 - [26] - Quote Gabriel Elarik wrote: covetor and hulk retriever are easy targets the fit does nott matter most of the time because they cant fit enough tank to survive Even a Covetor can easily fit enough tank to shrug off a T2 Catalyst in 0.5 sec space. Just being able to survive a single catalyst very significantly reduces your chance of being ganked. But Covetors and Hulks also are made to be flying in mining fleets. In a fleet you share intel with each other, and you pay attention, and when someone sees someone else being suspicious, perhaps looking for a gank, they let everyone know and you guys get safe. That reduces ganks even better than the tank. Both together will cut your ganks by over 90%. And then you can still enjoy that yield bonus. I'd fly a Covetor any day, but I would certainly fit tank. I might not fit a Procurer for tank but I probably would. Tank modules just make a bigger difference than yield modules. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
Lienzo Amanuensis 6	Posted - 2014.12.31 00:41:37 - [27] - Quote Seems like a barge full of rocks would be able to absorb tonnes of abuse. Wardec immunity of industrial ships in newbcorps is a big, big obstacle to all kinds of logical content though.
Extreme Eye of God Circle-Of-Two 18	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:03:04 - [28] - Quote Joe Risalo wrote: I think I understand where the OP is coming from. I don't think it's a matter of what the ships are capable of, but more a matter on, since they're all pretty well balanced, why does the Hulk still require substantially more time and costs to produce? If they all have even trade-offs, why do they not cost the same general amount of time and isk to produce? There's always going to be a bit a variables when it comes to production costs, but they should be more evenly balanced. Perhaps the Hulk should mine everything better, and cost slightly more to produce, and maybe even slightly longer to produce. But the key word there is slightly.... If you did this, then the profit margin would be determined by supply and demand instead of manufacturing costs and time. That's right Joe
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2152	Posted - 2014.12.31 03:09:59 - [29] - Quote I thought they have about the same costs to produce, and the lower price tag on the procurers was due to having a lot already built. But if they do indeed cost a lot less to produce, I think that should change. I don't see a problem with them costing a bit less, but overall I think the cost should be about the same. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
Extreme Eye of God Circle-Of-Two 18	Posted - 2014.12.31 14:31:42 - [30] - Quote I just checked the bpo's of skif/mack/hulk and they do have the same production times now. BUT Using the industry information it will cost 239.5M isk in materials to produce 1 hulk (BPO original with no research) and can sell it at 216M isk on market. (exclusive 6.6M production costs and exclusive 1.5M sales tax per ship) Mack bpo with no research, at the Industry tool, it costs 203M to produce a mack and it sells at 200M on market Skiff, BPO with no research, 165M to build and selling 165M on market Conclusion: Hulk 23.5M loss per produced ship Mack 3M loss per produced ship Skiff breaks even As i used bpo non researched and same market materials (Jita), market fluctuations have no role nor influence on this basic outcome. Question is why the Industry tool generates at best a break even on the Skiff and a 10% loss (excluding production costs and sales tax of 8M isk). The loss on a produced Hulk is 23.5M plus 8M production costs and tax, 31.5M per ship! There is also a huge overstock on market so i can conclude Exhumers have become way to strong and/or the penalties in Empire ganking Exhumers have become too strong?
Gabriel Elarik Celestiel Rams 1	Posted - 2014.12.31 16:00:45 - [31] - Quote or some guys dont bother with flying exumers in empire out of fear to lose a ship agains a ganking squad the result low demand
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1355	Posted - 2014.12.31 22:46:54 - [32] - Quote Gabriel Elarik wrote: in my eyes there is no difference between the ability to chose a ship with more tank or a ship with the ability to mine ice better This would be relevant in an appreciable manner if the old barges/exhumers only had a resource preference. The current set of ships allows for the extremes of tank yield or hold to be applied to gathering any resource equally. The old barges did not.
