I would say having logi, DPS and the ability to fit a tank in your mining fleet will be far from useless and will have everything to do with running a successful mining operation.

Again I have to ask why is it that you want to be helpless?

2: That logic means they don't need skiffs or tank. Even if they're out in null...if they're not willing to lower M3 to field a few combat ships to take care of rats...

Its not the fact you lower your M3 per hour its the fact that you have people sitting with the miners doing nothing and earning nothing. This is why nobody flys logi in a mining fleet or parks a combat fleet with them, they have nothing to do. Giving the ability to the miners themselves means the defense and the logi are the very people who are mining.

It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.

Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded.

The CFC in Dek had by far the best response times and firepower, they could dump a supercap fleet on your head fast enough to save ratting ishtars. The problem with the mining fleets is that they are so squishy they even by the time the call for help has gone out half of the fleet is well on way to being dead. A single solo bomber will rip apart 4 of the 6 barges before help can arrive.

It will in highsec, and every time you don't have a rorqual. These ships should not have to rely on a capital to actually work.

Yes, I was wondering about this as well, what exactly is the problem being addressed?

Bottom line is, CCP is nerfing the Hulks by 626m3, dose not sound like much, by look at It this way:

lets say it's time for you're corp to mine, at this time you're Hulk get 1412x3 that 4236 for each Hulk,

Now lets look at CCPs new Idea of the Hulk: 1805*2=3610-4236=626

626(less ore)x20(Miners)=15,520 less from the corp fleet of miners. Which would you like to mine with 3610 or 4236 per Hulk.

my two sense

As for the DST, yeah it's your ship use it as you see fit, I'll continue to use one that's 200x cheaper and can hold more..63k m3.(a touch more using the cargo hold)

If it's not failfit he's right, no?
Or did you have a bigger DST than the rest of us?

As for Lugh. Seriously 'LOL you mine in a WH' is your argument. Go back to kindergarten and learn how to behave.

Could we FINALLY get a gas mining hull?

Also, am I the only one irked that we STILL don't have a way to use all 3 ''hardpoints'' on the Venture hull?

At least give the Endurance a visual update to hide the redundant 2 slots.

Also, on a purely personal standpoint, I actually liked the Skiff's single beam...

If CCP changed *just* wormhole-space ore sites to sigs to require scanning, that would be an amazing change to make wormholes a little more different than k-space. Miners there would theoretically have a bit more of a heads-up, and give different incentives to mining in womholes verses null.

No, they changed it because mining barges DON'T HAVE UTILITY SLOTS.
Oh hey look, like mentioned earlier that's another reason to give them real fittings so they can actually fit things like that.
So that you 'could' (Not that I think it's a good move actually to turn all the anoms to sigs, because Sigs are too easy to warp to safety from to your citadel which can't be easily bubble camped as soon as you see combat probes, but that's a different story) have mining sigs without miners having to undock, probe, save bookmark, redock, change vessels, mine, and then delete bookmark afterwards.

If its good for them why is it not good for the mack?

Speaking strictly on the theme of wormhole sig mining, what's wrong with re-shipping? We're talking about very adventurous people living out in nowhere, banded together to survive some of the harshest conditions EvE has to offer. I *think* they'd bring a few extra ships somehow.

Besides, every time I hear about wormhole corps discussed on the forums here, the common thread (har har, a PUN!) discussed is that when you're in a wormhole corp, it is *every* pilot's responsibility to do at least some probing. Also, probing skills aren't that difficult to attain, right? Handful of skills to level 3 (should be enough to scan a sig, right?), preferred racial frigate to 3. Is that really so much of a burden? I don't have time to math and map out a thing for a newbie character, but we're talking about 2 days of training time or thereabouts, right?

What happened to moving asteroids and tracking?

Are alpha clones on sisi also, and if so was that interfering.

PS. Just think when you have people who stop mining because the boosts become too expensive to maintain and the mining ships get raped, What will happen to the industrial side of eve... And what will happen to the price of ships and other player made commodities? If it is too costly to mine = no ore. no ore = no minerals. no minerals = no ships. no ships = people quitting. people quitting = less revenue for CCP.... Oh well.

Just another comment from a noob, but it would be nice if the mining laser cycle time was much lower. Active tank setups are sketch because of the large capacitor hit, even if the overall fit would be stable.

The metrics simply don't support your argument. The mack is boss because it has an ore hold that is 133% larger than 2nd place. I'm not going to defend the skiff having a drone bonus, I always thought that was odd, but asking for buffs to the most used exhumer because of a characteristic of the least used exhumer doesn't make sense.

[quote=CCP Fozzie]
Which ships will have the best yields for : Ice Harvesting? Gas Harvesting? etc ...

You think you could make the Procurer and Skiff a little less better at mining and a bit more better at combat? Proc Fleets in nullsec is the only way to mine, imo

The Procurer and Skiff are currently the only reasonable ships to fly in the current environment.

I ran some tests on this recently and I can confirm this is correct. A Mack will not however, survive three medium-skill (level 4 skill) catalysts in .6 or .5 space, even with kin/therm resists, level 5 skill (for 20% native shield resists) and a DC (barring lucky ecm drone use perhaps). Given the immense survivability gulf between the skiff/proc and the next toughest (the mack), to say nothing of the retriever, covetor and hulk, some improvements in this area would be welcome.

Curiously, the skiff can fit for max yield and also almost max tank (everything but the DCU) without requiring fitting rigs or mods, with pg and cpu to spare, whereas the mack, even when not fit for max yield struggles with cpu and pg issues.

Essentially, fitting a DC makes very little difference to most mining ships so why sacrifice yield when you'll probably get ganked anyway? I'd like to see valid fitting choices beyond the cookie-cutter max-yield fits for mining ships where sacrificing yield for toughness (or other desirable qualities) makes a real difference.

P.S. final point - large ore capacity simply promotes afk game styles in an area of the game rife with this 'playing' style. Back before the barge rebalance, the best ship was the hulk, when fit with cargo rigs etc could carry 13000(ish) m3 and that was adequate. Any improvements to durability of the mack/retriever would come with reduced ore bay, as I think they're a bit too generous as is.

But it can't. Being able to last the tiny timer on a suicide gank is not 'fending off 3 other ships on it's own'. It's surviving 10-20 seconds before the super hotdrop arrives to defend you. Regardless of the rest of the argument lets not use fake benchmarks to try and make a point.

The quote is from a post about the Mack, Retriever, Covetor and Hulk which are indeed not spec'ed for PVP.