Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
595
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 06:53:00 -
[2551] - Quote
Yeah they don't have dead space cargo expanders or dead space MLUs, mining sucks. If they had those, I would propably fly the procurer, tank be worth it.
Hopefully someday, CCP Moses puts his hands on your hulk and cures it. Until then you just have CCP Goliath's ambigious promise of it being better tomorrow. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
595
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 06:54:00 -
[2552] - Quote
Does seem like the mack will be the go to ship for most people. Based on reading most players replies, they want the hulk to be pro, or only experts are allowed to drive it. One reason I chalked up, why everyone might fly a mack. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 06:55:00 -
[2553] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Yeah they don't have dead space cargo expanders or dead space MLUs, mining sucks. If they had those, I would propably fly the procurer, tank be worth it.
Hopefully someday, CCP Moses puts his hands on your hulk and cures it. Until then you just have CCP Goliath's ambigious promise of it being better tomorrow.
i don't think ccp goliath was being that ambiguous; he admitted he didn't know what the changes were. even so, if you look at the inconsistencies between what ccp have said, and the other ships on sisi the most likely change today is the hulk's cargo going back to 500m3 and the issue being resolved.
no, 500m3 is not enough for a full set of every crystal, however it's enough space for enough crystals that it doesn't matter. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
596
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:02:00 -
[2554] - Quote
Seems kind of like a lame change, suppose its either Goliath's lame change tomorrow, or Goliath's ambigious change tomorrow.
Those SIS builds change too fast and too much for me, can't stand staying up with the changes. Though it does seem I might be flying two macks now, then a hulk and orca. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1775
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:05:00 -
[2555] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Pockets and anoms exist, let me tell you how fun is it to fly an indy thru 80km and multiple gates.
Today: Nice and dandy. Tomorrow: "We have to dump all our Hulks (that will be worth as much as an awful ship can be) and replace with Macks".
In other words you're mad you have to buy new ships.
As fully geared and rigged Hulks and Mack producer? Lol. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Shameless Avenger
Can Preachers of Kador
361
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:09:00 -
[2556] - Quote
128 pages of tears in less than a week... OMG what a success! "This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1775
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:10:00 -
[2557] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:
Yeah, Changing Ammo's so terrible. How ever shall we manage. If the increase in Yield from using a Hulk is not worth your effort of changing out crystals every few hours or whatever, then the Mackinaw is better for you.
I don't talk for me. I am ready to bet that Hulks won't be worth the effort for more than me.
For the 3rd time (probably more), I already have all macks ATM so it's not something affecting me. Plus I produce both Macks and Hulks, what do you want I am going to care to switch them.
Pipa Porto wrote: Yes, they do, and your Indy is already going to be flying through those gates to pick up Ore. So what's the new problem? If you were going to despawn the mission, then have your hauler bring crystals out in an MWD Magnate or something.
Not using indy but Orca. Never, never had to fly to the ships. Tractor beam FTW.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
596
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:11:00 -
[2558] - Quote
^ This thread was suppose to be about pigs, not tears. Don't make an ISD come here. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1775
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:13:00 -
[2559] - Quote
Danny Diamonds wrote:You have no chance Vaera.
Pipa will keep posting and trying to "win" an internet thread about opinions. Logic and fun were thrown out long ago.
He's the second prevalent "pro PvP" troll on the forums and fully motivated to bring as much nerf on miners as possible. I know it's pointless but that does not mean I will stay silent and see them manipulate the developers into creating unpractical features that bring nothing new on the table except inconvenience Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
596
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:15:00 -
[2560] - Quote
^ Pipa, is not a pro pvp troll, he told me he mined like years ago. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1776
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:16:00 -
[2561] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:CCP is already investigation the potential "fleet hangar" to replace the Orca's "corp hangar". Why is this even part of the discussion? How many belts actually require more than a whole day of mining? Are you trying to mine an entire nullsec or class 6 grav site with 1 hulk?
You don't accept whatever in exchange for a vague statement about a far future Orca change. It's the most typical bait and switch strategy.
Also, large grav sites may easily take more than 1 day, expecially since you'll get rogues "invading it" and trying to gank the ships (I had this on 5 grav sites out of 5 I have done 2 months ago). Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1776
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:17:00 -
[2562] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ Pipa, is not a pro pvp troll, he told me he mined like years ago.
I PvPed years ago. I will never imply I am a pro EvE PvPer nor will put my beak into PvP balance discussions. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1776
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:19:00 -
[2563] - Quote
Dave stark wrote: which then means you've simply crowned a new "go to" mining ship and the rebalance has totally failed because every one just switches to macks and the problem we currently have will still exist except the fotm ship will be the mack not the hulk.
then if you weren't just posting for the sake of it or had any idea about the issue being discussed; you'd already know that.