Gabriel Elarik Celestiel Rams 1	Posted - 2015.01.01 04:19:44 - [33] - Quote as i statet above i see no difference between the ability to chose a ship with more tank or a ship with the ability to mine ice better in my eyes its more logical to use a specialized ship for the job and fit it for your play style the only thing that needet change would be the tanking ability
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1356	Posted - 2015.01.01 04:53:19 - [34] - Quote Gabriel Elarik wrote: as i statet above i see no difference between the ability to chose a ship with more tank or a ship with the ability to mine ice better in my eyes its more logical to use a specialized ship for the job and fit it for your play style the only thing that needet change would be the tanking ability Actually the hold and tanking would need to change as the hulk was able to significantly exceed both of the other exhumers in that capacity. If it didn't and you cared about either of those the hulk was still the right choice for just about anything as it's yield was less but still competent compared to the other alternatives. You could add the same fitting capacities to the others, but at that point you have an ice hulk, a ore hulk and a merc hulk, which is less interesting than either the old or new barges.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2155	Posted - 2015.01.01 04:55:34 - [35] - Quote So you're saying that CCP gave us too much control over our mining experience, and that they should go back to the way it used to be, when the resource you were mining determined the cost and hit points of your ship, and one of the barges was completely useless, even for newbs? Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) "What if [climate change is] a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?" -comic on Greenmonk
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.03.24 13:01:32 - [36] - Quote Dear CCP, it has been a while since ive writen to you in forums but im going to give it one last try to get you all to see where you have gone wrong and the errors of your ways. Myself i am a hulk pilot,...I spent a lot of time getting there, going thru al the smaller ships and finally getting to the point that the hulk was the pentacle of my existence, and now, you want to take that away. THE SKIFF,....SERIOUSLY?,...have you guys been sniffing the burned shellac off the components of your computers again? Heres my take on things,...If you want to make the hulk with its cargo nurfed, im ok with that, I orca mine anyway, The MAC, well its has its place but with al the nurfs you all have done to it, you might as well go set it out in the belt and feed it to the rats. The SKIFF,....for some reason i just cant wrap my head around this,..... Just buff the tank on the HULK,...and ill be fine with the fact that the skiff mines just as much but this CRAP that the skiff has a better tank,... THIS CRAP IS WHY I LEFT EVE THE FIRST TIME,.... CCP,....my one and only suggestion to you all,... ~-=+>UNINSTALL<+=-~ OH and fix the hulk before you go I honestly think CCP has done an excellent job with the game but this is a bit over the top. just rebalance the miners,... IMO the HULK should have the best tank, medium cargo and ore hold. the MAC, a bit bigger hold and about as much tank as the hulk, These two ships are the penticle of mining IMO The skiff,...I wont say nurf the tank but a tank that is BS sized?,...yea that is BS. and with the fact that it does as much as a hulk in ore,....>shakes head< you all have some real work ahead of you,..... =-=-=-=-=-=- remember,...stay in school, get education, stay off drugs, and fix my hulk. ~-=+>xXx<+=-~
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 263	Posted - 2015.03.24 13:28:40 - [37] - Quote Gawain Edmond wrote: the hulk is still the best mining ship, pulls in more ore than the others, the other ships have things that are better than the hulk like tank and cargohold but the hulk still mines more than the others. Want to mine lots use a hulk. Want to mine afk while watching tv use a different one. Want to not get suicide ganked use the other one. Only one of those three is best at mining the others are better at not mining. ive seen the numbers and the hulk only outmines a mack but just over 100m3. even the skiff has a larger hold. also while hulkageddon started killing hulks, the following years saw anything of industry could be killed for points....you just don't see miners killing ore thieves and small fleets with the hulk anymore. "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2393	Posted - 2015.03.24 20:21:09 - [38] - Quote PJRiddick wrote: hulk was the pentacle of my existence I agreed with you that the Hulk should be big and beefy, and the Skiff should, rather than being tough, be slippery and fast. When CCP tiericided barges, they approached them with the idea that all barges are medium ships, and that's part of the problem--in yours and my eyes anyway. One advantage, however, is that the Hulk doesn't cost much more than a Skiff. If the Skiff were destroyer sized and the Hulk battleship-sized, you'd be looking at a 75 mil Skiff and a bil+ hulk. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Juan Mileghere Incident Command Southern Star Dominion 8	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:18:47 - [39] - Quote Extreme wrote: When CCP, 2.5 years ago, made new roles for Skiff, Mack and Hulk they "forgot" to take a look at the build requierements/ the total cost of build vs time to build vs market demand vs profit per ship. This is really unbalanced and should be reviewed by CCP. The Hulk cost way more to build, takes way longer to build but meanwhile there is way less market demand vs the Mack. You can produce 50 Macks a month vs 21 Hulks a month. Profit for a Mack is around 70M isk vs 8M isk for a Hulk. So even if the mining / cargo outcome is ok to some, CCP really have to look over the cost to build/ time to build. 8M profit for a Hulk while only 21 can be produced a month vs a Mack 70M profit while able to produce 50 and then also take into notice the number of sales per day 50 hulks vs 200 Macks tells me there is something broken here! Stop building Hulks then that just sounds like supply is WAY higher than demand
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 3587	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:25:26 - [40] - Quote The only change I would like to see is for all the ore holds to be modified so as to carry ice without having empty space left over. Adjust them up, down, sideways or whatever, just so that there isn't an extra 1k m3 or 500 m3 or even 1 m3.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1987	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:37:20 - [41] - Quote Since this is a necro'ed discussion again.... The correct solution is actually to give one of the barges Cruiser or BC numbers of slots (14 or 17 for the T1's) depending on if you want to call them Cruiser or BC size. Make a module (which has a stacking penalty or fixed bonus only) which adds to ore hold (could be cargo extenders which should have stacking penalty anyway). And then give it cruiser/bc level base EHP & PG/CPU. Put a hard cap on the strip miners that can be fitted just like Command Links. (Could even allow Command processors to increase this if you really wanted ala utterly untanked 5 strip miners). And then turn the other two barges into alternative Ore ships. Like the often demanded Ore Transport and Ore Combat ship. Then players actually would have to make serious choices fitting their barges. Currently there is so much in the base stats and so few fitting slots & so little PG/CPU that you can't make any meaningful choices other than picking a hull. Having the majority of the stats be in the modules makes choices more meaningful and removes this silly trinary balancing that is going on.
