| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Docain
Skull Knockers
   |
Posted - 2007.05.21 19:29:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Docain on 21/05/2007 19:28:39
Edited by: Docain on 21/05/2007 19:27:06
Hey,
recently I've tried various exhumer setups and I've found a problem with the Mackinaw. At first, lets have a look at the base cpu amount of all exhumers:
Hulk: 300 cpu
Mackinaw: 188 cpu
Skiff: 188 cpu
As we can see the Hulk has the highest amount of cpu, which is okay since it has the most turret slots (3). The skiff has the lowest cpu, which is okay, too, because it has the fewest turret slots (1). But why do the Mackinaw and the Skiff have the same base amount of cpu? The Mackinaw must fit an additional turret. Furthermore T2 Ice Harvesters use 10% more CPU than T1 Harvesters, while Strip Miners and their T2 variants use the same amount of CPU.
The result is that the Mackinaw just doesn't have enough CPU to fit 2 Mining Upgrades and a decent tank at the same time. Both other exhumers have sufficient CPU to combine a full mining setup with a good (or even excellent) tank. Most people use exhumers because they can tank very well and mine alot at the same time. The Mackinaw is unable to do that. Here I would like to ask why the Mackinaw was designed as it is now.
A simple increase in CPU amount could solve this problem and make the Mackinaw a little bit more interesting. By the way, I don't want to say the Mackinaw sucks at the moment. 
It is still a very good ship which can mine a large amount of ice.
I would like to hear all suggestions and opinions.
edit: typos
|
Lothros Andastar
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.21 22:58:00 -
[2]
Simple solution.
You can either A) Fit a tank or B) Fit IHU's.
|
JanSVK
|
Posted - 2007.05.22 13:49:00 -
[3]
Signed increase the CPU of Mackinaw. That ship costs darn 80-90 mil.
Further pls increase the targetin range of all exhumers by double "22 km is too low". T2 tanked Hulk can barely tank a crap double BS spawn (tested) and even T1 strips not to metion T2 already suck so much cap that you cant run a small Sheld Booster indefinetly on a ship of the size of a BC and price of 200 mil  . At least let me be able to shoot the NPCs with my drones if I cant tank them.
|
Docain
Skull Knockers
|
Posted - 2007.05.22 14:54:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Lothros Andastar
Simple solution.
You can either A) Fit a tank or B) Fit IHU's.
That doesn't solve the problem.
|
Docain
Skull Knockers
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 11:19:00 -
[5]
bump
|
Kekei Genkai
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 11:30:00 -
[6]
Hmmmmmmm....... Electronics 5 and/or Co-Processor II?
|
Harris
Warspite Developments
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 13:42:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Kekei Genkai
Hmmmmmmm....... Electronics 5 and/or Co-Processor II?
Originally by: Docain
The result is that the Mackinaw just doesn't have enough CPU to fit 2 Mining Upgrades and a decent tank at the same time.
(and that's with Electronics 5).
The barges can't but that's their draw-back and that's fine. All the Exhumers should be able to, the other two Exhumers do have enough, although it's a tight fit.
If increasing the CPU wasn't going to happen then the possibility of rigs to modify Ice Harvester/Strip Miner CPU use might be an option, but a review of the Mackinaw's CPU would be quite straight forwards.
|
Signaldog
Gallente
Venom.
|
Posted - 2007.05.25 15:10:00 -
[8]
/signed
I happen to agree with Docain on this one.
The mack needs serious look, when a covetor can out-mine a mack just because of the cpu/power requirements, we have a problem.
READ MY SALVAGER THREAD HERE!!!!
|
Docain
Skull Knockers
|
Posted - 2007.05.30 16:00:00 -
[9]
Fix the mackinaw!
Maybe I should open a similar thread in the game development forum, maybe it gets noticed more. 
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2007.05.30 20:35:00 -
[10]
Hmm, perhaps CCP should first state whether they want the Mackinaw to have enough CPU to fit 2 Mining Upgrades and a decent tank at the same time.
If it's not supposed to fit that kind of setup, there's nothing to fix.
_________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well.. - |
Ezeon
|
Posted - 2007.05.30 22:23:00 -
[11]
Not going off of experience, but from what I've read, it sounds like this ship needs to have its abilities bumped up to at least stay almost on par with the other ships.
/sign
|
Artu Stargazer
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 02:06:00 -
[12]
Retriever (T1 Mack) has a similar thing where it has 120 base CPU. Two stripminers? 120 CPU. Any tank or Mining Upgrades you fit come out of CPU you get out of Electronics skills and Co-Procs. I'd like to be able at least pretend my ship can tank NPCs. . .
|
Chib
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 05:02:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Signaldog
/signed
I happen to agree with Docain on this one.
The mack needs serious look, when a covetor can out-mine a mack just because of the cpu/power requirements, we have a problem.
the mack is an ice mining ship which none can outmine......it works fine it just cant solo in 0.0 u need someone to tank if u get 2 and shield rep drone each other u can survive
---------------------------------------------
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 07:10:00 -
[14]
Mack is fine. It is not intended to tank 0.0 spawns and whats left after mining upgrades is enough for high sec survivability.
If you want to mine in 0.0 get dedicated tank. Covertor cant tank 0.0 spawns either so it's not like it's better for 0.0 ice mining than mack. Or use Hulk for ice mining in 0.0
|
Docain
Skull Knockers
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 15:15:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Carniflex
Mack is fine. It is not intended to tank 0.0 spawns and whats left after mining upgrades is enough for high sec survivability.
If you want to mine in 0.0 get dedicated tank. Covertor cant tank 0.0 spawns either so it's not like it's better for 0.0 ice mining than mack. Or use Hulk for ice mining in 0.0
According to the ship's description this is wrong.
"[...]They are also far more resilient, better able to handle the dangers of deep space. The Mackinaw is a specialty vessel, ideally suited for ice mining."
Using a Hulk for Ice Mining would basically remove the need for a deep-space ice mining ship.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.06.01 20:18:00 -
[16]
Well it IS stronger than covertor, just not strong enough to tank 0.0 spawns. It is also better ice miner than any other ship so it's not 'worthless' either so I still think it's fine.
Matter of personal opinion I quess.
|
Docain
Skull Knockers
|
Posted - 2007.06.24 10:55:00 -
[17]
The new Ice Harvester Upgrade modules might make the Mackinaw easier to fit, but it's CPU is still far to low.
It needs to be increased in order to be in line with the other exhumer's CPU.
|
Kasriel
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 15:10:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Kasriel on 05/09/2007 15:12:05
actually with the new IHU - specifically the t2 variant i'm using Frigoris at the moment due to this problem - the mackinaw just cannot fit 2 ice harvester IIs and 2 IHU IIs due to it having such a low CPU
and i have electronics V i have sofar the minimum for the upgrades (mining upgrades IV) but it seems very... 'gimped' that The Mackinaw is a specialty vessel, ideally suited for ice mining. simply cannot fit t2 strips and IHU (unsure about if you have level 5 but judging by the amount my penalty has dropped from previous levels i doubt it)
hell i'm not bothered about fitting a tank on it as well just let me fit it so that i can use my damn IHU IIs rig slots shouldn't even come into it, whats the point of buying a 94million isk ship that can't even have fully t2 fittings without a tank..
**Edit**
just realised something, to all those complaining it can't fit a tank it's a ship geared soley towards mining ice, it makes sense it can't have a tank as well although i wish i could at least fit a small booster..
|
Ser Prius
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 19:41:00 -
[19]
This is a badly gimped ship. It needs to be able to fit:
2 Ice Harvester II
2 Ice Harvester Upgrade II
decent mid slots.
Even rigs can't fix the problem.
/Signed
|
Tonto Auri
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 23:49:00 -
[20]
Even with single IHU II and Co-processor II Mack can't fit any tanking fit. Can't say "decent" because it just can't fit anything, even T1 modules.
Mack's CPU should be increased to 240-245 to fit some small tank. (set of hardeners and shield recharger, all just named T1 modules)
--
Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig> |
FinalHeaven
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 19:07:00 -
[21]
I normally don't comment, but this problem should be fixed the the mackinaw should have more cpu, but if you use one or both of the implants below you should be able to equip more mods.
Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Highwall' HY-2
and
Hardwiring - Zainou 'Gypsy' KMB-75
I don't want to hear how they are so expensive either, you said you need the extra cpu to be able to ice mine in 0.0, you are in 0.0, things are not cheap anymore, to make alot you have to spend alot.
|
gallentescout
|
Posted - 2007.10.14 15:57:00 -
[22]
I agree with the OP. CCP needs to have another look at the CPU amount of the mackinaw in my opinion.
Obviously, if you choose to have maximum mining yield from a ship then you have to sacrifice some of it's defences. That's fine but the mackinaw is way beyond that.
Even by having the mid slots empty its CPU is too low to fit the tech2 gear That's a little too restrictive for a specialist mining ship, no other ship has to sacrifice all other mods and yet still struggle to fit it out for the job it was designed to do.
Just a small amount of extra CPU would balance this ship out in line with the majority of other ships in game. Even specialist ice mining rigs would be fine imo as you therefore sacrifice more ship ability and value to get more yield.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |