EVE Search - What do you think CCP is planning for the barge rework?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Science and Industry

What do you think CCP is planning for the barge rework?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Eva Ronuken Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2016.06.21 21:44:16 - [1] - Quote So, unfortunately the proposed mining/barge rework was moved from summer to fall. We know that the rorqual is getting flights of mining "fighters" and some other things that will give it a fresh new role. But CCP is also planning on tweaking the barges to "to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field." I'm trying to think of ways that would bring mining more inline with the income that the rest of the other professions put out, but I can't think of anything, seeing how ores and mineral prices are tied to the market, and increasing barge efficiency just devalues minerals and keeps income the same. considering that mining is pretty much the butt of jokes in this game and new players are warned against "falling for the mining meme" I'm curious to what they have planned, or if it at all touches on the risk vs reward of mining.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 67	Posted - 2016.06.21 23:46:39 - [2] - Quote in my observation.. CCP hates it when one particular ship dominates in an area for too long... almost everyone is useing SKIFFS that i see.. everywere i go..i see skiffs. and a smattering of makinaws (or the T1 versions of those ships)... almost no hulks simple question, what do you do to bring it more evenly ballanced its all in the Tank for me.... i dont care if the hulk could mine 10x more then the skiff, i dont care if the makinaw could hold 10x more then the skiff... its all about tank tank tank and more tank... for me that is i wont even consider a mak or hulk unless its got a lot more tank
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 2569	Posted - 2016.06.22 10:25:28 - [3] - Quote Yeah, at least in highsec there are too many Procurers/Skiffs. I guess that the Skiff will have its yield cut, or the other two ships will have their yield raised (or both). Alternatively they might drop the tank of the Skiff, but I see that as less likely. I was hoping there might be whole new types of mining being added with the Drilling Platforms that might result in new sub-specializations for barges/exhumers. Given how little we have heard though, I am now just betting on a slight rebalance of numbers to make the less-tanky ships more attractive. Perhaps we will know more after the o7 show on Sunday. Why Do They Gank?
Knitram Relik Running With Railguns 58	Posted - 2016.06.22 11:10:43 - [4] - Quote All the Skiffs in hi-sec is a result of the miner ganking that's been in vogue the past few years. My thoughts are as follows for buffs/nerfs: Hulks: A little more tank and a reduction in the ORE mined bonus Macks: Bigger hold, less tank. Skiffs: Smaller hold. Like 25 % reduction. Just my 1/50th of a dollar. I await people telling me I'm wrong and/or an idiot.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 67	Posted - 2016.06.22 11:51:17 - [5] - Quote we know the gankers will scream at any buffing of the tank on any of the ships i am guessing -Skiff / Proc - change 5% shield hp bonus per level to 4% shield bonus hp per level ( goes from 25% to 20% at max skill) change drone damage bonus from 50% to 33% , possibly remove one of the low power slots from the skiff as well -Hulk/Covetor/Retriver/Mak - possibly reballance CPU/PG to fit a bit more tank dont think they will tweek with any of the yield bonus's.. as the entire economy would get screwed with up or down as it stands... a MAX YIELD skiff.. mines more and has more tank then any of the others that are fit for MAX TANK (or the numbers of the yield are so close as to not even be worth looking at any other ship besides the skiff)
Sunwell Jaeger Biotech 0	Posted - 2016.06.22 12:04:22 - [6] - Quote Knitram Relik wrote: All the Skiffs in hi-sec is a result of the miner ganking that's been in vogue the past few years. My thoughts are as follows for buffs/nerfs: Hulks: A little more tank and a reduction in the ORE mined bonus Macks: Bigger hold, less tank. Skiffs: Smaller hold. Like 25 % reduction. Just my 1/50th of a dollar. I await people telling me I'm wrong and/or an idiot. I'll have to agree here. A lot of the HS mining is done AFK - reduce the hold on the skiff and people will be forced to pay more attention.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 67	Posted - 2016.06.22 12:13:53 - [7] - Quote nah, have to disagree on the afk mining rocks going poof too fast with a well skilled skiff... i cant even get up to refresh my coffee in the morning during a bit of roid mining befor off to do IRL stuff i dont see as much AFK mining as used to be back in the day.. perhaps ice miners in maks maybe, but the changes to cycle times and size of ice ect.. yea, you gotta be at keyboard for the most part for any ship except the makinaw doing ice mining for me, it will always come down to tank.. dont care what ship it is if they nurf the skiff tank to hell and back again... i will mine roids with a Rokh or some other battleship instead (its been done in the past)
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 0	Posted - 2016.06.22 13:33:33 - [8] - Quote From recent efforts at mining ore in nullsec (Providence): The Hulk is in a good spot as king of yield, but at the risk of having to leave a can behind when reds show up. The ore hold could use a little increase so it reliably holds two cycles with implants and/or mining drones. Mackinaw is good when there is more red traffic in the neighborhood. Yield is the same as a skiff and no need to mine into cans. Although I see many people mining in Skiffs, for me it doesn't work. In theory a couple of skiffs could deal very well with a lone confessor or interceptor. In practice there are more hotdroppers in cloaky nullified T3s than solo small ships, making the Mackinaw the logical choice. The Skiff rules for Mercoxit mining as it fits 3 mining upgrades plus the Mercoxit rig. Thanks to processor rigs it is possible to fly a max yield, decent tank fit on a Hulk or Mack even with CPU Management IV. In the ideal case there would be an option to have 3 flights of drones: mining drones, light drones for PvP and medium drones vs belt rats. The Skiff already has a 100 m3 dronebay while the Hulk and Mack have 50 m3. Perhaps increase the dronebay of the Mack to 75 m3 while keeping the Hulk at 50 m3 so max yield comes at a cost.
Do Little Virgin Plc Evictus. 300	Posted - 2016.06.22 15:46:27 - [9] - Quote Skiff/Procurer are the rational choice in highsec - the substantial tank means they are the least likely to be chosen as a gank target and they are fast enough that you are giving up relatively little yield compared to a Mackinaw/Retriever if there is a station/POS/Citadel nearby where you can unload. In nullsec, the extra tank is little help against a hot drop fleet - fly a T1 barge and insure it. Eve updates talks about "tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field". No mention of nerfs. With the new structures and capital rebalance demand for minerals seems to be increasing, I would expect CCP might want to attract more players to the profession
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 67	Posted - 2016.06.22 17:38:58 - [10] - Quote Do Little wrote: Eve updates talks about "tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field". No mention of nerfs. With the new structures and capital rebalance demand for minerals seems to be increasing, I would expect CCP might want to attract more players to the profession that does seem logical has been a massive increase in the demand with not much increase in the supply need to bleed off the excess stock piles of minerals befor we see those numbers affect the market

Jasmine Cheryu Perkone Caldari State 44	Posted - 2016.06.24 00:57:46 - [11] - Quote "tweaks to improve their functionality and efficiency in the field" I do hope that the changes to efficiency reduce the yield and cycle time appropriately, in order to improve efficiency. I hate mining an asteroid that has.. i duno.. 10 units of ore.. when a full cycle will give me 4000 units. It's just wasting time, and decreasing the yield and decreasing the cycle time (but keeping the yield/cycle time as a constant) will actually improve efficiency THAT ORE... (see what I did there? ) I would like to see.. that when you activate your mining lasers, they dont have a cycle, but just activate like a cloak module does, and it just deposits ore quickly in your ore hold.. and you can just watch the number go up, until the asteroid pops Thats my opinion (and hopes) for the efficiency improvements
Eva Ronuken Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2016.06.24 02:08:49 - [12] - Quote Jasmine Cheryu wrote: I would like to see.. that when you activate your mining lasers, they dont have a cycle, but just activate like a cloak module does, and it just deposits ore quickly in your ore hold.. and you can just watch the number go up, until the asteroid pops this is something that I've always wanted. Not because it fixes any issues that exist, it just feels much more satisfying to me to, like you said, just smoothly see the numbers go up.
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 36	Posted - 2016.06.24 05:23:51 - [13] - Quote Jasmine Cheryu wrote: I do hope that the changes to efficiency reduce the yield and cycle time appropriately, in order to improve efficiency. I hate mining an asteroid that has.. i duno.. 10 units of ore.. when a full cycle will give me 4000 units. It's just wasting time, and decreasing the yield and decreasing the cycle time (but keeping the yield/cycle time as a constant) will actually improve efficiency I have been saying this for a while, diversify the mining ship line with barge/exhumers yields with mining lasers and drones (2 lines). The mining laser version would have very fast small yield cycles, the drone one would just be because I love drones.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 67	Posted - 2016.06.24 16:24:11 - [14] - Quote THE BIGGER PICTURE ok, was haveing a discussion with friend this morning and resulted in interesting line of thought reguarding the mining barges As stated in a dev post some were (dont recall exact word for word) the big wars.. the one that resultedin B-R big massive fight... the "world war bee" thats been going on since january.. these types of things bring in the paying customers. the players... even players that have stopped playing come back what promotes these wars... i do belive there was a comment that stated that after these wars.. things got quiet.. stagnated.. very quiet as forces sliped back into their corners to lick their wounds and rebuild forces... these big wars are fought with ships, lots and lots of ships... miners mine ore.. industrialists make ships... big wars are fought, ships blow up how do we promote more of these conflicts and such.... get more ships into game beef up miners... increase the supply.. make ships cheaper.. easier to make... get more ships into the field.. promote big wars.. bring in the players and more subscirptions.. along this line of thought however.. other things were discussed .. now gotta get into the economics.. amount of cash in circulation... supply demand profit margins ect... that adds an entirely new set of mathamatical equations. miners wont mine unless they are makeing a profit.. and wont make ships unless its profitable... Alot more to look at for me it seems then just how much a ship can tank or how much M3 it mines per cycle or how much M3 it mines in an hour
Scotsman Howard S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore 137	Posted - 2016.06.24 18:02:03 - [15] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: THE BIGGER PICTURE ok, was haveing a discussion with friend this morning and resulted in interesting line of thought reguarding the mining barges As stated in a dev post some were (dont recall exact word for word) the big wars.. the one that resultedin B-R big massive fight... the "world war bee" thats been going on since january.. these types of things bring in the paying customers. the players... even players that have stopped playing come back what promotes these wars... i do belive there was a comment that stated that after these wars.. things got quiet.. stagnated.. very quiet as forces sliped back into their corners to lick their wounds and rebuild forces... these big wars are fought with ships, lots and lots of ships... miners mine ore.. industrialists make ships... big wars are fought, ships blow up how do we promote more of these conflicts and such.... get more ships into game beef up miners... increase the supply.. make ships cheaper.. easier to make... get more ships into the field.. promote big wars.. bring in the players and more subscirptions.. along this line of thought however.. other things were discussed .. now gotta get into the economics.. amount of cash in circulation... supply demand profit margins ect... that adds an entirely new set of mathamatical equations. miners wont mine unless they are makeing a profit.. and wont make ships unless its profitable... Alot more to look at for me it seems then just how much a ship can tank or how much M3 it mines per cycle or how much M3 it mines in an hour Sorry, cheaper ships will not promote the big wars like you think. If you increase the amount of ore, you decrease the price, decrease the price decrease the number of miners will to mine, decrease the number of miners, increase the cost of ore, etc. People will only mine for X amount of profit. Anything you do will change that but the main point is the system balances itself. Anyways, assuming the T1 market tumbled and ships got cheaper, it would not promote the big null wars you are after. The main question has not been answered and that is "Why should I go take someone elses SOV?" WWB had a sort of herd mentality for everyone going to fight the goons. It was not about SOV as much as taking things from Goons. Aside from location, there is really no reason one SOV area is better than another. There needs to be a reason to fight and people will fight. Cheaper ships will not cause wars. As for the thread, my guess is CCP is going to mess with the tank of the skiffs making them far easier to gank because "reasons" or make them so bad at mining it is not worth it to mine at all when you consider gank costs vs additional yield. Maybe they will go the other way and make a "Mordus Legion" like balance pass of the exhumers lol.
Do Little Virgin Plc Evictus. 301	Posted - 2016.06.26 08:50:03 - [16] - Quote The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier!
Maldiro Selkurk CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X 557	Posted - 2016.06.27 05:27:54 - [17] - Quote Predicting it will be bad for highsec miners......i know that isnt even a bold prediction but rather a given but i put it out their first ! Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 37	Posted - 2016.06.27 19:30:18 - [18] - Quote I think the skiff is in the right spot so... Pessimistic me says skiff gets nerf to EHP, yield, and hold. Placing the ore hold around 8.5k so it's not good for solo mining. Mack will lose 1k ore hold for ice miners. Hulk will get a tank nerf and a yield buff, try to bait more people into glass cannon miners so ganking is easier. Optimistic me says skiff stays as is, mack get boost to cpu and 1k more ore hold for ice miners, hulk will get more cpu and slightly more yield.
Gwenaelle de Ardevon Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 3229	Posted - 2016.06.27 19:50:46 - [19] - Quote Do Little wrote: The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier! probably the flood of citadels «An hour sitting with a pretty girl on a park bench passes like a minute, but a minute sitting on a hot stove seems like an hour». Albert Einstein - [11, S. 154] More Quotes, Poetry & Prose on: https://gwenaelledeardevon.wordpress.com/
Sheeth Athonille Rabid Dogz Mining The Bastion 110	Posted - 2016.06.27 20:17:46 - [20] - Quote Gwenaelle de Ardevon wrote: Do Little wrote: The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier! probably the flood of citadels That probably explains the peak at the end, but it doesn't explain why it's consistently been about 3 times the amount since at least July 2013.