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.03.30 18:41:36 - [42] - Quote Regardless of all the chatter, the skiff right now is top dog in the fight, it mines as well as the hulk, and has 3 times the tank, The mac is slower and has somewhat of a better hold but then theres the hulk,..WTF,...it has crap for a tank, and crap for a hold. now heres the punch line to the joke, The skiff is first in the skills tree,...and easier to get, I think. I really didnt look at the skills, since i can fly a hulk, and the skiff is in that tree family, im assuming the skill set is not as long to get the skiff. If you were to do anything, heres how i would do it SKIFF cut the mining bonuses by about 30%, tank by about half Mac The bonuses are good for the mining amount, Tank is good, ide like to see it tank a bit better HULK, Give it the tank that the skiff has, leave the mining amount as is, and double its hold. IF YOUR WORRIED ABOUT MACROS,...move the belts every day on respawn,...500KM,...thats is all it will take. You all are doing it to the ice,...Just dont have the belts have to be scanned,...just move them a bit every day,..that should throw a wrench in the works for macros. and as far as gankers go, just flying a hulk is just asking for a gank.....IMO
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light 112	Posted - 2015.03.30 19:27:02 - [43] - Quote PJRiddick wrote: it mines as well as the hulk Enough of these lies: Max skill, max-yield-fitted comparison (base # of strip miners * mining barge bonus * exhumer bonus * role bonus * MLU2 bonus) Skiff: 1 * (1/(1-50.02)) (1/(1-50.02)) (1+1.50) * (1.09 ^ 3) = 3.997 effective strip miners. Mackinaw: 2 * (1/(1-50.02)) (1/(1-50.02)) (1+0.25) * (1.09 ^ 3) = 3.997 effective strip miners. Hulk: 3 * (1/(1-50.04)) (1/(1-50.03)) (1+0.00) * (1.09 ^ 2) = 5.242 effective strip miners. Hulks have a yield that is 31.14% better than that of Skiffs or Mackinaws. And that's fine. Until all are free...
Maldiro Selkurk CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X 218	Posted - 2015.03.30 23:17:42 - [44] - Quote Extreme wrote: When CCP, 2.5 years ago, made new roles for Skiff, Mack and Hulk they "forgot" to take a look at the build requierements/ the total cost of build vs time to build vs market demand vs profit per ship. This is really unbalanced and should be reviewed by CCP. The Hulk cost way more to build, takes way longer to build but meanwhile there is way less market demand vs the Mack. You can produce 50 Macks a month vs 21 Hulks a month. Profit for a Mack is around 70M isk vs 8M isk for a Hulk. So even if the mining / cargo outcome is ok to some, CCP really have to look over the cost to build/ time to build. 8M profit for a Hulk while only 21 can be produced a month vs a Mack 70M profit while able to produce 50 and then also take into notice the number of sales per day 50 hulks vs 200 Macks tells me there is something broken here! CCP doesnt need to change anything. You find low profits building hulks, dont build them. If many industrialists feel as you do and stop building them the price will rise until industrialists again see profits they like and start making them again. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 259	Posted - 2015.03.30 23:35:28 - [45] - Quote The stupidity and ignorance of this post hurts my brain...
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:36:35 - [46] - Quote Kueyen wrote: PJRiddick wrote: it mines as well as the hulk Enough of these lies: Max skill, max-yield-fitted comparison (base # of strip miners * mining barge bonus * exhumer bonus * role bonus * MLU2 bonus) Skiff: 1 * (1/(1-50.02)) (1/(1-50.02)) (1+1.50) * (1.09 ^ 3) = 3.997 effective strip miners. Mackinaw: 2 * (1/(1-50.02)) (1/(1-50.02)) (1+0.25) * (1.09 ^ 3) = 3.997 effective strip miners. Hulk: 3 * (1/(1-50.04)) (1/(1-50.03)) (1+0.00) * (1.09 ^ 2) = 5.242 effective strip miners. Hulks have a yield that is 31.14% better than that of Skiffs or Mackinaws. And that's fine. =-=-=- Its not the output of the hulk VS the SKIFF that im disputing, its the tank. Heres my ***, When im in belt, and 3 CATS can come in on me and gank me before they can get concorded,VS a SKIFF with a max tank and strip II running crystals, and gankers wont even look at you because they know that they are not going to break you before CONCORD has them for lunch,...**, The SKIFF has more tank or at least as much tank as the ORCA!,...now how balanced is that? Thats the point of this argument. In my book, the HULK being the KING of the MINERS, BIG BAD HULK, should have the tank of the skiff, and the skiff, the tank of the Hulk, as it sits NOW! The way it is now, Is just,...just,...WRONG I say to CCP again,..~-=+>UNINSTALL<+=-~
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:41:11 - [47] - Quote OH and one more thing before i go,. With the Skiff, Im getting as much out of the skiff with T-II crystals and ONE strip as i did with 3 T-II strips and crystals on the hulk. So what gives with that then? And yet the tank on the skiff is as much as the orca or a BS,... Balancing is just an art form, but to the layman, Its all smoke and mirrors. ~-=+>xXx<+=-~ Fly safe and eat your vegetables
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2428	Posted - 2015.04.06 16:51:37 - [48] - Quote does the word 'balance' just pass over your head riddick? EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
LuckyQuarter Lucky Galactic Expeditions 37	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:10:05 - [49] - Quote Skiff sacrifices a lot in order to get its tank. Only 1 strip miner...missed cycles make it much slower. It doesn't have the yield bonuses of the hulk either. Skiff is supposed to be the exhumer with average mining rate, average ore hold, and great tank. Mac has big ore hold, average mining rate, and average tank. Hulk has excellent mining rate, small ore hold, and small tank. I'd be fine with giving the hulk a bigger ore hold or slightly faster mining rate, but otherwise I think the ships are balanced pretty well. If there is an issue, it is that there isn't a growth plan for miners past the hulk....I'd like to see a BS or t3 type miner...and, the prospect doesn't count!