Finally somebody with a clue.
Despite I have all and only Macks ATM I am trying not to make them the easy no brainer new FOTM. Glad to see at least 1 can get this so hard concept. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
574
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:21:00 -
[2564] - Quote
So after 126 barrels of bitching moaning and tears stuff aren't those fake gankers tired of looking stupid?
Now, what if we start making some decent statements and ask CCP to take a better look to Hulk and give it +5K base EHP and actually make it better at mining?
brb |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
596
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:21:00 -
[2565] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:rodyas wrote:^ Pipa, is not a pro pvp troll, he told me he mined like years ago. I PvPed years ago. I will never imply I am a pro EvE PvPer nor will put my beak into PvP balance discussions.
Sounds like you are steps ahead of pipa then, in finally realizing who you are. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1675
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:55:00 -
[2566] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Also, large grav sites may easily take more than 1 day, expecially since you'll get rogues "invading it" and trying to gank the ships (I had this on 5 grav sites out of 5 I have done 2 months ago).
When mining a grav site in w-space, you do not need to worry about "can flipping" because you can shoot first. The minor loss in time from having to drag crystals to and from a can because you absolutely have to mine every type of rock with every hulk in the fleet is your own cross to bear. Normal, clear thinking people would equip each Hulk in the fleet for specific rocks and have at those rocks for the duration of the mining operation, transferring the ore to the Orca, to be scooped up by the haulers.
You can avoid the ganks by monitoring signatures. The time your mining fleet spends inside the POS bubble is not causing damage to the mining crystals, so doesn't matter.
GÇ£But the belts are huge and the rocks re spread outGÇ¥ you cry. Do multiple sweeps. There are enough of each type of ore that you can run through the belt with no interruptions harvesting one or two types of ore. Keep moving with the Orca, you will cover the 100km belt having extracted all of those ores. Then turn around and repeat for the next set. The rocks are large, so you will have time to target the next rock while mining out the current one.
Other options include having a scout in a MWD frigate bookmarking appropriate entry points and delivering different crystals as the miner needs them. This could be the same pilot monitoring signatures.
Adapt your workflow to the style afforded by the ship you want to fly, or adapt your ship to the workflow you wish to follow. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
jonathon Jameson
Spatial Interaction inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:58:00 -
[2567] - Quote
Being a miner myself i can see the need for rebalancing, but i think CCP have gone overboard on some aspects.
the main thing being yield and tanks, if they had left the hulk and covetor alone EHP-wise and yield wise that would have been fiune for me, as if you fly a hulk with no tank you've gone full ****** anyway.
What i would have done is the following:
covetor / hulk - EHP no change, 10k/15k ore hold no change to yield, so the hulk still needs to jet can to get good yield.
retriever / mack - 50% better tank than covetor / hulk & keep the yield 2/3 of the covetor / hulk, plus 20k/30k ore hold - no jet canning required.
procurer / skiff - ubertank + 150% on the hulk/covetor - but keep the yield at 1/3 of hulk/covetor, and cargo hold 10k/15k same as covetor / hulk - again no jet canning required
If CCP kept the emphasis on the hulk / covetors yield the gankers would still be happy as i can assure you the majority of miners would still honestly believe that hulks were the best for ALL situations, and max-yield hulk tears could still be drunk by the gallon.
but miners who had some kind of idea could show some sense and take the right ship at the right time, mack for solo, hulk for gang.
just taking the derp option and giving all barges a big old EHP boost makes no sense to me at all, like most people say above, it DOES make mining too easy - and that's coming from a miner. now everything has nearly the same yield as a hulk (procurer 75% of hulk) it just makes no sense either - where's the trade off? it should be set towards making AFK mining harder not easier. either you mine AFK for max-yield and risk losing a 300million isk ship or take the safe option and drop yield by 1/3 or 2/3.
that way miners get a variety of ships worth using and gankers still have idiot miners to keep them happy. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
596
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 08:11:00 -
[2568] - Quote
^ What was the trade off for the destroyer buff and new T3 BCs? You should have spoken up then, about balance and not overdoing something. Its too late to stop the dumb train now. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
804
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 08:15:00 -
[2569] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ What was the trade off for the destroyer buff and new T3 BCs? You should have spoken up then, about balance and not overdoing something. Its too late to stop the dumb train now. Contrary to what you might think, tier 3 BCs weren't added with the intent of boosting suicide-ganking. And destroyers were so terrible and underused, they needed a buff (or rather the removal of the built-in nerf) just to become relevant again. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 08:18:00 -
[2570] - Quote
jonathon Jameson wrote:Being a miner myself i can see the need for rebalancing, but i think CCP have gone overboard on some aspects.
the main thing being yield and tanks, if they had left the hulk and covetor alone EHP-wise and yield wise that would have been fine for me, as if you fly a hulk with no tank you've gone full ****** anyway.