Captain Tardbar Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 1152	Posted - 2016.06.29 03:38:32 - [21] - Quote Black Pedro wrote: Yeah, at least in highsec there are too many Procurers/Skiffs. I guess that the Skiff will have its yield cut, or the other two ships will have their yield raised (or both). Alternatively they might drop the tank of the Skiff, but I see that as less likely. I was hoping there might be whole new types of mining being added with the Drilling Platforms that might result in new sub-specializations for barges/exhumers. Given how little we have heard though, I am now just betting on a slight rebalance of numbers to make the less-tanky ships more attractive. Perhaps we will know more after the o7 show on Sunday. People will still mine in a Skiff and Proc is they have better tank even if they only made 100,000 isk per hour. "Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down.
Raiz Nhell Tactically Gifted Tactical Supremacy 517	Posted - 2016.06.29 03:42:41 - [22] - Quote Maldiro Selkurk wrote: Predicting it will be bad for highsec miners......i know that isnt even a bold prediction but rather a given but i put it out their first ! Everything is bad for HS miners, even if they doubled the yield and trebled the tank across the board... There would still be cries of "Why didn't they quadruple the yield, and make the trip back to station for me!!!!!" There is no such thing as a fair fight... If your fighting fair you have automatically put yourself at a disadvantage.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 69	Posted - 2016.06.29 04:02:19 - [23] - Quote im just gonna go back to mining in a dominix.. bring it on you ganker bitches hahahahahaha
Ix Method Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 510	Posted - 2016.06.29 08:40:27 - [24] - Quote Sunwell wrote: I'll have to agree here. A lot of the HS mining is done AFK - reduce the hold on the skiff and people will be forced to pay more attention. Annoying people rather than fixing the problem is terrible game design. Travelling at the speed of love.
Crinnfika Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2016.06.29 13:40:16 - [25] - Quote Do Little wrote: The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB. The worrisome line on that chart is production - we are consistently producing 3 times as much as we are consuming and that will eventually lead to problems in the economy. CCP needs to bring this into balance - industry should be more difficult, not easier! There are other ways for items to get taken off the market without the item being outright destroyed. 1 - quitters, when a player quits the game everything they own is for all intents and purpose destroyed. 2 - packrats - stuff that gets left unused in storage on some station is also for all intents and purposes off the market.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 1869	Posted - 2016.06.29 14:24:22 - [26] - Quote First of all you tend to see only Skiffs and Procurers in systems where gankers are always active, after that you only see players who like to mine in a tanking ship, because they don't want to be an easy kill. Currently CODE. are running around various systems to kill people in the other mining ships so they can say look CCP everyone is in Skiffs and Procurers, isn't this boring, nerf them to create content please. sigh I started mining again when I had the opportunity to use a ship that did not have the tank of a wet paper bag, but also with enough yield to not completely waste my time, nerfing the Skiff and Procurer will be a shame in terms of game balance. There are enough people using the other ships that are easy to kill and go for yield over tank, I see these people quite often and the killboards show it too. Like always I will wait and see, if the tank is not enough for me then I just will not bother mining, which I only do when I cannot be bothered to do anything else. For reference CCP I stopped doing any mining at all from the point in time that Catalysts had their DPS buffed up until the time the Skiff and Procurer were given a tank and I will do the same again. So CCP needs to think very carefully about destroying the tank of ships that more discerning players use. As far as I can see there are plenty of ganks going on, the balance is fine. I hope that this is to fit in with the new structures and new mining gameplay only, one can only hope..., but expect to be disappointed... COHE, the Coalition of Hisec Entities is now in operation, time to make hisec work for people who operate there.
KenFlorian Jednota Inc 39	Posted - 2016.06.29 18:12:31 - [27] - Quote Do Little wrote: The players who want to fight will find a way regardless of whether there is a war. A look at the production/destruction chart in CCP Quant's economic update https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2016/ shows that destruction is remarkably consistent - minor bumps at B-R5RB and WWB.! Why do good data always win? It's unfair ;-)
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 0	Posted - 2016.06.29 19:47:57 - [28] - Quote As far as I can see there is currently nothing particularly broken on the roles and balance between the mining barges/exhumers, or on the additional mining yield in nullsec over highsec. Of course CCP wants to bring mining boosts on-grid. IMO an easy and good solution would be the introduction of a new ORE Command Ship (i.e. like the Damnation and at a similar price point). The ship would provide boosts similar to the Rorqual in nullsec and lesser boosts in highsec (enviromental regulations on spacedust etc etc). With some DPS this ship could also assist in getting rid of belt rats or perhaps counter (or at least deter) the occasional gank destroyer if used in HighSec. The Orca would keep its current role combining boosts and ore/ship storage and would still hold court as the king of highsec AFK mining, surrounded by the usual following of procurers and skiffs. The Rorqual would be looking for a new role (what else is new), but from the hints that CCP have given it could very well be "carrier mining". Ensure the increase in yield is comparable to to the current step between AFK ishtar and carrier ratting and people will no doubt be eager to give it a try. Some balance issues would need to be solved: 1> i.e. reduce the ore bay on the Rorqual so it will need to warp to a POS/Citadel to dump ore, which generates "moments of increased risk" similar to a carrier warping to a new anomaly, 2> require active control of the mining drones (similar to fighters) so multiboxing does not have a disproportionate impact on the mining economy. No need for a dumb invulnerability mechanism either.
Crinnfika Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2016.06.29 21:01:42 - [29] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: First of all you tend to see only Skiffs and Procurers in systems where gankers are always active, after that you only see players who like to mine in a tanking ship, because they don't want to be an easy kill. This. Procurers are everywhere because the ever present catalyst gangs make flying anything else nonviable in highsec.
Kaivarian Coste Beyond Imports and Exports 27	Posted - 2016.06.29 21:44:46 - [30] - Quote Knowing CCP, any changes to barges will be BAD for the mining profession. They'll probably force the camera to pan around your ship every time you mine an asteroid.

Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 511	Posted - 2016.07.02 16:00:44 - [31] - Quote They'll probably increase their yield overall, making them stronger upgrades over Mining / Explo Frigs, and also increase Exhumer yields. They'll also give the Rorq a yield somewhere around 60m+ / hr for nullsec ore, and to keep exhumers competitive, will buff those significantly over this amount.
Varisto North Star Science And Industry 5	Posted - 2016.07.03 15:27:14 - [32] - Quote Theres reason why everone uses skiff now.. its reasonable price and tank against ganking... Come on CCP, Mining ships are supposed to be monsters that destroy asteroids. Something not even titans with their super weapons are not able to do... Its should take considerably more firepower then now used by gangers to destroy them... Personally im keping my fingers cross that they actually dont mess it up this time.. But knowing CCP anything is bossible..
Moustache Cuir Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 7	Posted - 2016.07.03 21:28:21 - [33] - Quote I have purchased a rorqual, waiting for the industry update ... But i'm not holding my breath, they will probably screw it up (and if you want a 3b+ once fitted ship on grid you'd better make it worth it, NPC DREADS PEOPLE!) - but you never know ^^. I'd like to see beefier exhumers, ganking in HS is one thing, surviving the NPC dreads in 0.0 long enough to warp out is another ...
Echo Mande 70	Posted - 2016.07.04 14:55:56 - [34] - Quote Well, there are some changes I would like. Hulk: add 15 grid,15 CPU, a midslot and a cap boost (25 will do, more would be nice). Maybe a bigger drone bay. Skiff: more CPU. Bigger changes (being able to fit a large shield booster forex) would change the character of the ship. Orca: An upper slot (tractor!), maybe a midslot. More capacitor. Mack: Maybe some more CPU. One thing that would be cool for the Rorq and the Orca would be to bring back an optional onboard compression module, though maybe not as a siege action. The orca and if needed the Rorq should get a slot of whatever type is needed for this. Wallet remarks everywhere
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light 131	Posted - 2016.07.04 15:40:45 - [35] - Quote Given this image of a Procurer and a Skiff (found on the Fall update page), I think we can expect rather large changes (it's fairly obvious that both these redesigns have room for TWO strip miners). Whether the number decals on the ships (Procurer "4" and Skiff "5") are something else to read into, remains to be seen. Either way, change is good (and probably all we'll ever get, because having ~50 out of ~300 ship types dedicated to non-combat pursuits is obviously too many...) Until all are free...
Kaivarian Coste Beyond Imports and Exports 63	Posted - 2016.07.05 15:44:49 - [36] - Quote Well I would like some improvement to low sec mining. Offer some unique asteroids that provide a much greater yield than anything you can find in high sec. Barges themselves don't need any improvement. The market will simply adjust.
Crinnfika Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2016.07.08 21:27:55 - [37] - Quote Kaivarian Coste wrote: Well I would like some improvement to low sec mining. Offer some unique asteroids that provide a much greater yield than anything you can find in high sec. Barges themselves don't need any improvement. The market will simply adjust. tbh the asteroids aren't the problem with lowsec mining, the problem with lowsec mining is that lowsec is the biggest hive of scum and villainy in the game. Lowsec is simply too overcrowded with destructive individuals to make mining there viable. At least in null you can usually find a nice quiet backwater system to mine in.
Bernard Quinn Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 6	Posted - 2016.07.08 22:07:09 - [38] - Quote As crazy as it may sound, I'm hoping for an overhaul of how asteroid belts work. Instead of having static belts in every system, make them all anoms that will respawn with similar mechanics to ice belts (four hours after it was mined out), but in different systems instead of the same system. I know it isn't a change to the barges, per se, but it would be an interesting change to mining as a whole. It would give haulers a lot more work to do, and would make compression arrays much more useful (not saying they aren't, just that they'd be very useful for transporting ores instead of mining and using in the same few systems).
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 38	Posted - 2016.07.08 22:53:51 - [39] - Quote Bernard Quinn wrote: As crazy as it may sound, I'm hoping for an overhaul of how asteroid belts work. Instead of having static belts in every system, make them all anoms that will respawn with similar mechanics to ice belts (four hours after it was mined out), but in different systems instead of the same system. I know it isn't a change to the barges, per se, but it would be an interesting change to mining as a whole. It would give haulers a lot more work to do, and would make compression arrays much more useful (not saying they aren't, just that they'd be very useful for transporting ores instead of mining and using in the same few systems). I back this for a different reason. Static belts are one of the few TZ/DT reliant aspects of the game. Considering DT is at 4 am here, that means that by the time I get off work, others have had 12+ hrs to clear belts.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 5	Posted - 2016.07.10 08:41:39 - [40] - Quote The Hulk/Covetor is fine at the job it's designed for; it's a great tool in an organised mining operation with advance warning from scouts of incoming hostiles, and an couple of PvE ships (including one appropriately fit Blackbird) on grid to keep the rats off you. The Hulk provides 30% more Ore than a Skiff, at a cost of greater vulnerability (which is negated by the advantages of being in an organised group) and 3.5 times the Mining Crystal usage. If you use the Hulk for the purpose for which it was intended, it works perfectly well. If there was one thing I'd like to see it get, it'd be a Role Bonus: "70% reduction in chances of Mining Crystal damage" The real problem is that the Retriever, which appears to have been intended as the new Miners first barge, is simply unfit for purpose, because new miners main problem isn't running out of Ore Hold, it's surviving the gankers to do so. The Retriever's weaknesses are only addressed by mining in a fleet, which immediately means that it's major advantage is worthless because an organised mining fleet has haulers, so you're better off in a Covetor. The Retriever & the Mackinaw lose to the Procurer & Skiff for solo-survivability, and to the Covetor & Hulk for fleet mining ops. They were designed for a niche that doesn't really exist.

Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 38	Posted - 2016.07.18 19:46:29 - [41] - Quote This isn't directly related to barges, but impacts them none the less. Without details on mechanics, on grid boosting has a high chance of being an issue with miners. If it requires constant presence then, beyond the obvious rorq issue, medium to large fleets in HS would need multiple Orcas or just go without boosting. So my vote would be to remove mining boosting all together. Give all barges a 70% yield boost, refund sp and isk, and make rorq and orca both drone mining ships. Since most of these items are already on the list for fall changes, it's a possibility.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 515	Posted - 2016.07.19 17:19:58 - [42] - Quote Lugues Slive wrote: This isn't directly related to barges, but impacts them none the less. Without details on mechanics, on grid boosting has a high chance of being an issue with miners. If it requires constant presence then, beyond the obvious rorq issue, medium to large fleets in HS would need multiple Orcas or just go without boosting. So my vote would be to remove mining boosting all together. Give all barges a 70% yield boost, refund sp and isk, and make rorq and orca both drone mining ships. Since most of these items are already on the list for fall changes, it's a possibility. This is one good post.
Jozhin Z Bazhin Legendary Purpose AL3XAND3R. 5	Posted - 2016.07.20 08:25:28 - [43] - Quote New mining methods. I know, that CCP pepares ship rebalance, but I would also love some totaly new options for miners implemented. So those, who mine at keyboard will benefit from active mining and those, who mine AFK, will still have what they have now.
Bing Bangboom DAMAG Safety Commission 495	Posted - 2016.07.22 20:33:34 - [44] - Quote I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. Highsec is worth fighting for. By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.-á www.minerbumping.com
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 1918	Posted - 2016.07.24 17:05:19 - [45] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. You spend most of your time in a heavily ganked ice system, of course you only see Skiffs and Procurers where you currently operate. PS Pity that Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher did not drop COHE, the Coalition of Hisec Entities is now in operation, time to make hisec work for people who operate there.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 9	Posted - 2016.07.25 01:37:00 - [46] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. So your argument here is that because people have taken effective countermeasures to your ganking, CCP should make it easier for you by nerfing them? Tanked skiffs are not "a negligible impact" on Mining m3 - they are a full 40% worse than a MaxMine Hulk. If Procurers & Skiffs were nerfed, then there would be no HighSec mining at all.
Amarrchecko Hedion University Amarr Empire 113	Posted - 2016.07.25 03:15:12 - [47] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. The skiff really is overpowered. Of course it has massively better tank (and the ability to fit that). But it also has: extra low slot for a third MLU, bigger drone bay, easier time with cap due to more cap AND only 1 laser, big enough hold that even the best miners with great boosts can't overflow the hold before they can jet a new can even if they are using mining drones too, cheapest build cost. Mackinaw? Fraction of the tank of the skiff, only two low slots, half the drone bay, higher crystal consumption, worse cap, harder to fit... all for a big ore hold. The hold is convenient for players who only run 1-2 accounts and who pay attention, but it doesn't even help "afk miners" because in high sec you'll kill your two asteroids in only a few minutes anyway so you need to pay attention to pick new asteroids, and it doesn't help low/null miners because AFK = death even in quiet corners of null (whether due to rats or players). Hulk? At first blush it looks like you're getting a wet paper bag that can mine a ton more than a skiff. But if you consider the 2 low slots and the fact that you really need to be specific with how you mine to avoid losing ore to cycles that finish when your hold is too full (no hugging asteroids and using drones and letting an MTU collect cans), the yield really isn't much higher than a skiff at all. And for that like 10% higher yield you also have like 1/10 the tank, more than 3x the crystal consumption, terrible cap, tight fit for the minimal tank you can get on it, a smaller drone bay, highest build cost, etc? Skiff is great all the time. Mack is only worth using for a guy with 1-2 accounts who doesn't AFK. Hulk is only worth using if you don't have boosts or if you are boxing enough/in a fleet op so that you have a dedicated hauler, you don't want to use mining drones, and you have other ships around to protect you from rats. Although if rorqs are suddenly in belts all the time, hulks will probably become a lot better because they'll be able to catch RR support and help killing rats from the rorq, and the rorq can use a tractor beam to pull in full cans instead of an MTU that grabs them before the hulk is ready to give it up... so hulks will be able to travel from roid to roid to use drones and still not overflow their cargo. Mackinaw and skiff will benefit less or not at all really, from rorqs being in belts though, as far as I can see it.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 1919	Posted - 2016.07.25 05:40:00 - [48] - Quote The Skiff is no way near as good a mining ship which people have demonstrated, you have a yield impact, people chose it to mine in when they mine in systems which have lots of ganks or when they are a target for ganks. Miner lose ISK using it, but for some of us we prefer to be difficult to kill. I repeat, you see them in systems where the gankers are very active, where I mine I see the odd one and of course my own ones, but its mainly Mackinaws in my system. That you lot are whining about it shows that you lot are not up to EVE, you need to up your game. Eve is not supposed to be a walk in the park but to have a level of difficulty which you are obviously uncomfortable with. COHE, the Coalition of Hisec Entities is now in operation, time to make hisec work for people who operate there.
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 0	Posted - 2016.07.25 06:59:53 - [49] - Quote Amarrchecko wrote: Mackinaw? Fraction of the tank of the skiff, only two low slots, half the drone bay, higher crystal consumption, worse cap, harder to fit... all for a big ore hold. The hold is convenient for players who only run 1-2 accounts and who pay attention, but it doesn't even help "afk miners" because in high sec you'll kill your two asteroids in only a few minutes anyway so you need to pay attention to pick new asteroids, and it doesn't help low/null miners because AFK = death even in quiet corners of null (whether due to rats or players). Sounds you have not mined in null very often. Mackinaw has three lows and with two processor rigs you can fit three mining upgrades, T2 strips and some tank. In case BS sized belt rats show up the Mackinaw that gets the initial aggro will probably have to warp off, while the other miners kill the rats. Roids are huge in nullsec anomalies so you won't have to switch roids until it is time to squadwarp back to the compressor array. Mackinaws are really convenient. Unfortunately I'm not mining in a quiet dead-end, because that would provide more opportunity to break out the Hulk.
Kei Nagasai X-COM Navy Fidelas Constans 4	Posted - 2016.07.25 11:12:06 - [50] - Quote IMO, the only changes should be done to the Mack and Hulk. The mack should get 3/4's of the Skiffs tank. The Hulk should get 1/2 of the Skiffs tank. The Skiff is fine how it is, the only reason you see them everywhere is because they are the tankiest (good against gankers in highsec, good against rats in null), increase the tank of the other hulls, you'll start to see more of them, its that simple.

Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 1919	Posted - 2016.07.25 12:17:38 - [51] - Quote Kei Nagasai wrote: IMO, the only changes should be done to the Mack and Hulk. The mack should get 3/4's of the Skiffs tank. The Hulk should get 1/2 of the Skiffs tank. The Skiff is fine how it is, the only reason you see them everywhere is because they are the tankiest (good against gankers in highsec, good against rats in null), increase the tank of the other hulls, you'll start to see more of them, its that simple. This is more like it, those two ships have the tank of a soggy paper bag and should be adjusted to a better level, they are T2 ships and should be better than what they are now. COHE, the Coalition of Hisec Entities is now in operation, time to make hisec work for people who operate there.
Sarah Flynt Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity 225	Posted - 2016.07.25 19:14:03 - [52] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. You're farming the same three systems (Kino, Erenta, Venilen) for easy kills for years now and you're seriously complaining that over time people have switched to more tanky mining ships (with a considerably lower yield btw)? And carebears are supposed to be the stupid ones, hu? I suggest to look for a new hunting ground because you've clearly overfished the waters. Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
Bing Bangboom DAMAG Safety Commission 496	Posted - 2016.07.25 21:36:56 - [53] - Quote Sarah Flynt wrote: Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. You're farming the same three systems (Kino, Erenta, Venilen) for easy kills for years now and you're seriously complaining that over time people have switched to more tanky mining ships (with a considerably lower yield btw)? And carebears are supposed to be the stupid ones, hu? I suggest to look for a new hunting ground because you've clearly overfished the waters. This is actually true. I do consider the lack of anything other than Skiffs and Procurers in the Kino vicinity to be directly my fault. Anything else is at risk and it is the source of great amusement to me when the local miners say I have no effect on them as they skiff about. But I've been in other systems too as I've chased wartargets who have scattered to the four winds (are there winds in Eve? Maybe I need a better phrasing). And I see lots of skiffs everywhere I go. Admittedly anecdotal evidence. CCP knows though if skiffs are overly popular. If there are systems somewhere in highsec where the old Mack herds graze as they used to, or where a Retriever doesn't have a half life of about six hours, then CCP knows and will adjust based on the big picture. If I'm right and skiffs outnumber the other options disproportionately then we should expect a nerf. This is how online games work. Always trying to find a balance. Its like the recent nerf to freighter bumping. Too many freighters were dying to New Order fleets, in CCP's estimation, so they gave the pilots a get out of jail free button. Since they are carebears they made it so they didn't even have to push it themselves. Freighter ganking has moderated. Success! Now the skiffs may get their turn. I little believe that CCP will read my well thought out arguments for a skiff nerf and decide, based on that, that mining ships with battleship tanks are unbalanced. If skiffs are changed to be less tanky out of the box, or if their yield takes a tweak downward, it will be because of the decisions of hundreds of highsec miners who have, once again, decided to remove themselves from interaction with other players. If CCP still wants Eve to be an interactive game of player versus player, then skiffs MUST explode more. That's what I continue to expect even if its taken far too long. Highsec is worth fighting for. By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.-á www.minerbumping.com
Autism Intensifies Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2016.07.27 08:08:30 - [54] - Quote I'm slowly getting convinced they haven't planned anything at all yet, and it'll come down to minor tweaks in the <5% range on all their attributes. And Rorquals somehow end up with 5 Mining Drones that haul less than a Retriever and is generally in a worse place than before the patch. If they had anything good coming down the pipe, we'd have seen it on Sisi or some Devblog or a Upcoming Features thread.
TheVirus32 Trois Etoiles The Volition Cult 12	Posted - 2016.07.28 11:37:10 - [55] - Quote Autism Intensifies wrote: I'm slowly getting convinced they haven't planned anything at all yet, and it'll come down to minor tweaks in the <5% range on all their attributes. And Rorquals somehow end up with 5 Mining Drones that haul less than a Retriever and is generally in a worse place than before the patch. If they had anything good coming down the pipe, we'd have seen it on Sisi or some Devblog or a Upcoming Features thread. I get that very same feeling :/
Bing Bangboom DAMAG Safety Commission 496	Posted - 2016.07.29 01:54:00 - [56] - Quote So, I'm sitting looking at a Blue Ice field in Angymonne, a system hardly touched by the New Order recently. There are 26 skiffs, 2 Orcas and a Nightmare for some reason. I had just left Antollere next door where I saw 10 skiffs, an Orca and two Procurers. I'll keep traveling and looking. I will let you know if I see anything except fleets of skiffs. So far its all I can find. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf overdue... wayyyy overdue. Highsec is worth fighting for. By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.-á www.minerbumping.com
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 11	Posted - 2016.07.29 10:28:04 - [57] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: So, I'm sitting looking at a Blue Ice field in Angymonne, a system hardly touched by the New Order recently. There are 26 skiffs, 2 Orcas and a Nightmare for some reason. I had just left Antollere next door where I saw 10 skiffs, an Orca and two Procurers. I'll keep traveling and looking. I will let you know if I see anything except fleets of skiffs. So far its all I can find. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf overdue... wayyyy overdue. Edit: Went next door to the sleepy system of Scuelazyns. Only nine skiffs there, all named Mining Bot # with an Orca piloted by Supreme Bot Commander. All in NPC corps of course as have been every skiff pilot I've seen on my trip. Somebody please tell me where to go where EVERY ship isn't a skiff. So you're still whining about people taking effective countermeasures to your actions, and you still want CCP to nerf the Skiff so that you can gank without effort. Tough. You created this. Live with it.
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 491	Posted - 2016.07.29 10:59:03 - [58] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: So, I'm sitting looking at a Blue Ice field in Angymonne, a system hardly touched by the New Order recently. There are 26 skiffs, 2 Orcas and a Nightmare for some reason. I had just left Antollere next door where I saw 10 skiffs, an Orca and two Procurers. I'll keep traveling and looking. I will let you know if I see anything except fleets of skiffs. So far its all I can find. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf overdue... wayyyy overdue. Edit: Went next door to the sleepy system of Scuelazyns. Only nine skiffs there, all named Mining Bot # with an Orca piloted by Supreme Bot Commander. All in NPC corps of course as have been every skiff pilot I've seen on my trip. Somebody please tell me where to go where EVERY ship isn't a skiff. I'm in an Ice belt now, with myself and 2 other guys in a Mack and Retriever, I don't see a massive Skiff overuse.
Bing Bangboom DAMAG Safety Commission 497	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:54:29 - [59] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: Bing Bangboom wrote: So, I'm sitting looking at a Blue Ice field in Angymonne, a system hardly touched by the New Order recently. There are 26 skiffs, 2 Orcas and a Nightmare for some reason. I had just left Antollere next door where I saw 10 skiffs, an Orca and two Procurers. I'll keep traveling and looking. I will let you know if I see anything except fleets of skiffs. So far its all I can find. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf overdue... wayyyy overdue. Edit: Went next door to the sleepy system of Scuelazyns. Only nine skiffs there, all named Mining Bot # with an Orca piloted by Supreme Bot Commander. All in NPC corps of course as have been every skiff pilot I've seen on my trip. Somebody please tell me where to go where EVERY ship isn't a skiff. So you're still whining about people taking effective countermeasures to your actions, and you still want CCP to nerf the Skiff so that you can gank without effort. Tough. You created this. Live with it. What I'm doing is seeing if the claims that the large number of skiffs I'm seeing is a direct result of my, or other New Order Agents, presence in our habitual haunts. My evidence is anecdotal but I really did travel to multiple ice systems across highsec last night. I did see a lone Retriever in one system and two in another. So it wasn't completely skiffs. But they WAY outnumber the alternatives. Huge skiff fleets stripping the ice fields. I know its hard to distinguish but I'm not so much calling for a nerf to skiffs, despite the attempts at humor where I admit I DID call for nerfs. I don't know how CCP decides what to do but I'm pretty sure its not based on forum posts from those of us who inhabit them. If CCP leaves them tanked up so much then I will just deal with it as other mechanisms allow. Personally, I'd rather argue for a return of the Watch List and locking players into wardecced corps as it would benefit me more than less tanky skiffs. This thread was a discussion of what we THOUGHT might happen in the mining rebalance. My point is that the trinity of mining ships is broken and I THINK CCP knows it and will do something to rebalance the situation. Time, as always, will tell. If they do cut the tank or lower the yield please give me the credit for the idea, OK, see? That was humor again. Honest viewers of the situation will admit that skiffs are overrepresented in highsec versus other platforms. We may certainly disagree on the significance of this and what, if any, adjustments are warrented. I'm just looking for the truth of this particular point in my explorations. CCP knows for sure what I can only view one system at a time. I think there will be a nerf of some kind to skiffs. (Fingers crossed!) Highsec is worth fighting for. By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.-á www.minerbumping.com
Cap James Tkirk Support Fleet Unit ZETSURIN HOSHI 156	Posted - 2016.07.29 19:04:22 - [60] - Quote In true CCP fashion a half measure then 2 years of balancing and finally barges/exhumers will end up where they were 5 years ago.

Zayden Bryant GermanDungeonPorn 4	Posted - 2016.07.29 19:48:27 - [61] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: What I'm doing is seeing if the claims that the large number of skiffs I'm seeing is a direct result of my, or other New Order Agents, presence in our habitual haunts. My evidence is anecdotal but I really did travel to multiple ice systems across highsec last night. I did see a lone Retriever in one system and two in another. So it wasn't completely skiffs. But they WAY outnumber the alternatives. Huge skiff fleets stripping the ice fields. There is your problem. Ice fields are easy to locate, the systems are static, the belts are advertised, and the timers are easy to track. Of course the people there will be cautious. But in ore belts, where you have to hunt through the system to find targets, you will often find every type of mining ship (except the specialized T2 frigs)
Traedar InterStellar Trading Syndicate 28	Posted - 2016.07.30 01:35:55 - [62] - Quote When barge tiericide was implemented in 2012 the intent of the "self defense" Procurer was to have battleship-level EHP. So I doubt its tank will be nerfed. I am hoping the Procurer gets a third low (it should have similar yield to Retriever) I am hoping the Covetor gets increased ore hold (to be similar to the Procurer) I think Strip Miners will take a turret hardpoint and be only fittable on Mining Barges. Then one or more of the hulls will get a utility high. Especially Procurer but maybe Retriever too. I think the Exhumers should stay as beefed up versions of the tech 1 hulls, with an added twist: each can fit a fleet boost module to its utility high that gives all fleet members on-grid a bonus in its specialty: Mack gives bonus to ore hold, Hulk gives bonus to yield, Procurer gives bonus to shield HP.
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 0	Posted - 2016.07.30 08:35:23 - [63] - Quote Procurer/Skiff with a utility highslot for a cyno: the dream of baiters and counter-baiters across EVE (except Empire, but who cares about them). And anything that leads to more pew is a good thing(tm).
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 13	Posted - 2016.07.30 18:34:45 - [64] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: My point is that the trinity of mining ships is broken and I THINK CCP knows it and will do something to rebalance the situation. There isn't really a trinity of Mining Ships. There's the Hulk, which is for organised Fleet Mining Operations and is excellent at its role. Then there's the Skiff, which has the tank to support Solo Mining - be that in NullSec vs NPC rats or HighSec vs player rats. The Mackinaw simply doesn't have a role. The job it was intended to do, doesn't exist because of people like you. In my view - leave the Hulk as it is, or maybe with a reduction in Mining Crystal damage, and merge the Skiff and Mackinaw into one ship - tanky with a large Ore Hold. The idea that the Mackinaw is useful for mining solo is a dead one, because of people like you who make HighSec belts more deadly than NullSec ones. Traedar wrote: When barge tiericide was implemented in 2012 the intent of the "self defense" Procurer was to have battleship-level EHP. So I doubt its tank will be nerfed. I am hoping the Procurer gets a third low (it should have similar yield to Retriever) I am hoping the Covetor gets increased ore hold (to be similar to the Procurer) I think Strip Miners will take a turret hardpoint and be only fittable on Mining Barges. Then one or more of the hulls will get a utility high. Especially Procurer but maybe Retriever too. The Covetor & Hulk don't really need extra Ore Hold. It's irrelevant when they are used for their real purpose - fleet mining while sitting next to a Freight Container or a ship with a Fleet Hanger that they can dump into. I quite like the idea of a utility high on a Procurer, but I will warn you now that people will Spider Tank the hell out of that.
Yokai Mitsuhide Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 7069	Posted - 2016.08.02 22:50:05 - [65] - Quote I'd rather have new mining ships to train for beyond exhumers instead of barges getting a rework. Bigger...better ships.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 154	Posted - 2016.08.14 20:35:17 - [66] - Quote So, 2 strip miners for all 3 barges and all 3 exhumers... Interesting. Looking forward to more details soon, given that these changes are expected next month already... Until all are free...
Wayne Donne Royal Oaks Glen Oaks Oakwood Oaks Country Club All My Friends Are Ded 1	Posted - 2016.08.15 01:17:10 - [67] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I see nothing but Skiffs any more with the occasional Procurer. This is broken. There is supposed to be a tradeoff which players use to balance their ship choices. In highsec mining there are only ignorant miners and Skiff miners. I'd suggest a massive decrease in the built in tank of the Skiffs and Procurers with whatever CPU/slots/etc necessary to allow the miner to tank his ship back up to the battleship EHP they enjoy now. BUT their yield will be hammered. Right now they get incredible tank, decent yield, and with a nearby station or Orca negiligible impact of a smaller ore hold. Yes, yes. We caused this. I understand that. We broke highsec mining. Now its up to CCP to fix it. Skiffs overpowered. Nerf Skiffs. You realize how hard it is for anyone to take you seriously with your sig.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 19	Posted - 2016.08.15 09:37:09 - [68] - Quote Kueyen wrote: So, 2 strip miners for all 3 barges and all 3 exhumers... Interesting. Looking forward to more details soon, given that these changes are expected next month already... It's certainly a major change. If we assume that the focus of each Barge/Exhumer line remains the same and that the intention is that overall capabilities do not go down, then there will have to be a big boost to either yield or cycle time for the Hulk. What's interesting to me now is this small Mining Command Ship. It's going to be quite difficult to justify this over just putting another Barge on Grid.
ChromeStriker Out of Focus Odin's Call 1046	Posted - 2016.08.15 10:44:14 - [69] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: Kueyen wrote: So, 2 strip miners for all 3 barges and all 3 exhumers... Interesting. Looking forward to more details soon, given that these changes are expected next month already... It's certainly a major change. If we assume that the focus of each Barge/Exhumer line remains the same and that the intention is that overall capabilities do not go down, then there will have to be a big boost to either yield or cycle time for the Hulk. What's interesting to me now is this small Mining Command Ship. It's going to be quite difficult to justify this over just putting another Barge on Grid. The way things seem to be going... the mining command ship will likely have mining capabilities itself... like the Rorqual (not as "good" obviously) No Worries
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 19	Posted - 2016.08.15 11:06:18 - [70] - Quote ChromeStriker wrote: The way things seem to be going... the mining command ship will likely have mining capabilities itself... like the Rorqual (not as "good" obviously) That's a good point, I hadn't considered that. If it's a Drone Boat then that would also fit with the way the ORE lineup seems to be going.

Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 72	Posted - 2016.08.15 11:33:11 - [71] - Quote personal preference for me .. and speaking for myself only... i would love to see a full line of miners... that the mining / industry side of the game recieve as much attention as other aspects of the game we currently have : T1/T2 mining frigates T1/T2 mining barges/exhumers (i see these as cruiser or battlecruiser size) i want to see battleship sized mining ships and expansion of command industrial ships listed below are random thoughts and ideas: -just like T2 command battlecruisers. if fit a certain way can fit more then 3 warfare links... some how expand the slots on orca to fit more then 3 warfare links / industrial links or -a fleet mining command ship that provides boosts. has drones and/or guns and provides fleet defense, remote repair capabilities for the fleet, but does not have a cargo bay much to speak of... would have significantly faster target lock capabilities (lock targets about as fast as the skiff can lock targets).. basicaly i wanna see orca become something more then a 2nd or 3rd account ship that just sits there and sucks in cans how we go about this, i have no clue, something like a Nestor, with drones and remote repair capabilities and fit industrial command links and tracktor beams with realy fast lock on time to lock and kill belt rats (damned orca takes forever to lock those targets) ... make the command links some how more interactive ... im just throwing out crazy ideas here in short... make it more active, more interactive, interactive with the game environment and the members of the fleet -combine the industrial fleet command ship role with the fleet defense role into one ship.... we all know that alot of players just do not want to sit around and play guard to a mining fleet
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 19	Posted - 2016.08.15 12:36:16 - [72] - Quote Well if you watched the Twitch TV thing last night you'd know that On-Grid Boosting is going to feature scriptable boosting modules, so that's a thing to consider.
Zerzzes Markarian Andraste. 4	Posted - 2016.08.15 12:47:42 - [73] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: If CCP still wants Eve to be an interactive game of player versus player, then skiffs MUST explode more. That's what I continue to expect even if its taken far too long. First, Eve is not a pure PVP game. And if they must explode more, just bring a bigger ship. The Skiff costs almost 200M ISK. Why should it explode when you bring only cheap ****? Otherwise, just search a bit more. If you look outside ice belts, you will find plenty of non-Skiff mining ships.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 72	Posted - 2016.08.15 12:55:58 - [74] - Quote i totaly missed the twitch TV thing
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 72	Posted - 2016.08.15 13:05:28 - [75] - Quote Bing Bangboom wrote: I little believe that CCP will read my well thought out arguments for a skiff nerf and decide, based on that, that mining ships with battleship tanks are unbalanced. If skiffs are changed to be less tanky out of the box, or if their yield takes a tweak downward, it will be because of the decisions of hundreds of highsec miners who have, once again, decided to remove themselves from interaction with other players. If CCP still wants Eve to be an interactive game of player versus player, then skiffs MUST explode more. That's what I continue to expect even if its taken far too long. as it stands, i can mine useing all 3 ships i choose to mine in a skiff. even if the area appears to be safe.. and sacrifice as much as 40% of potential income for safety.. so there is a solid tradeoff ... i trade profits for safety.... as do the vast majority of the other players if they nurf the skiff as you suggest... what do you see the results being?? i see miners going back to doing what they did quite a few years ago... mine in a rokh or dominix... what are you going to do then when belts have fleets of battleships mineing astroids?? miners will almost always choose the safest method to mine... if you create a situation were the risk is not worth the reward... then the miners will not mine... this is bad for the economy.. very very bad .... and im curious about your statement Bing Bangboom wrote: "hundreds of highsec miners who have, once again, decided to remove themselves from interaction with other players" i mine and interact with lots of other players and find the mining community to be rather interactive with each other in the areas i operate out of.. this statement of yours i find to be false
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.15 13:20:06 - [76] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: i totaly missed the twitch TV thing https://www.twitch.tv/ccp/v/83622730 They talk about Boosts & Rorqual from 55mins. The Rorqual's SuperBoost looks nice, though
ChromeStriker Out of Focus Odin's Call 1046	Posted - 2016.08.15 13:25:10 - [77] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: Gunrunner1775 wrote: i totaly missed the twitch TV thing https://www.twitch.tv/ccp/v/83622730 They talk about Boosts & Rorqual from 55mins. The Rorqual's SuperBoost looks nice, though Need the dev-post really... for example... what happens if theres more than one Rorq on field?? Rorq fleets? No Worries
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 39	Posted - 2016.08.15 15:23:49 - [78] - Quote From the art clips in o7, it looks like all barges/exhumers will get 2 turrets. So I assume lots of bonus tweets to balance laser counts.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 154	Posted - 2016.08.16 19:09:59 - [79] - Quote Details (provisional, of course) on Sisi, courtesy of Reddit: Barges and exhumers: Traits, Attributes comparison Strip miners: Attribute comparison If my math's correct, these are max-yield-fitted m³/s (rounded to nearest m³) of unboosted ships with all skills to V and with T2 modules and crystals, ordered by new yields ascending, as well as the per-cycle yields: Procurer: 2079m³/s » 2079m³/s (unchanged) 1871m³/c » 1871m³/c (unchanged Skiff: 2666m³/s » 2666m³/s (unchanged) 2039m³/c » 2039m³/c (unchanged) Retriever: 2266m³/s » 2833m³/s (+25%) 2039m³/c » 2549m³/c (+25%) Covetor: 2807m³/s » 3022m³/s (+7.65%) 2245m³/c » 2039m³/c (-9.2%) Mackinaw: 2666m³/s » 3333m³/s (+25%) 2039m³/c » 2549m³/c (+25%) Hulk: 3302m³/s » 3555m³/s (+7.65%) 2245m³/c » 2039m³/c (-9.2%) Minor fitting changes, no base stat changes, no other role bonus changes. Interpretation: please come out of your skiffs, so the gankers have some content again! Until all are free...
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 72	Posted - 2016.08.16 19:25:09 - [80] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Details (provisional, of course) on Sisi, courtesy of Reddit: Barges and exhumers: Traits, Attributes comparison Strip miners: Attribute comparison If my math's correct, these are max-yield-fitted m³/s (rounded to nearest m³) of unboosted ships with all skills to V and with T2 modules and crystals, ordered by new yields ascending, as well as the per-cycle yields: Procurer: 2079m³/s » 2079m³/s (unchanged) 1871m³/c » 1871m³/c (unchanged Skiff: 2666m³/s » 2666m³/s (unchanged) 2039m³/c » 2039m³/c (unchanged) Retriever: 2266m³/s » 2833m³/s (+25%) 2039m³/c » 2549m³/c (+25%) Covetor: 2807m³/s » 3022m³/s (+7.65%) 2245m³/c » 2039m³/c (-9.2%) Mackinaw: 2666m³/s » 3333m³/s (+25%) 2039m³/c » 2549m³/c (+25%) Hulk: 3302m³/s » 3555m³/s (+7.65%) 2245m³/c » 2039m³/c (-9.2%) Minor fitting changes, no base stat changes, no other role bonus changes. Interpretation: please come out of your skiffs, so the gankers have some content again! even if the hulk/mak/cov/ret mined 500% more then the skiff... i would still mine in a skiff.. as would everyone i have talked to so far (which is quite a few) ... that is by choice...

Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:36:39 - [81] - Quote So the headline figures are that the Mackinaw now mines 25% more than a Skiff, and the Hulk mines 40% more than a Skiff. Still not enough to make the Mackinaw worthwhile; it doesn't have the tank to survive solo against either NullSec rats or HighSec gankers, and in any fleet situation the Hulk will out-mine it. It might make the Retriever worthwhile, as it's cheap enough not to matter when it gets ganked.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 2222	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:37:01 - [82] - Quote The strip miners got a boost as well and makes up that effective missing 50% of the -150%.on the Skiff, the second strip miner taking out 100% of course.. Base stats is that the T1 strip miner is up to 675m3 from 540m3 for the same time spent which is 180 seconds. When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 156	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:37:49 - [83] - Quote And for ice harvesting, max-cycle-time-fitted (but: unrigged, since you probably need some CPU rigs to even fit the Ice Harvester Upgrade II's): A) m³ per cycle: All: 1000m³/c » 1000m³/c (unchanged) B) ice harvesters per ship Procurer: 1 » 2 (+50%) Retriever: 2 » 2 (unchanged) Covetor: 3 » 2 (-33%) Skiff: 1 » 2 (+50%) Mackinaw: 2 » 2 (unchanged) Hulk: 3 » 2 (-33%) C) seconds per cycle Procurer: 074.53s/c » 149.06s/c (+100% time = -50% m³/s) Retriever: 135.64s/c » 108.51s/c (-20% time = +25% m³/s) Covetor: 165.62s/c » 101.73s/c (-38.575% time = +62.8% m³/s) Skiff: 061.04s/c » 122.08s/c (+100% time = -50% m³/s) Mackinaw: 122.08s/c » 097.66s/c (-20% time = +25% m³/s) Hulk: 140.78s/c » 086.47s/c (-35.575% time = +62.8% m³/s) F) m³ per second (= A*B/C) Procurer: 13.42m³/s » 13.42m³/s (unchanged) Retriever: 14.74m³/s » 18.43m³/s (+25%) Covetor: 18.11m³/s » 19.66m³/s (+8.53%) Skiff: 16.38m³/s » 16.38m³/s (unchanged) Mackinaw: 16.38m³/s » 20.48m³/s (+25%) Hulk: 21.31m³/s » 23.13m³/s (+8.53%) Until all are free...
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 156	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:42:38 - [84] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: The strip miners got a boost as well and makes up that effective missing 50% of the -150%.on the Skiff. The +25% strip miner yield and the -20% ice harvester cycle time that are apparent on Singularity were accounted for in these analyses. Until all are free...
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 2223	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:45:55 - [85] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Dracvlad wrote: The strip miners got a boost as well and makes up that effective missing 50% of the -150%.on the Skiff. The +25% strip miner yield and the -20% ice harvester cycle time that are apparent on Singularity were accounted for in these analyses. I just compared my yield on my skiff and Traqulity and Sisi ore mining and got exactly the same yield with T1 strip miners, well 1m3 extra and the time taken was the same too. As I am not going to change from the Skiff that is all that matters to me. When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:51:39 - [86] - Quote Interesting: Due to the extra low slot I think the Mackinaw might mine Ice ever so slightly faster. I might have to retract my statement & say that the Mackinaw has an extremely marginal use during an ice rush.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 156	Posted - 2016.08.16 20:56:32 - [87] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: I just compared my yield on my skiff and Traqulity and Sisi ore mining and got exactly the same yield with T1 strip miners, well 1m3 extra and the time taken was the same too. As I am not going to change from the Skiff that is all that matters to me. Skiff: 13.99m³/s » 13.99m³/s (unchanged) Entirely consistent with my findings. Kalido Raddi wrote: Interesting: Due to the extra low slot I think the Mackinaw might mine Ice ever so slightly faster than the Hulk. I might have to retract my statement & say that the Mackinaw has an extremely marginal use during an ice rush. All low-slots were accounted for (and fitted with T2 Mining Laser Upgrade II's / Ice Harvester Upgrade II's), including the 3 low slots Mackinaws already have, and the 3 low slots that Covetors and Hulks are getting. The Procurer is the only one left with only 2 low slots. Until all are free...
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.16 21:07:11 - [88] - Quote Ah right,. I missed that your figures included the modules. In that case I go back to my original statement; the Mackinaw is pointless. The increased yield might look attractive to newer players though. I foresee hilarious lossmails.
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 40	Posted - 2016.08.16 21:11:19 - [89] - Quote That's a sizeable increase in Retriever/mack yield with no hold increase, going to make them a bit worse in the solo miner arena.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 156	Posted - 2016.08.16 21:17:45 - [90] - Quote Ugh, forgot all the non-ship-related skill bonusses... Doesn't change the relative numbers, but the absolutes are still off. Will have to edit them again... Until all are free...

Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 1	Posted - 2016.08.16 21:50:52 - [91] - Quote Thanks for doing the math. The change seem modest and straightforward. The Procurer/Skiff for low risk/low reward, Mackinaw and Hulk at an equal risk level, but the Hulk offering a yield bonus if you want to make the effort with jetcans or hauling ore. Still too many unknowns on the Rorqual/new command ship to make up my mind. Scenario one would be Mackinaws supported by the new command ship (dumping ore in a POS or future mining array), and scenario two would be hulks supported by a Rorqual (dumping ore in the Rorqual). A lot depending on how much bonus yield CCP will give for the latter scenario. But if the situation is safe enough for a Rorqual, why not train all miners up to a Rorqual. Waiting for the relevant devblog....
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.16 22:07:45 - [92] - Quote Interesting in a tactical sense that it's now the Hulk that has the rapid cycle time. That's a big advantage in an Ice Rush. I always use the Skiff over the Hulk for an Ice Rush, even though the Hulk had range and a slight advantage in volume. Now I suspect I'll be using a Hulk.
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 40	Posted - 2016.08.16 22:19:11 - [93] - Quote Arianne Kass wrote: Thanks for doing the math. The change seem modest and straightforward. The Procurer/Skiff for low risk/low reward, Mackinaw and Hulk at an equal risk level, but the Hulk offering a yield bonus if you want to make the effort with jetcans or hauling ore. Still too many unknowns on the Rorqual/new command ship to make up my mind. Scenario one would be Mackinaws supported by the new command ship (dumping ore in a POS or future mining array), and scenario two would be hulks supported by a Rorqual (dumping ore in the Rorqual). A lot depending on how much bonus yield CCP will give for the latter scenario. But if the situation is safe enough for a Rorqual, why not train all miners up to a Rorqual. Waiting for the relevant devblog.... That last part has been my question, if the Rorqual gets huge yield with drones, why not just run Rorquals? Huge tank, lots of dps for defense, spider tank the fleet, and possibly daisy chain invulnerability field.
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 1	Posted - 2016.08.16 22:58:59 - [94] - Quote Lugues Slive wrote: That last part has been my question, if the Rorqual gets huge yield with drones, why not just run Rorquals? Huge tank, lots of dps for defense, spider tank the fleet, and possibly daisy chain invulnerability field. The picture shown by CCP doesn't have a large bubble, but tendrils enveloping each mining ship, so it probably won't extend to nearby Rorquals. Gevlon Goblin had lots of amusing stories on his blog about MoA hotdrops vs. Goon carriers, mainly people being left to their fate to die horribly. Not seeing that whole "rescue fleet in 15 minutes" happen. Staying aligned at all times making a lot more sense.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 522	Posted - 2016.08.16 23:44:37 - [95] - Quote Q: What purpose does the Mackinaw serve? The hulk pulls in more, so it's better in a fleet! A: Yes and no. The hulk is better as long as you can empty all of your own hulk's ore holds without any hulk stopping their miners. A Hulk's cargohold fills up every ~150 seconds. So if you can empty one every 10 seconds, you can run 12-15 Hulks yourself. If you have more than 15 mining chars, you have to use Mackinaws. The Mackinaw is the ship for the guys that want more than 2 minutes between emptying the cargoholds.
Wayne Donne Royal Oaks Glen Oaks Oakwood Oaks Country Club All My Friends Are Ded 1	Posted - 2016.08.16 23:46:34 - [96] - Quote If the stats on sisi stay the same until release, the clear winners here are the retriever/mackinaw.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.16 23:57:30 - [97] - Quote Wayne Donne wrote: If the stats on sisi stay the same until release, the clear winners here are the retriever/mackinaw. It's still useless though; not tanky enough for solo, doesn't mine as much as a Hulk in fleets.
Wayne Donne Royal Oaks Glen Oaks Oakwood Oaks Country Club All My Friends Are Ded 1	Posted - 2016.08.17 00:23:05 - [98] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: Wayne Donne wrote: If the stats on sisi stay the same until release, the clear winners here are the retriever/mackinaw. It's still useless though; not tanky enough for solo, doesn't mine as much as a Hulk in fleets. In high-sec, you can get a mack to 75k tank against hybrid charges with boosts/heat. That's not bad.
Wayne Donne Royal Oaks Glen Oaks Oakwood Oaks Country Club All My Friends Are Ded 1	Posted - 2016.08.17 00:29:24 - [99] - Quote Wayne Donne wrote: Kalido Raddi wrote: Wayne Donne wrote: If the stats on sisi stay the same until release, the clear winners here are the retriever/mackinaw. It's still useless though; not tanky enough for solo, doesn't mine as much as a Hulk in fleets. In high-sec, you can get a mack to 75k tank against hybrid charges with boosts/heat. That's better than i thought. If you are smart, you bookmark the other side of the belt, so any catalysts who warp in have to slow boat ~50 k to your location just to scram you.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17903	Posted - 2016.08.17 07:35:06 - [100] - Quote The hulk and mackinaw both have big issues with CPU shortage, the retriever and covetor have no ability to fit much of anything aside from mining gear. All 4 of these miners are lacking fitting options while the skiff and procurer are overtanked in their base HP. The same mistakes that were made with the last 2 barge balances are being made again with this one.

Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 07:37:03 - [101] - Quote just messed around on test with the new stuff love the graphics... as for fitting out the ships, tank vs yield ect due to the current nature of the environment, the vast majority will probobly be sticking with the skiff still as for the screams by code and other entities to nurf the skiff, i am not the least bit concerned. it was designed to tank belt rats in null sec, and will thus remain as it is,
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17904	Posted - 2016.08.17 08:05:44 - [102] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: just messed around on test with the new stuff love the graphics... as for fitting out the ships, tank vs yield ect due to the current nature of the environment, the vast majority will probobly be sticking with the skiff still as for the screams by code and other entities to nurf the skiff, i am not the least bit concerned. it was designed to tank belt rats in null sec, and will thus remain as it is, The problem is that the skiff and proc overshadow the other 4 barges. They should not be getting such a massive base tank, they should be getting the fitting options to get a good tank and the other barges should be getting an equal ability to be able to actually fit things to them. Skiff and proc should get their base hp brought back down to normal levels, keep the combat bonus to drones, get a few more slots and fitting room to open up options and allow for a decent combat fit. They are now perfect mining escorts/defence boats for both fleet work and solo. Retriever and mackinaw both need a good deal more slots and CPU/PG so they can actually have options when fitting them. CCP need to get creative here so I would say go radical. Give them two utility highs and a small bonus to remote shield boosters. Alter the cap to compensate. Again, they need the ability to actually fit a decent setup, 1 mid and 3 lows are next to useless. Covetor and Hulk should be the go to strip miners, they also need more fitting slots and CPU/PG to actually fit things. Again, 1 mid and 3 lows does not a good ship make.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 08:20:32 - [103] - Quote if they did as you suggest Baltec, lower the tank, and add add more cpu and more slots to the skiff / proc , then in theory, those fitting slots could be used to make the skiff mine more then the mak or hulk combined would be right back in the same situation with everyone useing skiffs.. some fit as tank some fit for max yield, and you would never know which their tank was ballanced around null sec - wormhole mining they already mine worse then the others..... by serious sacrifice in yield they gain the tank, the real question is WHY nurf the tank on the skiff??? to make it easier to gank?? game does not revolve around ganking, there be other aspects of the game,, wormhole, null sec industry ect were the tank is used
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17904	Posted - 2016.08.17 08:43:26 - [104] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: if they did as you suggest Baltec, lower the tank, and add add more cpu and more slots to the skiff / proc , then in theory, those fitting slots could be used to make the skiff mine more then the mak or hulk combined Diminishing returns on fitted mods, past 3 mining upgrade the improvement would be non existent. Just like weapon mods. Gunrunner1775 wrote: the real question is WHY nurf the tank on the skiff??? to make it easier to gank?? game does not revolve around ganking, there be other aspects of the game,, wormhole, null sec industry ect were the tank is used Same reason the t3 ships need a massive nerf, they invalidate the other other ships. Notice that I am not saying lower the skiff and proc to covetor levels of tank and leave them there, I am saying reduce the base tank of the skiff/proc down to the level of the other miners then buff all of them so they are all useful. The base profile of the hulk for example is not too different from a zealot, the difference is that it is lacking in slots, CPU and powergrid. The skiff should not get its huge tank from the hull it should come from the pilot actively choosing to fit a good tank.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 08:44:19 - [105] - Quote for the most part, the miners are shield tanks,, the only real way to ballance the tank vs yield issue make them all armor tanks. reduce them to only 2 midslots each (enough for an AB or mwd, and survey scanner) give them bunch of low slots.. and now they choose, tank or yield since both armor tank and mining upgrades go in the low slot but then again, you run into the situtation of crafty players comeing up with ways to tweek the tank or tweek the yield, and then right back were we started ... might as well have only 1 type of mining barge and 1 type of exhumer then and get rid of the others
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17904	Posted - 2016.08.17 08:58:48 - [106] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: for the most part, the miners are shield tanks,, the only real way to ballance the tank vs yield issue make them all armor tanks. reduce them to only 2 midslots each (enough for an AB or mwd, and survey scanner) give them bunch of low slots.. and now they choose, tank or yield since both armor tank and mining upgrades go in the low slot but then again, you run into the situtation of crafty players comeing up with ways to tweek the tank or tweek the yield, and then right back were we started ... might as well have only 1 type of mining barge and 1 type of exhumer then and get rid of the others Making them armour tankers makes a lot of sense in terms of balance when it comes to fitting them. Personally I think cargo expanders should have an impact on the ore holds too simple to add more options to consider. The bays would naturally have to be altered to take that into account.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 09:13:18 - [107] - Quote if they went with the armor tank method, then for the skiff to retain its tankability / survivability in null sec - wormhole space, it would have to have significant number of low slots to fit the tank in return this would make for nearly ungankable ships in high sec ... or... would create a skiff that would have more yield then makinaw and hulk combined.. even with dimenishing returns on the mining laser upgrades... then everyone would be flying skiffs again...
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17904	Posted - 2016.08.17 09:31:17 - [108] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: if they went with the armor tank method, then for the skiff to retain its tankability / survivability in null sec - wormhole space, it would have to have significant number of low slots to fit the tank in return this would make for nearly ungankable ships in high sec ... or... would create a skiff that would have more yield then makinaw and hulk combined.. even with dimenishing returns on the mining laser upgrades... then everyone would be flying skiffs again... They used use to be more lowslot focused. The yield won't be an issue, all 4 of the other mining barges have bonuses to mining amount so putting them all on an even level in terms of ability to fit a tank will open up the options. Right now the reason why just about everyone is in the skiff and procurer is simply down to the fact the have a monster of a tank while the rest cant get close or even fit a tank at all. To put the madness into perspective, the Iteron V gets 5 lows, 4 mids and two highs. The covetor has 3 lows, one mid, two highs on sisi.
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 09:43:44 - [109] - Quote skiff has worst yield and best tank if you nurf the tank, what do you give it in return?? almost everyone calling for nurf to skiff has been gankers because they want it easier gank in high sec, perhaps its because smart miners have chosen tank over yield and profit the reason behind the tank on the skiff, was to allow them to survive belt rats in null sec wormhole space should all us in wormhole space and null sec alter our play style to revolve around the crying of the 1% high sec gankers?? this is not an easy fix by any means i just do not want to see CCP bend to the 1% Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few
Eternus8lux8lucis Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 895	Posted - 2016.08.17 10:42:31 - [110] - Quote Kueyen wrote: And for ice harvesting, max-cycle-time-fitted (but: unrigged, since you probably need some CPU rigs to even fit the Ice Harvester Upgrade II's), all skills to V, and no boosts or : A) m³ per cycle: All: 1000m³/c » 1000m³/c (unchanged) B) ice harvesters per ship Procurer: 1 » 2 (+50%) Retriever: 2 » 2 (unchanged) Covetor: 3 » 2 (-33%) Skiff: 1 » 2 (+50%) Mackinaw: 2 » 2 (unchanged) Hulk: 3 » 2 (-33%) C) seconds per cycle Procurer: 55.90s/c » 111.79s/c (+100% time = -50% m³/s) Retriever: 101.73s/c » 81.39s/c (-20% time = +25% m³/s) Covetor: 124.22s/c » 76.30s/c (-38.575% time = +62.8% m³/s) Skiff: 45.78s/c » 91.56s/c (+100% time = -50% m³/s) Mackinaw: 91.56s/c » 73.25s/c (-20% time = +25% m³/s) Hulk: 105.58s/c » 64.85s/c (-35.575% time = +62.8% m³/s) F) m³ per second (= A*B/C) Procurer: 17.89m³/s » 17.89m³/s (unchanged) Retriever: 19.66m³/s » 24.57m³/s (+25%) Covetor: 24.15m³/s » 26.21m³/s (+8.53%) Skiff: 21.84m³/s » 21.84m³/s (unchanged) Mackinaw: 21.84m³/s » 27.30m³/s (+25%) Hulk: 28.41m³/s » 30.84m³/s (+8.53%) If the procurer and the skiff lose the 60% duration bonus why is the cycle time being multiplied by 100% instead of 60%? This would change a lot in your calculations imo. Have you heard anything I've said? You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right? That's right. Had to end sometime.

Zerzzes Markarian Andraste. 4	Posted - 2016.08.17 12:14:07 - [111] - Quote I don't know, maybe I'm doing something wrong. I've been mining for years in high-sec with Retrievers and Macks, and haven't lost a single one. And I see quite a lot of people using them as well in Ore belts. This whole discussion is just about yield vs. tank, while for me the ore hold is the reason I'm using the Mack. Because if you factor in the warp times to POS/station when you don't have a hauler in the belt, the Mack wins.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.17 12:23:34 - [112] - Quote Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: If the procurer and the skiff lose the 60% duration bonus why is the cycle time being multiplied by 100% instead of 60%? This would change a lot in your calculations imo. If it were just a case of the Ship traits changing, then the Procurer's cycle time would increase by 150%. However, there have also been changes to the Strip Miner and Ice Harvester modules, which reduce the Ice Harvester's duration by 20%, thus keeping the overall cycle time of the Procurer identical to before. http://i.imgur.com/CorMkCt.png
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 157	Posted - 2016.08.17 12:27:16 - [113] - Quote Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: If the procurer and the skiff lose the 60% duration bonus why is the cycle time being multiplied by 100% instead of 60%? This would change a lot in your calculations imo. The part you are missing is the -20% cycle time bonus all ice harvesters are getting (which boils down to a 25% yield over time increase, identical to the +25% yield bonus all strip miners are getting), In total, Procurers and Skiffs lose their x0.4 (-60%) cycle time role bonus, get a yield doubling from fitting 2 ice harvesters instead of one, and gain the new 0.8 (-20%) cycle time bonus of the new ice harvesters. new cycle time is 1 / 0.4 * 0.8 (losing the 0.4 role bonus, and gaining the 0.8 ice harvester bonus), and thus doubles new yield is 1 * 2 (gaining a second ice harvester), and thus doubles. Net result: double the yield in double the time = same yield per time unit. Also, while I rewrote this post several times, I have been ninja-ed by Kalido Raddi Until all are free...
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 20	Posted - 2016.08.17 12:46:26 - [114] - Quote Yours is more detailed :) I'm still finding interesting things. The Hulk still has it's crystal damage issue, although it's not quite as severe any more. It now eats Crystals only 40% faster than the Skiff (& Mackinaw) does, rather than almost 70%. Partly this is because the Skiff will eat more of them too. That part is good news for me as I make Tech2 Mining Crystals! The Hulk is looking like the stand-out winner of this pass. It gains more of everything it was already superior in: It mines more than ever before, with a 40% better yield over time compared to the Skiff, it has an extra low slot. It also becomes the fastest cycler, which has tactical implications for competitive mining environments like Ice Rushes. The downside is that the Hulk is going to be an awful pain to fit. Losing 40 tf (and 5 MW) is an obvious offset to the reduction in the number of Strip Miners it needs to fit, but the addition of a 3rd MLU is going to make for some very tight fits (unless the CPU requirements of Strips and Harvesters changed on SiSi - I haven't managed to log on and check yet). Mining Upgrades 5 just got a lot more worthwhile.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17906	Posted - 2016.08.17 13:30:20 - [115] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: if you nurf the tank, what do you give it in return?? Nothing, you add it into the rework of ALL the barges, giving all of them the ability to actually fit the ships. The advantage of the skiff would be the offensive ability. Gunrunner1775 wrote: the reason behind the tank on the skiff, was to allow them to survive belt rats in null sec wormhole space should all us in wormhole space and null sec alter our play style to revolve around the crying of the 1% high sec gankers?? The skiff wasn't made tanky for null and WH use, if that was the case it would have been tilted towards active tanking. The raw HP buff was purely for the whining highsec bears who refused to fit any tank. CCP decided to do it for them and ended up with these problem ship we have now. Null has already been forced to adapt to the wants of a minority of highsec, null can adapt again only this time all the barges should be useful, not just two. Again I will point out, the covetor and retribution cannot fit a tank, they simply have no slots to do it and the hulk and mack are both short of CPU to make use of the slots they have. The barges are poorly balanced against eachother and against the other ships out there.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 3903	Posted - 2016.08.17 13:58:23 - [116] - Quote In figuring yield, there is one real world consideration. Most miners do not scan the roid and try and time their strip cycle to avoid wasting time on a depleted roid. Thus, on average, the last cycle will have wasted time, on average half a cycle. In high sec, right now, the average roid lasts 6 cycles of a Hulk, 4 cycles for a Mack, and 2 cycles for a Skiff. This is all due to the bonuses and the differing number of strips. As a result, the Hulk loses 8% yield due to wasted time, 12% for the Mack, and 25% for the Skiff. All theses values will change to 16% for all exhumers due to all having 2 strips. Thus, with this real world consideration, Skiffs get a 13% buff and Hulks get a 4% nerf. Stay in your Skiffs, folks. Know a Frozen fan? Check this out Frozen fanfiction
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 74	Posted - 2016.08.17 14:49:25 - [117] - Quote Quote: DEV BLOG Ship Balancing: Mining Barges 2012-08-03 18:10 \|By CCP Tallest 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. GÇó 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. GÇó 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. GÇó 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. i dont see any problems with the design concept hopefully they continue to stick with this one
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 157	Posted - 2016.08.17 15:35:20 - [118] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: In figuring yield, there is one real world consideration. Most miners do not scan the roid and try and time their strip cycle to avoid wasting time on a depleted roid. Thus, on average, the last cycle will have wasted time, on average half a cycle. In high sec, right now, the average roid lasts 6 cycles of a Hulk, 4 cycles for a Mack, and 2 cycles for a Skiff. This is all due to the bonuses and the differing number of strips. As a result, the Hulk loses 8% yield due to wasted time, 12% for the Mack, and 25% for the Skiff. All theses values will change to 16% for all exhumers due to all having 2 strips. Thus, with this real world consideration, Skiffs get a 13% buff and Hulks get a 4% nerf. Stay in your Skiffs, folks. Not entirely correct. I refer you back to my earlier post that shows that Mackinaw and Skiff cycles will be 41% longer than Hulk cycles, and Mack cycles will be 25% more voluminous than Hulk or Skiff cycles. Regardless of how many cycles whatever asteroid would take you to mine in a Hulk, the Skiff will take exactly as many cycles to do so (the Hulk will just do it 41% faster); the Mackinaw will however take 20% fewer cycles, and thus lose a few more percents when not properly managed. So, not all identical as you asserted. But Skiffs did get buffed in this regard, and Hulks (and Mackinaws) nerfed. but in other regards (total yield per time), Mackinaws got significant buffs. So, if you're on your own, and pay even moderate attention, Mackinaws are decent mining vessels. If you don't pay attention at all... stay in the Skiff, I suppose. Until all are free...
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 21	Posted - 2016.08.17 15:52:45 - [119] - Quote @Kueyen: I can't get ontonSisi at the moment. Have the Grid & CPU requirements of the Strip Miners & Ice Harvesters changed with the changes to other stats?
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 157	Posted - 2016.08.17 17:25:52 - [120] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: @Kueyen: I can't get ontonSisi at the moment. Have the Grid & CPU requirements of the Strip Miners & Ice Harvesters changed with the changes to other stats? No changes detected. Fun fact: Sisi just went down for maintance... perhaps more changes might become apparent... Until all are free...

Commander A9 The Scope Gallente Federation 728	Posted - 2016.08.17 18:20:15 - [121] - Quote Well, guess I don't have a reason to go back to the belts. Giving all mining vessels 2 Strip systems... :/ I didn't like the changes they made to barges back in 2011-2012, and I don't like them now. What makes the Hulk so much of a better choice versus the Mackinaw with these changes then? :/ Recommendations: -enable ships wobbling in hangar view (pre-Captains Quarters) -add more missions (NPC fleet vs. NPC fleets that actually shoot) -STOP NERFING EVERYTHING! Join Live Events!
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 21	Posted - 2016.08.17 18:41:56 - [122] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Kalido Raddi wrote: @Kueyen: I can't get ontonSisi at the moment. Have the Grid & CPU requirements of the Strip Miners & Ice Harvesters changed with the changes to other stats? No changes detected. Fun fact: Sisi just went down for maintance... perhaps more changes might become apparent... Well, if that remains true, with the stats shown in earlier images fitting the Hulk will be very much like fitting the Mackinaw is now. Base CPU of 270 is 337.5 at CPU Management 5 Base Grid of 35 is 43.75 at Power Grid Management 5 3 Mining Laser Upgrade IIs is 120 tf each MLU also adds 9.375% to the CPU of each fitted Strip Miner at Mining Upgrades 5 2 Modulated Strip Miner IIs are 60 (base) * 1.09375 * 1.09375 * 1.09375 = 78.5064 tf Total of 277.01 (beware of CCP_round) Which leaves 60.49 That's not really enough to work with, so let's assume that we're adding CPU rigs. With one Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I, CPU is 361.46 tf With one Medium Processor Overclocking Unit II, CPU is 369.9 tf With two Medium Processor Overclocking Unit Is, CPU is 383.13 tf With an 6% CPU Implant in, the numbers are: EE-606 & MPOU1 = 383.15 tf EE-606 & MPOU2 = 392.09 tf EE-606 & 2MPOU1 = 410.35 tf So at the very maximum you can have 133.34 tf (actually 133.340978296875 - beware once again of CCP_Round) for your mid slots - if* you give up your 6th implant slot and both Rigs. Power Grid usage comes to 27 of 43.75 MW I'd guess that most people will be looking at 2 Hardeners, a Survey Scanner and some other tanking module. You can't fit an MSE without sacrificing an MLU for a MAPC, which defeats the point. The trade-offs for a workable Hulk fit are going to be tricky. It's interesting to note that while CCP have hard nerfed the CPU and Grid on the Hulk, they've left the increased Capacitor that it needed to run 3 Strip Miners untouched.
Eternus8lux8lucis Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 897	Posted - 2016.08.18 06:32:54 - [123] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: If the procurer and the skiff lose the 60% duration bonus why is the cycle time being multiplied by 100% instead of 60%? This would change a lot in your calculations imo. The part you are missing is the -20% cycle time bonus all ice harvesters are getting (which boils down to a 25% yield over time increase, identical to the +25% yield bonus all strip miners are getting), In total, Procurers and Skiffs lose their x0.4 (-60%) cycle time role bonus, get a yield doubling from fitting 2 ice harvesters instead of one, and gain the new 0.8 (-20%) cycle time bonus of the new ice harvesters. new cycle time is 1 / 0.4 * 0.8 (losing the 0.4 role bonus, and gaining the 0.8 ice harvester bonus), and thus doubles new yield is 1 * 2 (gaining a second ice harvester), and thus doubles. Net result: double the yield in double the time = same yield per time unit. Also, while I rewrote this post several times, I have been ninja-ed by Kalido Raddi Aha!! I missed the -20% module reduction! It is all good now in my head.... and it MUST BE GOOD IN MY HEAD DAMMIT!! Have you heard anything I've said? You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right? That's right. Had to end sometime.
Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 212	Posted - 2016.08.18 15:21:16 - [124] - Quote Delonewolf has made a video about it. https://youtu.be/mvvlcUBe8AE "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen." (Ein Single) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind." (Einer, dem es egal ist)
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 76	Posted - 2016.08.18 15:53:43 - [125] - Quote im on test right now fitted a max yield hulk mid slot i put 1 invul field, thats all i could fit with orca boosts i get the following Max Yield Hulk H- 2x T2 strip miners w/T2 crystals M- Adaptive Invul Field II L- 3x Mining Laser Upgrade II Rigs- 2x shield extender rigs II Defense: 14,209 hp Shields: 4.356 hp, 44%/56%/67%/72% Armor: 2.430 60%/35%/25%/10% Hull: 2500 hp 33%/33%/33%/33% Mining Yield: (2x 1833 m3) / 72.1 seconds. = 50.1 m3 / second (183,045 m3 per hour) Max Tank Hulk with orca fleet boosts -notes: I ran into power grid issues trying to fit moderately decent shield tank H- 2x T2 strip miners w/ T2 crystals M- Adaptive Invul Field II, Thermal Amp II, Kinetic Defl II, Medium Shield Extender L- Damage control II, Power Diagnostics II, compact reactor control unit Rigs- 2x Shield extender rigs II Defense: 23,396 hp Shields: 6860 hp, 52%/79%/84%/76% Armor: 2430 hp 66%/45%/37%/24% Hull: 2500 hp 60%/60%/60%/60% Mining Yield: (2x 1415 m3) / 72.1 seconds, = 39.25 m3 / second (141,303 m3 per hour)
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 76	Posted - 2016.08.18 16:02:17 - [126] - Quote it appears that there might be some issues with the role bonus on the makinaw on test hulk: mining barge bonus per level 5% strip miner range 2% strip miner duration exhumer bonus 4% shield resist 3% strip miner duration assumeing lv 5 in both... should be 10% + 15% faster mineing then role bonus is 25% faster mining Makinaw has barge: 5% ore hold bonus 2% strip miner duration Exhumber 4% shields 2% strip miner duration role bonus 25% strip miner yield so tank hulk w/o fleet bonus im showing Mining Yield: (2x 1230 m3 / 103.3 seconds, = 23.8 m3/second (85,730 m3 per hour) and tank makinaw w/o fleet bonus im showing Mining Yield: (2x 1230m3) / 145.8 seconds = 16.87 m3 / second (60,740 m3 per hour) makinaw should be mining slower (as it shows) but mineing more per cycle which is not showing up unless im totaly blind and missing something
Lugues Slive Diamond Light Industries 40	Posted - 2016.08.18 19:04:00 - [127] - Quote Just doing some quick fittings test, the mack basically has no changes, it's 25% increase in yield comes from strip miner changes. Looking at a passive tank for HS catalyst defense, with no implants, I get an 80% increase in EHP and a 5% increase in yield. Strip miner 1 x 2 Kinetic amp 2 Thermal amp 2 Upgraded thermal amp MSE 2 DCU 2 RCU 2 MLU 2 field extender 2 x 2 Def: 48,353 Shields 7290 30/81/78/65 Armor 2875 66/45/36/24 Hull 3375 all 60% Yield 1183 m3/min
Careby 285	Posted - 2016.08.18 19:44:28 - [128] - Quote If they really want to see rorquals out in the belts, they could, you know, let them into highsec...
Gulmuk Control-Space DARKNESS. 2	Posted - 2016.08.21 18:42:48 - [129] - Quote I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. As for the Rorqual changes.. WHY would I put a rorqual in a belt or anomaly? IF they are compressing ore they are a sitting duck, and if they aren't they align so slow, they're going to get ganked. NO, I think I will still leave the rorq in the POS, use cheap haulers to move the ore to the Citadel and have a fleet of skiffs in the belt. They can tank, mine, kill the rats that spawn, and haul out their load if reds come in system. So where does the HULK fit in now? Good going CCP... Leave the mining barge changes up to the MINERS and leave the economics up to the economy nerds... On a side note... CCP can we PLEASE get the deadspace and faction mods seeded on SISI? It's very hard to try and figure out a workable fit without them. Especially with the changes to the Exhumers.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 159	Posted - 2016.08.21 22:48:42 - [130] - Quote Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. As I demonstrated here, there's nothing that's changing about the Skiff's yield, whereas a max-yield-fitted Hulk is actually gaining another 7.65% over its current yield, improving it from 31.2% better than a max-yield-fitted Skiff to 41.2% better. How has that "effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game"? Until all are free...

Autism Intensifies some random local shitlords 9	Posted - 2016.08.21 23:11:28 - [131] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. As I demonstrated here, there's nothing that's changing about the Skiff's yield, whereas a max-yield-fitted Hulk is actually gaining another 7.65% over its current yield, improving it from 31.2% better than a max-yield-fitted Skiff to 41.2% better. How has that "effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game"? The worst of it all is that these people with obviously limited mental capabilities are the ones crying the most on the forum. Let's just pray CCP isn't listening to them.
Gulmuk Control-Space DARKNESS. 2	Posted - 2016.08.22 00:42:40 - [132] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. As I demonstrated here, there's nothing that's changing about the Skiff's yield, whereas a max-yield-fitted Hulk is actually gaining another 7.65% over its current yield, improving it from 31.2% better than a max-yield-fitted Skiff to 41.2% better. How has that "effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game"? And who fits for max yeild in 0.0? I came up in this game with the HULK being the premium 0.0 mining vessel. It's what I used it for and as of last update. It's broken! This next update just seems to want to break it more. I have done the math and with a HULK tanked for 0.0, a skiff can mine 36K/m3 ore in an hour. The hulk does marginally better at 50K per hour. Plus you have to jetcan mine with a hulk. I don't live in highsec and therefore can't use a HULK in highsec. I am speaking for the 0.0 miners. And the only way to fit a good 0.0 tank on the hulk anymore is to use deadspace modules to make it work.
Gulmuk Control-Space DARKNESS. 2	Posted - 2016.08.22 00:43:40 - [133] - Quote Kueyen wrote: Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. As I demonstrated here, there's nothing that's changing about the Skiff's yield, whereas a max-yield-fitted Hulk is actually gaining another 7.65% over its current yield, improving it from 31.2% better than a max-yield-fitted Skiff to 41.2% better. How has that "effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game"? Oh and I like how your Link is to a Star Wars anime video on YOUTUBE ... LOLS
Gulmuk Control-Space DARKNESS. 2	Posted - 2016.08.22 00:46:28 - [134] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: im on test right now fitted a max yield hulk mid slot i put 1 invul field, thats all i could fit with orca boosts i get the following Max Yield Hulk H- 2x T2 strip miners w/T2 crystals M- Adaptive Invul Field II L- 3x Mining Laser Upgrade II Rigs- 2x shield extender rigs II Defense: 14,209 hp Shields: 4.356 hp, 44%/56%/67%/72% Armor: 2.430 60%/35%/25%/10% Hull: 2500 hp 33%/33%/33%/33% Mining Yield: (2x 1833 m3) / 72.1 seconds. = 50.1 m3 / second (183,045 m3 per hour) Max Tank Hulk with orca fleet boosts -notes: I ran into power grid issues trying to fit moderately decent shield tank H- 2x T2 strip miners w/ T2 crystals M- Adaptive Invul Field II, Thermal Amp II, Kinetic Defl II, Medium Shield Extender L- Damage control II, Power Diagnostics II, compact reactor control unit Rigs- 2x Shield extender rigs II Defense: 23,396 hp Shields: 6860 hp, 52%/79%/84%/76% Armor: 2430 hp 66%/45%/37%/24% Hull: 2500 hp 60%/60%/60%/60% Mining Yield: (2x 1415 m3) / 72.1 seconds, = 39.25 m3 / second (141,303 m3 per hour) Not sure how you came up with 1833m3/cycle but with my skills all at level 5, it's 1496 T2 miners and T2 crystals with 2 MLU's. Can't fit the 3rd MLU cause you need some sort of tank in 0.0... Lest you want to lose your hulk to a 3 BS spawn quick fast and in a hurry.
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 159	Posted - 2016.08.22 01:42:11 - [135] - Quote Gulmuk wrote: Oh and I like how your Link is to a Star Wars anime video on YOUTUBE ... LOLS Ugh, that's what I get for doing two things at once that involve copy-pasting links... Corrected. You should've seen it already anyway, it's post 79 of this very thread. Until all are free...
Kueyen Mei-Ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition 159	Posted - 2016.08.22 16:35:18 - [136] - Quote And now my math is all wrong again, because the role bonus of the Retriever and the Mackinaw has vanished from the vessels' Traits lists on Singularity. I suppose they're still sorting out final stats, but this is not encouraging for dissuading people from mining in Skiffs... It's like CCP is slowly realising that in the current barge/exhumer fitting, usage, and predation paradigm, the Retriever and Mackinaw have no role. By the Force, I think I'm starting to agree with Baltec1 in the So, Barge Info? thread... Until all are free...
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 25	Posted - 2016.08.22 21:14:13 - [137] - Quote From this thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=491069 CCP Fozzie wrote: As part of this change we are increasing the yield of all barge-sized strip miners and ice harvesters, which cancels out the changes to hardpoints and bonuses on the Barges and Exhumers. We are also providing a moderate buff to the ORE Strip Miners and ORE Ice Harvesters. The module changes in full are: All Non-ORE Strip Miners: +25% volume mined per cycle ORE Strip Miner: +30% volume mined per cycle, -10 CPU All Ice Harvesters: -20% cycle time, -20% capacitor use ORE Ice Harvester: -16 CPU And the ship changes: Procurer: Removal of strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses +1 highslot +7 PWG +55 CPU Skiff: Removal of strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses +1 highslot +8 PWG +60 CPU Retriever: Removal of strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses Mackinaw: Removal of strip miner yield and ice harvester cycle time role bonuses Covetor: Changed skill bonus for the skill Mining Barge: 2% (was 4%) reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration per level New role bonus: 25% reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration and activation cost -1 highslot +1 lowslot -5 PWG -15 CPU Hulk: Changed skill bonus for the skill Mining Barge: 2% (was 4%) reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration per level New role bonus: 25% reduction in strip miner and ice harvester duration and activation cost -1 highslot +1 lowslot -5 PWG -40 CPU We're very interested in your feedback and welcome you to try out the new stats (and new ship models) on SISI. Thanks! The Hulk is basically impossible to max fit. The 3rd LowSlot might as well not exist.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17987	Posted - 2016.08.23 08:33:37 - [138] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: The Hulk is basically impossible to max fit. The 3rd LowSlot might as well not exist. You need it for the CPU mod
Gunrunner1775 Empire Hooligans 102	Posted - 2016.08.24 05:24:44 - [139] - Quote Baltec1, some of your ideas interest me... (im slow to be persuaded .. cant teach an old dog new tricks) lets try and put tegether a ship... all the numbers everything.. but first have to have a base line to start with... T1 and T2 versions.... mining barge skill bonus and exhumer skill bonus come up with a design "cap" (ie max possible X abilities on the ship) number of slots ect as im retired and dont have much of a life except when i deside to get out and go fishin, or late at nights when the desert sky is clear, break out my telescope and look at the stars... this will be a good exercise for my brain will let you come up with the theoretical base line... then we can work numbers from there one perameter we must keep constant is the current state of the economy, so the max mined can not be more then the current ships in game one theory to toss around ... lets keep the mining frigates as they are... lets delete the mining barges and mining exhumers... lets create a mining cruiser and mining battleship (perhaps an Osprey as a base line for the cruiser and the Rokh as baseline for the battleship)
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 26	Posted - 2016.08.24 13:46:38 - [140] - Quote I think this is going to be the standard buffer Hulk: [Hulk, New Hulk] Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II Mining Laser Upgrade II 'Poacher' EM Ward Field Small F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Small F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender 'Desert Heat' Thermal Dissipation Field Modulated Strip Miner II, Arkonor Mining Crystal II Modulated Strip Miner II, Arkonor Mining Crystal II Medium Processor Overclocking Unit II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Acolyte II x5 Hornet EC-300 x5 24k EHP. The Hardeners cost about 11mil above using Tech2, and you need to spend 5mil on an EE-602 to fit this at all 5s. In terms of Shield alone, it's got about a quarter of the Skiff's Shield EHP, which will allow it to survive some shots from a rat battleship in Null without too much worry - as long as it's in a fleet and the rats die quickly. But that's fine - the Hulk is intended as a Fleet mining vessel. The big problem is the lack of a Survey Scanner, which has the potential to kill efficiency.

Zerzzes Markarian Andraste. 4	Posted - 2016.08.24 19:41:18 - [141] - Quote http://evenews24.com/2016/08/22/devpost-september-mining-barge-and-exhumer-tweaks/ This is for all the gankers who think the barges are broken, because everybody is using a Skiff: For a bit of insight into the current usage of the top 7 mining ships, hereGÇÖs the breakdown of mining yield by volume (last 90 days including ore, ice, and gas): Retriever: 23% Mackinaw: 22% Hulk: 21% Skiff: 14% Procurer: 8% Covetor: 7% Venture: 4% Other: 1% This is the tl;dr: The overall mining yields of the Procurer, Skiff, Retriever, and Mackinaw remain unchanged after this pass. The Covetor and Hulk will gain a lowslot which allows some new options and the potential of greater yield (although fittings will be appropriately tight when using three MLUs).
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 27	Posted - 2016.08.25 01:18:51 - [142] - Quote I want to see that broken down by Ore type, or by value.
Zanar Skwigelf Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra 17	Posted - 2016.08.25 13:47:38 - [143] - Quote Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The effective yield did not change on skiff & mack, and went up on the hulk. Are you sure you were on SISI? Gulmuk wrote: The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. None of this is different because of the new update. The skiff is the best solo miner for null belts, and the yield on the hulk is significantly better when you have several of them dumping into a freight container for the hauler to take to the POS. Gulmuk wrote: As for the Rorqual changes.. WHY would I put a rorqual in a belt or anomaly? IF they are compressing ore they are a sitting duck, and if they aren't they align so slow, they're going to get ganked. NO, I think I will still leave the rorq in the POS, use cheap haulers to move the ore to the Citadel and have a fleet of skiffs in the belt. They can tank, mine, kill the rats that spawn, and haul out their load if reds come in system. So where does the HULK fit in now? Good going CCP... Leave the mining barge changes up to the MINERS and leave the economics up to the economy nerds... Mining with the rorq in belts will probably be common in null. its pretty easy to set up properly 1) get in a frigate that can perma mwd, make bookmarks every 500km away from the belt / anom. This takes an entire 5 minutes 2) fit a capital higgs anchor to the rorq 3) warp to bookmark, release the mining drones, and align to the POS / safe 4) when neut shows up in system, warp to POS or warp to safe and cloak.
Amarrchecko Hedion University Amarr Empire 113	Posted - 2016.08.25 15:28:52 - [144] - Quote Zanar Skwigelf wrote: Gulmuk wrote: I have come to the conclusion that after this "UPDATE" I will be come one of the Skiff / Mack exclusive miners. I will sell my Hulk prior to the update because there will be no use for it any further... Thank you CCP for screwing over the miners. I am exclusively a 0.0 miner and spent the last 4 hours on SISI looking at the changes to the Exhumers, and I can say you are going to kill the HULK. There will be no more need for it. 2 strip miners on all the hulls? WTF??? You have effectively eliminated the Hulk from the game. The effective yield did not change on skiff & mack, and went up on the hulk. Are you sure you were on SISI? Gulmuk wrote: The last update to Exhumers you said you wanted the hulk to be a mining fleet ship. But with fleet boosters in a rorqual, I can easily run a 0.0 mining op in ships that TANK, Deal DPS, and MINE almost as much as a HULK. The SKIFF has effectively been made the best all around mining exhumer in EVE. And they are cheaper and easier to build than a HULK. None of this is different because of the new update. The skiff is the best solo miner for null belts, and the yield on the hulk is significantly better when you have several of them dumping into a freight container for the hauler to take to the POS. Gulmuk wrote: As for the Rorqual changes.. WHY would I put a rorqual in a belt or anomaly? IF they are compressing ore they are a sitting duck, and if they aren't they align so slow, they're going to get ganked. NO, I think I will still leave the rorq in the POS, use cheap haulers to move the ore to the Citadel and have a fleet of skiffs in the belt. They can tank, mine, kill the rats that spawn, and haul out their load if reds come in system. So where does the HULK fit in now? Good going CCP... Leave the mining barge changes up to the MINERS and leave the economics up to the economy nerds... Mining with the rorq in belts will probably be common in null. its pretty easy to set up properly 1) get in a frigate that can perma mwd, make bookmarks every 500km away from the belt / anom. This takes an entire 5 minutes 2) fit a capital higgs anchor to the rorq 3) warp to bookmark, release the mining drones, and align to the POS / safe 4) when neut shows up in system, warp to POS or warp to safe and cloak. Assuming it can boost while mobile, sure. I'm actually feeling like 70% certain it won't need to be sieged for 5 min at a time anymore based on what weve seen so far though. Doesn't seem to mesh with the new "links are a temporary aoe buff" mechanic for the rorq to be in IC in order to "cast" the buff. I feel rorq might be a bit op with mining drones, more defense, invulnerable gimmick, AND not needing to be stationary though. Although people lose plenty of ships that align faster than the rorq still so I guess they'd still die pretty often even if mobile while boosting. Very interested to see what happens
Autism Intensifies some random local shitlords 23	Posted - 2016.08.25 16:54:18 - [145] - Quote Kalido Raddi wrote: I want to see that broken down by Ore type, or by value. Rets & Macks probably in Nullsec Icebelts. Almost all of them.
Arianne Kass Garoun Long-Term Capital Management 3	Posted - 2016.08.25 19:22:22 - [146] - Quote Also check the Monthly economic reports http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70343/1/3_mining.value.by.region.png (values for May as the June report didn't include this picture). Domain, Lonetrek and The Forge as premier highsec mining regions, Providence for null (now that the Goon empire in Deklein is gone). Looks like all those complaints about Retrievers and Mackinaws not being viable are mostly hot air.
Kalido Raddi Echelon Research The Volition Cult 28	Posted - 2016.08.26 02:30:55 - [147] - Quote Autism Intensifies wrote: Kalido Raddi wrote: I want to see that broken down by Ore type, or by value. Rets & Macks probably in Nullsec Icebelts. Almost all of them. I live in a NullSec ice system. People use Procurers & Skiffs on Ice, because of the faster cycle time. After the changes to Exhumers, that will switch to Hulks having the fastest cycle time, so I'm going to sell my Ice Skiff and fit up an Ice Hulk soon.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.