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.06 17:53:24 - [50] - Quote now theres an idea,..T-III miners!,.. Bonuses in Low sec! CCP,...are you listening!
Tiddle Jr Galvanized Inc. 100	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:10:53 - [51] - Quote Extreme wrote: When CCP, 2.5 years ago, made new roles for Skiff, Mack and Hulk they "forgot" to take a look at the build requierements/ the total cost of build vs time to build vs market demand vs profit per ship. This is really unbalanced and should be reviewed by CCP. The Hulk cost way more to build, takes way longer to build but meanwhile there is way less market demand vs the Mack. You can produce 50 Macks a month vs 21 Hulks a month. Profit for a Mack is around 70M isk vs 8M isk for a Hulk. So even if the mining / cargo outcome is ok to some, CCP really have to look over the cost to build/ time to build. 8M profit for a Hulk while only 21 can be produced a month vs a Mack 70M profit while able to produce 50 and then also take into notice the number of sales per day 50 hulks vs 200 Macks tells me there is something broken here! I'm not even sure if someone biulding t2 mining barges from blanket bpo. So your math on build cost is not correct.
Tiddle Jr Galvanized Inc. 100	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:14:08 - [52] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Hulk is king of the miners. They just require you to be at the computer and use and orca and/or other support to haul. Mack just became popular because of the uberoreholds and the buffed tank which made them better for AFK miners. If anything, the SKIFF needs to be fixed and have its yield reduced. To have good yield AND battleship tank AND drone bonus is just bad design that sends the wrong message to its 'entitled' pilots. Noooes.. The idea was that all barges and exhumers would mine more or less the same amount of ore per time, so you wouldn't be "yield punished" by choosing one over the over three. If anything we would need a gas harvester module. The purpose of the rebalance in regard of Hulk and Covetor make those main choice for mining gangs with maxed yield but as a trade of that both have smallest ore hold.
Tiddle Jr Galvanized Inc. 100	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:18:39 - [53] - Quote And regarding the hulkageddon event, from the very specific show not officially scheduled but very well known and expected by community it sadly turned into a routine operations when those New Order and later CODE appeared in masses.
admiral root Red Galaxy 2660	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:29:03 - [54] - Quote PJRiddick wrote: In my book, the HULK being the KING of the MINERS, BIG BAD HULK, should have the tank of the skiff, and the skiff, the tank of the Hulk, as it sits NOW! At which point the yields would also need to be swapped, so what exactly is the point? No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff \| No-one hates you, none of us care enough for that. A recent survey of applicants to CODE. corporations showed that 100% accepted James 315 as their saviour. You can't argue with facts.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2229	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:50:18 - [55] - Quote Celthric Kanerian wrote: The stupidity and ignorance of this post hurts my brain... If it makes you feel any better it's probably intentional
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2003	Posted - 2015.04.07 00:53:08 - [56] - Quote Same as always, get rid of two of the barges, turn them into a hauler and a combat cruiser for ORE. And give the third barge REAL fittings, like PG & CPU of a Cruiser or BC, and the same number of slots. Then let fittings decide everything rather than hard baked stats.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2414	Posted - 2015.04.07 04:49:29 - [57] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Since this is a necro'ed discussion again.... The correct solution is actually to give one of the barges Cruiser or BC numbers of slots (14 or 17 for the T1's) depending on if you want to call them Cruiser or BC size. Make a module (which has a stacking penalty or fixed bonus only) which adds to ore hold (could be cargo extenders which should have stacking penalty anyway). And then give it cruiser/bc level base EHP & PG/CPU. Put a hard cap on the strip miners that can be fitted just like Command Links. (Could even allow Command processors to increase this if you really wanted ala utterly untanked 5 strip miners). And then turn the other two barges into alternative Ore ships. Like the often demanded Ore Transport and Ore Combat ship. Then players actually would have to make serious choices fitting their barges. Currently there is so much in the base stats and so few fitting slots & so little PG/CPU that you can't make any meaningful choices other than picking a hull. Having the majority of the stats be in the modules makes choices more meaningful and removes this silly trinary balancing that is going on. Nevyn Auscent wrote: Same as always, get rid of two of the barges, turn them into a hauler and a combat cruiser for ORE. And give the third barge REAL fittings, like PG & CPU of a Cruiser or BC, and the same number of slots. Then let fittings decide everything rather than hard baked stats. If I didn't know better, I'd say you were me. CCP should hire us to fix this mess. Nevyn Auscent wrote: Then let fittings decide everything rather than hard baked stats. It's so obvious, yet they can't seem to see it. Or perhaps the problem is that they are catering to simple folk who can't be bothered to fit a ship, so they require hard-coded stats with almost no wiggle room so they can't accidentally do it wrong. Retrievers with too much EHP to be suicide ganked by a catalyst when they don't have any modules installed? Come on, seriously. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2007	Posted - 2015.04.07 06:14:31 - [58] - Quote Well. Nothing says 1 catalyst is the level to balance at to be fair. It's just people got used to that being the level for so long that when it changed to need two it felt odd. But you need two to gang most bc's and all bs also. At least. So it depends what class of ship CCP consider a barge to be size equivalent to. But it's not that miners can't handle fittings. A lot of people asked for real fittings when they got changed also. Just because there were three barges they kept three barges. To avoid a hugely messy bpo and hull change over.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2414	Posted - 2015.04.07 06:26:41 - [59] - Quote My point was more that its EHP with a perfect tank fitting is barely higher than its base EHP. The damage control module makes a lot more difference than everything else put together. I don't think a catalyst should be able to gank a properly-tanked barge, not by any stretch. It's way too cheap. But a properly fit catalyst should be able to take apart an undefended cruiser of any sort, as they are a rather high damage ship. If it had proper fitting room and a catalyst couldn't take it out undefended, it might take more than two tornadoes to kill it with a proper tank. Now the gank ships begin to cost a lot more than the target. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2008	Posted - 2015.04.07 06:51:35 - [60] - Quote Yea. Agree on the fittings barely making a difference being a huge issue.
Xe'Cara'eos A Big Enough Lever 238	Posted - 2015.04.07 09:33:37 - [61] - Quote did exhumers ever get their production costs rebalanced as part of their round of teiricide? For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2034	Posted - 2015.04.07 10:02:43 - [62] - Quote Extreme wrote: The hulk should had been the number 1 miner, at least it still is when you see the total costs for construction parts, but it got badly nerfed by poor cargohold. So for a few years now the Mackinaw has become the most populair miningship just because the cargohold is better and way cheaper to build and way nicer profits to make. But Mackageddon? Seriously, the Hulk should get some love from CCP and so do the 'Hulka Gankers' CCP make Hulkageddon possible again, fix what you broke 2.5 years ago! /Extreme Extreme wrote: I just checked the bpo's of skif/mack/hulk and they do have the same production times now. BUT Using the industry information it will cost 239.5M isk in materials to produce 1 hulk (BPO original with no research) and can sell it at 216M isk on market. (exclusive 6.6M production costs and exclusive 1.5M sales tax per ship) Mack bpo with no research, at the Industry tool, it costs 203M to produce a mack and it sells at 200M on market Skiff, BPO with no research, 165M to build and selling 165M on market Conclusion: Hulk 23.5M loss per produced ship Mack 3M loss per produced ship Skiff breaks even As i used bpo non researched and same market materials (Jita), market fluctuations have no role nor influence on this basic outcome. Question is why the Industry tool generates at best a break even on the Skiff and a 10% loss (excluding production costs and sales tax of 8M isk). The loss on a produced Hulk is 23.5M plus 8M production costs and tax, 31.5M per ship! There is also a huge overstock on market so i can conclude Exhumers have become way to strong and/or the penalties in Empire ganking Exhumers have become too strong? hulks are NOT meatn to mine alone. They are meant to mine in large fleets and groups where you jet can your stuff and haulers collect it. Yup.. that means OUTSIDE HIGH SEC. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2414	Posted - 2015.04.07 10:59:10 - [63] - Quote Xe'Cara'eos wrote: did exhumers ever get their production costs rebalanced as part of their round of teiricide? Yes they did, but it takes a long time for the market to fully catch up. Years, yes, years. That initial change you may see on the graphs is a result of speculation by the ones who hold large amounts of market shares, giving the impression that it will even out quickly when in reality they are simply looking ahead to take advantage of the changes. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2009	Posted - 2015.04.07 11:00:27 - [64] - Quote Actually you can group mine in high sec just fine also. Outside highsec hulks are at even more risk unless you have massive blue space to spot people coming because 5 seconds and they blow up. While a fleet of Skiffs might actually last long enough to support, and skiffs have much more dangerous drones on their own also. So outside of blue ball space you aren't going to see hulk fleets either.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2414	Posted - 2015.04.07 11:51:18 - [65] - Quote It's more balanced now that the other barge yields were nerfed, but I still think Covetor and Hulk yields need a buff to make them more significant. It's almost there. Just change those 3% yield bonuses to 5% and you're golden. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2010	Posted - 2015.04.07 12:07:12 - [66] - Quote Try just giving Hulks the same ore hold as the Skiff, Covetors the same as the Proc. I think at that point you would see them used in a more balanced fashion also. As the ore hold would still be less than the Mack, but no longer the utter worst of the three and not able to hold 2 cycles with boosts.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2414	Posted - 2015.04.07 12:24:23 - [67] - Quote I'd like to see pilots be able to shunt the ore automatically into a jettison canister. You wouldn't have to click every three minutes, but you'd still need some support for getting the ore back home, and you're also electing to put it in danger if there isn't someone nearby to collect it for you. Now you could run and get an industrial once it fills up, and the time spent in the industrial will significantly reduce the profit margin over the Mackinaw/Retriever without eliminating it. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.14 18:00:00 - [68] - Quote [quote=Reaver Glitterstim]My point was more that its EHP with a perfect tank fitting is barely higher than its base EHP. The damage control module makes a lot more difference than everything else put together. I don't think a catalyst should be able to gank a properly-tanked barge, not by any stretch. YOU, MY FRIEND GET A COOKIE. You are so correct, one CAT should not ever be able to gank a hulk, the problem is they come at you, 3,..4 and the past time i got poped, 5 in the bunch. and yes i had a decent tank on my Hulk, they just had more dps,...but thats not where the problem lies My issue here is that the skiff is the first in the tree of mining, give it a serious tank but not to outmine the hulk With my skills, i do just as good in the skiff as i do in the hulk, and honestly, that really ticks me off. AND to beet all, the skiff has a better tank? SERIOUSLY? The skiff is faster to warp, The skiff has a bigger hold, The skiff has as good as if not better output than the Hulk OR the Mac. AND it has a BIGGER/BETTER tank,.. So who was it that was drinking Islandic VODKA the night they thought this up,.. SERIOUSLY! Answer me this, with the way that the mining barges are now, WHY GO PAST THE SKIFF? I thought that the further up the tree of barges the better the barge is? My outputs Hulk = 29 pr 89 sec SKIFF 12 or there abouts pr 98 sec,... Im getting more per cycle but just a little longer cycle Im confused,.... My brain hurts.
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.14 18:03:57 - [69] - Quote Reaver Glitterstim wrote: It's more balanced now that the other barge yields were nerfed, but I still think Covetor and Hulk yields need a buff to make them more significant. It's almost there. Just change those 3% yield bonuses to 5% and you're golden. im good with the yields of the hulk,.I just want a better tank.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2032	Posted - 2015.04.14 19:57:25 - [70] - Quote PJRiddick wrote: My issue here is that the skiff is the first in the tree of mining, give it a serious tank but not to outmine the hulk You sir, have not bothered looking at the ship requirements since tiericide happened. All of them now have the same requirements, Skiff is not first on the tree, they are all equal but different. I still maintain they should be trimmed down to just a single barge with real fittings, and repurpose the other two hulls to a combat cruiser & hauler that can still fit a strip miner or two but no mining bonuses, so your hauler sits there mining a bit rather than wasted time. And your escort can also contribute to ore while waiting for combat. I.E. Repurpose Procurer to match Navy Vexor Bonuses, but no gun slots (To avoid model redesign, if model redesign is possible I'd add unbonused missile/gun hardpoints), Can still fit one strip miner but no bonuses, maybe only 100 Drone Bandwidth or something. Very small ore hold. Repurpose Retriever to match the Gal ore hauler, but with real slot numbers (matching cruiser or even BC depending on final size). Can fit 2 strip miners but no bonuses towards them. And at least 1 utility high above & beyond the strip miners. Leave drone capability intact for defence but no guns at all. Covetor then gets treated as if it were a Cruiser or BC (My preference goes towards treating Barges as BC's so they are bigger lumbering vessels that feel appropriate for chewing through ore). Slots, PG/CPU & base EHP per Cruisers. Ore Hold to match current Proc hold. New stacking penalised module to increase ore hold or cargo expansions now stacking penalise and affect ore hold also. 3 Strip Miners, 4/5 highslots, new 'Mining Processor' that works like Command Processor but lets you fit an additional strip miner. This then lets you think about what you really want to fit on your Barges, do you go for 5 strip miners but sacrifice all your CPU to do this (Ala 6 link T3's) so have utterly no tank. Do you take a Moderate balance in the middle with prop mods, do you go dual buffer tank for brick. Etc. Just as reference for the gankers whining that 'I'm just wanting to Buff EHP' an untanked Cyclone has 20k EHP vs Omni, & basically identical 20k vs blasters. Which should be achievable by a max skill solo catalyst in a 0.5 system. Proc's start at 26k and go up from there with fittings. You could insist that they only count as cruisers, but then they get Cruiser align times, speed & sig bonuses compared to BC's, making them harder to catch. But having only 8kish EHP unfitted. If they get real fittings and opportunities, I'm not fussed either way, the current problem is the lack of options when you only have 3-4 slots to even think about on the T1's, of which at least 1 has to be an MLU for any real mining ability (How many of you make a DPS fit with no DPS enhancing mods of any sort after all), and no PG or CPU to put anything decent into those slots also.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2417	Posted - 2015.04.15 02:38:12 - [71] - Quote PJRiddick wrote: im good with the yields of the hulk,.I just want a better tank. You said earlier that you're getting similar yields on a Skiff, if I'm understanding you correctly. I assume you mean if you fit the Skiff for max yield and the Hulk for max tank, then they have about the same yield but Skiff gets a bigger hold and much MUCH better tank. This is my problem. People are willing to accept small marginal improvements but it doesn't mean it's fair. Given the way the tradeoff works in terms of tank vs. yield, the Hulk and Covetor should have a larger margin in yield even if their tank were improved. But I'm with Nevyn in thinking the base HP is fine on the barges (and should be nerfed on the Procurer/Skiff), and that they should be given more slots and powergrid/CPU so the player can either fit tank modules or other modules as they choose. Nevyn Auscent wrote: I.E. Repurpose Procurer to match Navy Vexor Bonuses, but no gun slots (To avoid model redesign, if model redesign is possible I'd add unbonused missile/gun hardpoints), Can still fit one strip miner but no bonuses, maybe only 100 Drone Bandwidth or something. Very small ore hold. I'm thinking a nice setup would be 5 high slots (much like a combat cruiser), with innate ability to fit one strip miner, and 2 launcher hardpoints. 4 mid slots and 4 low slots, with a lowish amount of powergrid, like 300mw. Two popular setups maybe: 1.) 1 strip miner, 2 RLMLs, probe launcher, cloaking device 2.) 2 strip miners, 2 RLMLs, probe launcher, command processor in mid slot It would have much higher base shield HP than armor. This combined with the low powergrid (and CPU not very high) would manage a few balance points: 1.) low powergrid makes HP-increasing modules less available, skewing the balance in favor of shield tanking 1.a) since shield tanking is easier to fit, command processors are more likely to cost defense whereas MLUs are mostly going to cost cargo space or evasiveness 2.) RLMLs preferrable to save powergrid which reduces sustained combat viability while improving its ability to defend itself in the occasional gank 3.) more than one command processor will not be particularly viable as it will cost too much in tank and use up a lot of powergrid and most of the CPU I already think there should be a special type of ore pockets you have to scan down which would contain small asteroids of richer ore, spread apart enough to make normal barges useless in there. This would be useful to Ventures and Prospects. But some of these could perhaps have asteroids a bit larger and a bit closer together in exchange for some rats you must fight off. These pockets would be more ideal for Procurers and Skiffs, but still useful for the more daring Venture or Prospect pilots. The richer ores will improve the value of a single haul--if the abundant asteroids in highsec are sufficiently marginalized into limited mineral yields, and if the richer ore types (+5% and +10% yield) are improved to make a larger margin, then it could become viable to spent a significant amount of time hunting for a small ore haul. This would help bridge the gap between mining and exploration, and expand the versatility of the mining profession. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2036	Posted - 2015.04.15 03:03:58 - [72] - Quote I was specifically meaning Cruiser PG, so take oh..... a Moa as the base PG/CPU. Being shield tanked also. So that they can actually fit a full set of cruiser fittings. Like, oh, Prop mods, they can actually use shield extenders or plates if they want to brick tank, etc. Rather than continuing the current line of gimped fitting thinking. The best analogy for EVE in terms of historical time period is actually the Spanish treasure galleons, not the super tankers of today. The Spanish sailed in an era of true piracy, and often had more guns and heavier hull than the pirates attacking them, despite hauling massive cargo's in their ships. They were just slow to manoeuvre so could be out sailed, or a pack of pirates might attack a single galleon.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2417	Posted - 2015.04.15 05:17:09 - [73] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: So that they can actually fit a full set of cruiser fittings. Like, oh, Prop mods, they can actually use shield extenders or plates if they want to brick tank, etc. Rather than continuing the current line of gimped fitting thinking. Oh I know, but remember that after you put guns on your cruiser, most of the powergrid is already gone. If it was given 400mw powergrid, it could easily fit 2 launchers, a MWD, and a command processor. The strip miners only take 1mw. Now it would struggle to fit on a 1600mm armor plate but so do other cruisers, without gimping their weapons anyway. At 300mw, it needs to be a bit more cautious with powergrid expenditure. It can fit a 200mm armor plate, but a large shield extender is a lot more forgiving. I'm not suggesting putting its fitting anywhere near as limited as the Procurer or Skiff are currently, with 45mw/50mw of powergrid. 300mw is very much within the cruiser range, just on the low end. We'll chalk that up to it being an industrial ship, probably has its hull more focused on carrying capacity than power routing capacity. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Eve Solecist Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1902	Posted - 2015.04.15 05:20:07 - [74] - Quote Hulk ... smash? This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others .... "I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon Ron Gilbert made me cry.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2256	Posted - 2015.04.15 05:23:50 - [75] - Quote please let this thread die, and for good.
PJRiddick CherryHill 6	Posted - 2015.04.16 13:22:13 - [76] - Quote ~-=+>shakes head<+=-~
Kiddoomer ScrewWork Inc. 29	Posted - 2015.04.16 13:39:08 - [77] - Quote I don't want to see weapons on any barge nor exhumer, but a drone damage and hitpoints (maybe drone yield) bonus would be far better for defensive capabilities of mackinaw and hulk (ORE is a "pirate" Gallente faction after all, trying to put missiles in the picture seems silly). And being able to put large shield extender without fitting module on hulk or mackinaw (and skiff too !) is something I don't like, a damage control and active/passive shield resistance is all these ships need IMO. About roles of the three sizes, I would really like way more emphasis on the player brain to "make" his/her own mining ship, with modules or subsystem for ore hold, cpu/pg or number of strip miners, with each bigger ship size having a larger customization space. A simple survey scanner proposal : post
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2425	Posted - 2015.04.16 21:15:14 - [78] - Quote Kiddoomer wrote: (ORE is a "pirate" Gallente faction after all, trying to put missiles in the picture seems silly). Mercenaries are known to fly Caldari hulls and fit lasers to them. There's no reason a pirate faction needs to be held to the same old limited views as the Navy of the faction they ran away from. If anything, it makes sense for a pirate faction to cover obvious flaws in the Navy's design philosophy. Missiles would work well with mining barges, if they were to try to fit weapon systems in the high slots. They work well with the fitting space available, too, being cheaper on powergrid and costing more CPU instead. Why do you feel that the barges should not be able to fit a large shield extender, if you do feel they should have more fitting options than current? It's not like they'll suddenly get too much EHP. Their base HP should be nerfed to be more like combat ships of their size, and then giving them powergrid and fitting slots will not make them overpowered but will instead make fitting them yield more possible options, and put the power in the player's hands. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2050	Posted - 2015.04.17 00:56:31 - [79] - Quote Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Oh I know, but remember that after you put guns on your cruiser, most of the powergrid is already gone. If it was given 400mw powergrid, it could easily fit 2 launchers, a MWD, and a command processor. The strip miners only take 1mw. Now it would struggle to fit on a 1600mm armor plate but so do other cruisers, without gimping their weapons anyway. At 300mw, it needs to be a bit more cautious with powergrid expenditure. It can fit a 200mm armor plate, but a large shield extender is a lot more forgiving. I'm not suggesting putting its fitting anywhere near as limited as the Procurer or Skiff are currently, with 45mw/50mw of powergrid. 300mw is very much within the cruiser range, just on the low end. We'll chalk that up to it being an industrial ship, probably has its hull more focused on carrying capacity than power routing capacity. Yet Vexors & Ishtars don't suddenly have half the PG of other ships despite the fact they don't have to fit guns as drone ships. If you give them real PG they get real fitting options. You might also give Strip Miners some PG costs along side I suppose, but it also allows for a greater variety of 'surprise, a full rack of neut' fits. Rather than continuing to artifically restrict them.
Kiddoomer ScrewWork Inc. 29	Posted - 2015.04.17 10:37:06 - [80] - Quote Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Kiddoomer wrote: (ORE is a "pirate" Gallente faction after all, trying to put missiles in the picture seems silly). Mercenaries are known to fly Caldari hulls and fit lasers to them. There's no reason a pirate faction needs to be held to the same old limited views as the Navy of the faction they ran away from. If anything, it makes sense for a pirate faction to cover obvious flaws in the Navy's design philosophy. Missiles would work well with mining barges, if they were to try to fit weapon systems in the high slots. They work well with the fitting space available, too, being cheaper on powergrid and costing more CPU instead. Fair point, but missile need space in cargohold, space already used by mining crystals. But yes, lasers could be cool too I guess (but maybe the cap needed by both strip miner and lasers would be too much without a cap buff). Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Why do you feel that the barges should not be able to fit a large shield extender, if you do feel they should have more fitting options than current? It's not like they'll suddenly get too much EHP. Their base HP should be nerfed to be more like combat ships of their size, and then giving them powergrid and fitting slots will not make them overpowered but will instead make fitting them yield more possible options, and put the power in the player's hands. Large shield extender add a lot of ehp to a cruiser ship, and is a no-brainer for passive tank, since ganker go for the dps spike to the face to be able to gank before Concord comes. Resistances imo need more thinking (thermal+kin or rat (nullsec)). But if strip miners start to consume PG then I'm totally fine with slightly buffing PG by mining barge modules or native to give more fitting options to the player. A simple survey scanner proposal : post

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.