What i would have done is the following:
covetor / hulk - EHP no change, 10k/15k ore hold no change to yield, so the hulk still needs to jet can to get good yield.
retriever / mack - 50% better tank than covetor / hulk & keep the yield 2/3 of the covetor / hulk, plus 20k/30k ore hold - no jet canning required.
procurer / skiff - ubertank +200% on the hulk/covetor - but keep the yield at 1/3 of hulk/covetor, and cargo hold 10k/15k same as covetor / hulk - again no jet canning required. keeping the warp strength bonus, you could even risk a quick mine during war, albeit at much reduced yield, so it would actually make the boat useable.
If CCP kept the emphasis on the hulk / covetors yield the gankers would still be happy as i can assure you the majority of miners would still honestly believe that hulks were the best for ALL situations, and max-yield hulk tears could still be drunk by the gallon.
but miners who had some kind of idea could show some sense and take the right ship at the right time, mack for solo, hulk for gang.
just taking the derp option and giving all barges a big old EHP boost makes no sense to me at all, like most people say above, it DOES make mining too easy - and that's coming from a miner. now everything has nearly the same yield as a hulk (procurer 75% of hulk) it just makes no sense either - where's the trade off? it should be set towards making AFK mining harder not easier. either you mine AFK for max-yield and risk losing a 300million isk ship or take the safe option and drop yield by 1/3 or 2/3.
that way miners get a variety of ships worth using and gankers still have idiot miners to keep them happy.
so basically you want them to not change the ships and keep the hulk as the king of mining. nobody is going to use a ship with 1/3 of the yield regardless of how much tank it has, the isk/hour would be a joke, in fact an osprey would probably out mine it.
the difference in yield is arguably the main reason why the other ships suck so much **** right now. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
|
Kryss Darkdust
The Skulls
37
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 08:27:00 -
[2571] - Quote
The confusing aspect of the mining barges for me is trying to decipher a purpose for each ship which defines it as "better for this purpose".
You have three mining barges, the procurer, Retriever and Covetor. Within reason these ships are priced pretty close to each other (within a few millions which is negligable and no one will choose a cheaper class just because of the price here). The skills are pretty negligable as well, for the most part we are talking a few days of extra training to get the Covetor.
So the question is what purpose does the Procurer and Retriever really serve in the scope of things? What do these ships do better than the Covetor and why would anyone beyond perhaps a brief period as they wait to skill up, fly the lesser ships?
The Hulk I understand. Its a considerably larger investment and higher skill requirement. So there is a reason for someone to take a lesser ship and fly it.
Can anyone shed some light on that for me? |
Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
337
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 09:18:00 -
[2572] - Quote
Kryss Darkdust wrote:The confusing aspect of the mining barges for me is trying to decipher a purpose for each ship which defines it as "better for this purpose".
You have three mining barges, the procurer, Retriever and Covetor. Within reason these ships are priced pretty close to each other (within a few millions which is negligable and no one will choose a cheaper class just because of the price here). The skills are pretty negligable as well, for the most part we are talking a few days of extra training to get the Covetor.
So the question is what purpose does the Procurer and Retriever really serve in the scope of things? What do these ships do better than the Covetor and why would anyone beyond perhaps a brief period as they wait to skill up, fly the lesser ships?
The Hulk I understand. Its a considerably larger investment and higher skill requirement. So there is a reason for someone to take a lesser ship and fly it.
Can anyone shed some light on that for me?
the situation now: no there's no reason to fly anything but the hulk. it has the most ehp, most cargo, and most tank. exception to this is if you're mining ice or mercoxit, even so the hulk is still close in terms of yield.
after the change; yeah the hulk has the highest yield, but the mack has more cargo and ehp, and the skiff just has insane ehp and that holds for the t1 variants too. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1776
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 11:15:00 -
[2573] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: When mining a grav site in w-space,
Nope, I was not referring to that.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Shameless Avenger
Can Preachers of Kador
361
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 11:20:00 -
[2574] - Quote
I want to be a miner... so I could mine some tin ... so I could make some hats.... and sell some tinfoil here... "This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro" |
Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. Ethereal Dawn
76
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 11:58:00 -
[2575] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Also, large grav sites may easily take more than 1 day, expecially since you'll get rogues "invading it" and trying to gank the ships (I had this on 5 grav sites out of 5 I have done 2 months ago). When mining a grav site in w-space, you do not need to worry about "can flipping" because you can shoot first. The minor loss in time from having to drag crystals to and from a can because you absolutely have to mine every type of rock with every hulk in the fleet is your own cross to bear. Normal, clear thinking people would equip each Hulk in the fleet for specific rocks and have at those rocks for the duration of the mining operation, transferring the ore to the Orca, to be scooped up by the haulers. You can avoid the ganks by monitoring signatures. The time your mining fleet spends inside the POS bubble is not causing damage to the mining crystals, so doesn't matter. GÇ£But the belts are huge and the rocks re spread outGÇ¥ you cry. Do multiple sweeps. There are enough of each type of ore that you can run through the belt with no interruptions harvesting one or two types of ore. Keep moving with the Orca, you will cover the 100km belt having extracted all of those ores. Then turn around and repeat for the next set. The rocks are large, so you will have time to target the next rock while mining out the current one. Other options include having a scout in a MWD frigate bookmarking appropriate entry points and delivering different crystals as the miner needs them. This could be the same pilot monitoring signatures. Adapt your workflow to the style afforded by the ship you want to fly, or adapt your ship to the workflow you wish to follow.
other one you can do to reduce risk vs reward factor is use covetors instead of hulks, sure it will take longer to strip gravs but WHEN they go pop its a hell of a lot cheaper to replace than hulks :) |
Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. Ethereal Dawn
76
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:00:00 -
[2576] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:rodyas wrote:^ What was the trade off for the destroyer buff and new T3 BCs? You should have spoken up then, about balance and not overdoing something. Its too late to stop the dumb train now. Contrary to what you might think, tier 3 BCs weren't added with the intent of boosting suicide-ganking. And destroyers were so terrible and underused, they needed a buff (or rather the removal of the built-in nerf) just to become relevant again.
Yep and some of us spotted what was going to happen soon as the winter patch info leaked and got a look at the numbers and changes, and nothing was done eitehr way...
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
806
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:09:00 -
[2577] - Quote
Blastcaps Madullier wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:rodyas wrote:^ What was the trade off for the destroyer buff and new T3 BCs? You should have spoken up then, about balance and not overdoing something. Its too late to stop the dumb train now. Contrary to what you might think, tier 3 BCs weren't added with the intent of boosting suicide-ganking. And destroyers were so terrible and underused, they needed a buff (or rather the removal of the built-in nerf) just to become relevant again. Yep and some of us spotted what was going to happen soon as the winter patch info leaked and got a look at the numbers and changes, and nothing was done eitehr way... An Armageddon is capable of the same, or even higher damage output than a Tornado, due to drones offsetting the ROF bonus on the latter. An Armageddon costs only slightly more than a Tornado to manufacture. A Thorax straight-up deals significantly more damage than a Catalyst. Sure, a Thorax costs seven to ten times as much as a Catalyst, but the actual marginal increase is in the middle-single-digit millions. Paying about ten million more per ship would not deter gankers from their activity. Sure, the already-slim profit margins would be even tighter if we had to use these ships, but ganking would still be viable, just like it was before the changes. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Mike Whiite
Keystone Industrial
64
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:21:00 -
[2578] - Quote
I could turn things arround and say CCP forces the big bad wolf, to use his brains.
I've no trouble with gankers as a whole I do hate the fact that with the current mining ships it's possible to create a trial account and shoot al but every mining ship in a week or so in a destroyer.
I don't mine but I consider that a expliot. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
806
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:28:00 -
[2579] - Quote
Mike Whiite wrote:I could turn things arround and say CCP forces the big bad wolf, to use his brains.
I've no trouble with gankers as a whole I do hate the fact that with the current mining ships it's possible to create a trial account and shoot al but every mining ship in a week or so in a destroyer.
I don't mine but I consider that a expliot. Would you consider it an exploit if 100 people rolled new characters, and after spending a few hours training some basic combat skills, went out and killed mining barges using Velators? How would you deal with this exploit? Would you prevent characters under a month old from aggressing anyone in high-sec? Because that would be very sandbox-like, right? But there would be no other way to deal with something that is essentially a numbers game, so what would you say to that? (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Dave stark
Bombardier Inc
338
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 12:30:00 -
[2580] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Mike Whiite wrote:I could turn things arround and say CCP forces the big bad wolf, to use his brains.
I've no trouble with gankers as a whole I do hate the fact that with the current mining ships it's possible to create a trial account and shoot al but every mining ship in a week or so in a destroyer.
I don't mine but I consider that a expliot. Would you consider it an exploit if 100 people rolled new characters, and after spending a few hours training some basic combat skills, went out and killed mining barges using Velators? How would you deal with this exploit? Would you prevent characters under a month old from aggressing anyone in high-sec? Because that would be very sandbox-like, right? But there would be no other way to deal with something that is essentially a numbers game, so what would you say to that?
ban trial accounts from using gates!
i think that's almost the most absurd thing i've ever said on these forums. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |