open All Channels
seplocked Science and Industry
blankseplocked Yes, the Orca and Rorqual bonuses are broken
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.08 00:20:00 - [1]
 

When I was looking forward to flying both of these ships, I (mistakenly) calculated that the 25% bonus (Rorqual w/ Capital Industrial Ship 5) or 15% bonus (Orca w/ Industrial Command Ship 5) to mining link effectiveness would increase my yields enough to make them worthwhile ships -- 25% reduced cycle time would be about 33% yield increase and 15% duration decrease would be about 18% yield increase. Now I know better.


In practice, now that I use both of them, the Orca reduces the cycle time by roughly 6 seconds and the Rorqual by roughly 10 seconds when compared to a max mining director flying a command ship (139.5 sec). The mistake I made was interpreting the term "mining warfare link effectiveness", which I assumed would be a 15% or 25% decrease in the cycle time that is already being reduced by 22.5% with a max mining director in a regular old command ship. In reality, CCP has increased the 22.5% mining link bonus number for a max mining director by 15% or 25% when flying the Orca and Rorqual -- which means 25.875% or 28.125% bonus in these ships running mining links, respectively.

I guess I will get Clintonesque and strive to examine what the word "effect" or "effectiveness" means to us miners in Eve. What is the effect of a mining link? It reduces your cycle time. The effect would be worthless if it were just a percentage number. Shouldn't the new bonuses for the new ship reduce your cycle time by another 15% or 25%? Heck, the Rorqual even requires you to burn fuel and be stationary for a 5 minute cycle to get that measly number.

I said the Rorqual was broken before I knew this, now I just laugh. Why fit cap tractor beams when you will never put it in the belt to bring in cans from afar? ...one ship bonus useless. Is it worth losing a hulk pilot or a mining director/command ship tank to sit in the rorqual to burn fuel for 10 seconds less duration? ...a second ship bonus useless. Remind me again why I spent 2 billion for this hunk of metal? Maybe I like getting carpal tunnel clicking through the crappy science and industry UI for at least 4 compression jobs every minute, so I have pre-empted using that reason against me. Hmm, would I rather be in my hulk moving ore every 139.5 seconds or operating that stinky rorqual as it is designed?

Is it worth it to risk a 500m+ glorifed hauler (i.e. not anywhere near bridging the gap between Industrials/Transports and freighters) tractoring cans in the belts with links on for 6 seconds less cycle time? The tractors can't even reach everything from 1 spot in the belts that I mine, which requires me to have a ship that can move to find a mid point for a warp in spot -- voila, enter the trusty old command ship tank with 139.5 second cycle reduction from it's mining links. Oh, don't forget that you will lose this 6 second bonus when you warp and/or dock to drop your ore, but you can just spend another half a billion to buy another to make up for that deficiency, or you can constantly abort your mining lasers to sync up with the warp or docking times, making the cap efficiency link more than useful, which the orca doesn't have enough high slots to fit anyway. Heaven forbid that your mining director would fit any other 3rd warfare link (shield resistances anyone?) because your hulks now have to tank with your director flying back and forth hauling ore, not sitting in the belt tanking. All this BS and headache for 6 second bonus to cycle time? Just say no!

Assumption - Rorqual : 180 * (1-.225) * (1-.25) = 104.625 sec
Reality - Rorqual : 180 (1-.28125) = 129.375 sec

Assumption - Orca : 180 * (1-.225) * (1-.15) = 118.575 sec
Reality - Orca : 180 * (1-.25875) = 133.425

Given this reality, BOTH ships underperform their designed roles, are WAY overpriced, and do very little to increase the efficiency of mining operations. I request a review by CCP Chronotis to confirm that the mining link bonuses for the Orca and the Rorqual have been applied as the design team intended

El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik
Posted - 2008.12.08 00:29:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Swearingen
I request a review by CCP Chronotis to confirm that the mining link bonuses for the Orca and the Rorqual have been applied as the design team intended

Considering that is how every link effectiveness bonus on every command ship works, why should this one be broken?

Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.08 00:56:00 - [3]
 

Read the post this time. It answers your question. Even the summary above the line you quoted would answer your question:

Originally by: Swearingen

Given this reality, BOTH ships underperform their designed roles, are WAY overpriced, and do very little to increase the efficiency of mining operations.



which equals broken implementations of recent ships for miners, of which the ship bonuses for the mining links are a part of the big FAIL. I neither did nor ever intended to compare it to other warfare link bonuses for other ships.

BROKEN, BROKEN, BROKEN.

Morgan Lorus
Caldari
Unstable Reaction Inc.
Posted - 2008.12.08 02:20:00 - [4]
 

Do the math and check your numbers while running the ganglink, also with a stopwatch if you want.
The bonuses apply, like intended.

And btw 70km tractorbeam range, reaches every can in every belt.
And why put your MD in a commandship, if you can give him a more usefull ship? One account just sitting somewhere in the belt doing nothing, besides running a ganglink, is a waste of real money.

Xioden Acap
Navy of Xoc
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2008.12.08 02:29:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Akita T

Assuming "all relevant L5 skills", BC/CS commander with mindlink and the cycle time link as baseline, Orca gives about +4.55% overall total results, Rorqual about +7.82% overall total results (compared to BC/CS, compared to Orca just +3.13%).

P.S. Rorqual with the above pilot and the cycle link is +60% overall results compared to "no commander at all".



Now throw in the fact that you're talking boosting the capabilities of multiple mining ships, you're talking a substantial boost in yield op-wide compared to just a BC/CS. If you're not boosting multiple mining ships... then frankly you're doing it wrong.

Now consider this against 5% highwall hardwirings. They're about 150mil assuming 1,000/LP. For 4 hulk pilots, highwalls are cheaper. For 5 hulk pilots, the orca is cheaper. For 10 hulk pilots, You've broken even with the rorqual. This of course all goes out the window when you take into account that the two bonuses stack and you're better with both hardwirings and orca/rorqual anyway.

For casual miners who jump out every so often, neither of the capital industrial ships are probably worth it. For any serious industrialists however, both the rorqual and the orca can pay for themselves very quickly.


Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.08 03:14:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Morgan Lorus
Do the math and check your numbers while running the ganglink, also with a stopwatch if you want.
The bonuses apply, like intended.



I did the math and I posted it. Didn't say they were wrong numbers, just insufficient. How do you know what the design team intended? If this is what they intended, then it is BROKEN.

Originally by: Morgan Lorus

And btw 70km tractorbeam range, reaches every can in every belt.



Nope.

Originally by: Morgan Lorus

And why put your MD in a commandship, if you can give him a more usefull ship? One account just sitting somewhere in the belt doing nothing, besides running a ganglink, is a waste of real money.


I gave reasons why the command ship benefits outweigh the measly orca and rorqual bonuses. I didn't even list all the things I do with my max MD in a vulture that benefit the hulks. Heck, the vulture with MWD and tractor could run around and collect all the cans and cluster them at a hauler warp in point and kill can flippers. Why use a ship that doesn't do enough to justify it's existence?

Dedaf
Gallente
United Brothers Of Eve
S E D I T I O N
Posted - 2008.12.08 09:30:00 - [7]
 

You assumption is just wishful thinking donít blame CCP for that.
It has been working like this, since who knows how long. And it has never been the intent to just have 1Rorqual/Orca + 1 Hulk, since itís a Fleet bonus. Imagine 5 Hulks and a Rorqual, then its 50sec.
Anyway I use the Rorqual myself sometimes, and even if Iím just myself and the Rorqual, then I make 5mill more pr hour than I would if I just used a command ship. With the right fitting I can tank almost any 0,0 spawn in the hulk, so no need to risk the Rorqual in the belt.
Okay the Rorqual uses fuel, but the price of that is less than 500k pr hour. And in 0,0 you donít have to worry about can flippers, so you can jet-can mine for hours and then haul it back in 5-10min

But in short the formula is like this and has been so as long as I remember. =180*(1-0,225*(1+0,25)) for the Rorqual.

Satrani Destiva
Posted - 2008.12.08 09:32:00 - [8]
 

withe Rorq and orca's corp hangar bay there will never be the need to kill can flippers unless you are baiting them in the first place.

These ships are not worth having if you are running a single miner but the more miners you have in an op the more worthwhile it becomes. My orca paid for itself within days of buying it.

If you don't agree, then don't buy one.

Solomon XI
Hidden Souls
Posted - 2008.12.08 10:05:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Solomon XI on 08/12/2008 10:05:17
I had a friend conduct a similar test to the OP's after reading his post earlier. My friend (who I basically consider to be the *ultimate carebear of all carebears*) also felt something was wrong.

***

I don't know much about mining and the whole industry aspect of the game quite yet but am willing to go with the bone here and support the OP in requesting that CCP & the QA Team take a look at their roles and verify that they are in fact working properly.

That is all.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2008.12.08 11:30:00 - [10]
 

Don't like it - don't use it. In your opinion those ships are underperforming, in my opinion they are quite fine. It's just that you need big enough gang to make the mining bonuses aspect of them worth it. And they do other useful things also, so as whole package they are good.

Jurgen Cartis
Caldari
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
Posted - 2008.12.08 11:36:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: El'essar Viocragh
Originally by: Swearingen
I request a review by CCP Chronotis to confirm that the mining link bonuses for the Orca and the Rorqual have been applied as the design team intended

Considering that is how every link effectiveness bonus on every command ship works, why should this one be broken?


This. They're not broken. Mining Link bonuses will be of course to the Mining Link (who'd have thought?) and will apply to its bonus, in the same way almost every other ship bonus in this game works. They multiply, they very rarely add.

They're Working As Designed. And they're working quite well for my purpose: making me ISK.Very Happy

Jonathan Calvert
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2008.12.08 13:59:00 - [12]
 

I agree, the Orca bonus doesnt amount to much, but its working as intended. The bonus is applied to the effected of the link, which as a base is 2%. This is whats increased by 25% or whatever. Beyond that the ORca is quite handy. You can move rigged ships, haul a bunch without a freighter, Replace a command ship with a hauler, freeing it up to mine.

Wardo21
Posted - 2008.12.08 16:01:00 - [13]
 

The orca/rorqual bonuses are in line with the command ship bonuses.

If you wanted a straight 15%/25% increase in yield, too bad. A little bit of research would have helped. It's not like the gang warfare mechanics are top secret or anything.

Now that you know the benefits, take a look at the difference between level 4 and 5 of industrial command ships. Gets a hulk about 3 fewer seconds cycle time and less than an additional KM of range for about a months training...

Krylon Rhae
Posted - 2008.12.08 16:56:00 - [14]
 

I posted this back in October... (here on page 4)

Quote:

Let's see if I got the bonus math correct assuming the following...

Mining Foreman lvl 5
Mining Director lvl 5
Leadership lvl 5
Warfare Link Specialist lvl 5
Mining Foreman Mind Link plugged-in
Laser Optimization Gang Mod running

With the above we have a 22.5% bonus to the mining team. This is where I am at the moment with my Vulture running 3 gang links.

Now, with this new ship, we apparently get a 3% bonus to the foreman gang links per level...

That is a 15% bonus to the gang links at lvl 5 Industrial Command Ship...

Does that yield a total collective bonus of 25.875% (22.5% times 1.15) Is this how the added 3% per level will work?

Someone with a better head on their shoulders please advise.



No one responded but I guess I was right back then. Certainly not the kind of boost I was expecting from a ship with a hefty price tag, but I have to say, I am glad that I purchased it.

I was using a Vulture previously in my one-man-band corp with 4 accounts. 2 hulksters, Iteron V and the CS. Now the CS has been replaced by the Orca. In and of itself not much of a difference but the peace of mind that comes with the corp hanger makes a huge difference.

I have said this in other posts, the greatest benefit comes from mining out missions. Particularly when the astroids are several km from the warp-in point. The Orca can stay at the warp-in point and tractor the cans into the corp hanger while the Itty makes the simple runs back and forth to station/POS. Slow boating the Itty is history now.

I think everyone will need to find their own comfort with the ship and as time goes by I am sure we will find many interesting uses.

I heard of one in local chat concerning pirates using the Orca's ship bay to store replacement ganking suicide ships so the podders could get replacements quickly. Hmm... me thinks this wasn't such a great idea afterall. FOUL / TILT / NERF / OUCH

This NameTaken
Posted - 2008.12.08 18:33:00 - [15]
 

I use mine for cleaning up after missions. I put 3 tractors on it, and drag everything to one place. Then, I have an alt grab the dedicated salvageing ship that I keep in the ship maintance bay. It has 5 salvagers on it, and has no need to run around the mission area. When I'm done, I pile everything into the orca and fly away.

brinelan
Caldari
Posted - 2008.12.08 18:39:00 - [16]
 

The links work the same as other links .. so thats not broken.

Tractor beam bonus on a rorqual. Just because YOU dont use it to tractor things in a belt dosen't make it broken, it just means that you arent using it for the bonuses. It is the same thing as using missiles on a vulture that gets gun bonuses.

Kruuna
Posted - 2008.12.08 21:51:00 - [17]
 

As said, the bonuses work just like other command ship bonuses... yeah, not a big bonus, but then it adds up.

I don't have the figures anymore, but by my calculations the cutoff for the Rorq bonus being better than the cost of the fuel comes to about the 5th hulk... (also depends upon the ore) but if you are helping 4 hulks the fuel might cost more, if its 5 hulks the fuel is paid for by the increased mining. Of course depends upon your hulk pilots too.

But whenever I've transformed the Rorq to get the bonus, I'm also compressing ore as fast as I can... the real reason for the fuel cost.

Kruuna
Posted - 2008.12.08 21:55:00 - [18]
 

As for the Orca, its big benefit in a mining op (other than the mining bonus) is it acts as a collection point for all the hulks mining so that the hauler just needs to warp to the Orca. Even thought the orca can hold alot, a good mining op will fill it up many times over... thus you still need a hauler.

Mioelnir
Minmatar
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:13:00 - [19]
 

You do have one point though, with the Orcas permanent bonus the Rorquals bonus being linked to siege mode is odd, even though it got buffed from 3% to 5% (a first, no other ship has a 5% efficiency bonus on ganglinks).

Without siege, a Rorqual should have 3% too. Industrial siege could then increase it from 3% to 5% for the duration of the siege.

Krylon Rhae
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:57:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
Without siege, a Rorqual should have 3% too. Industrial siege could then increase it from 3% to 5% for the duration of the siege.


/signed - good point

Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2008.12.10 12:10:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
Without siege, a Rorqual should have 3% too. Industrial siege could then increase it from 3% to 5% for the duration of the siege.


In fact, in light of the Orca's cost/benefit for yield boost, I'd even go for the Rorqual going to 3% non-siege and 6% sieged. This might offset the cost of the fuel a bit easier, and give a bit of a nod to the 0.0 miners.. ;-)

Juraka Furo
Caldari
Warped Mining
Strip Mining Club
Posted - 2008.12.10 14:17:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Morgan Lorus

And btw 70km tractorbeam range, reaches every can in every belt.



You've never mined in 0.0, have you? ^^

I have seen clumps of roids over 1000km from each other. The max I noticed was 1240km or something...

Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.10 21:05:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Swearingen


I did the math and I posted it. Didn't say they were wrong numbers, just insufficient. How do you know what the design team intended? If this is what they intended, then it is BROKEN.


Why use a ship that doesn't do enough to justify it's existence?



Why is it that many responders still think that I am referencing the code as broken? Why is it that many responders think that an ORE industrial ship should boost exactly like a fleet command ship?
The ORE exhumer at level 5 has bonuses which compound to a 32.25% yield bonus over a non-barge/exhumer. Does that set any precedent for the prowess of ORE ships over other combat ships? I say it does. Is it ludicrous to suggest that a mining command ship outboost a fleet command ship with the same vigor? Maybe it takes making a whole new class of mining links that fit only on the Rorqual and Orca, following the precedent of strip mining lasers that fit only on the barges and exhumers.

Why are responders, without CCP in their name, telling us that it is implemented as designed and as intended? I am not even willing to assume that CCP Chronotis is the only one that conceived, formulated, designed and implemented this ship. We already know that Oveur was the one that commissioned the idea to be pursued. Is it that hard to fathom that any original intention for this ship might have been lost in the chain of ownership of this idea through it's journey onto Tranquility?

The bottom line is that both of these ships underwhelm. If CCP is satisfied with introducing underwhelming content, then they will get what they deserve and this game won't be around for as long as we all may like. If you are satisfied with that, then I feel for you -- I guess you just like to have anything new to spend your ISK on, or maybe you want to keep the word of mouth positive for all the new ships you want to sell. I started this thread because I am not satisfied with that and I would like to see these ships turn into a big asset for all of us in the future, a benefit that justifies the risk vs reward relationship we get for flying them..

To put it in an engineering/roleplay perspective, ORE and Deep Core Mining would be in deep do-do after spending trillions of ISK developing these ships.

Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2008.12.11 04:48:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Clansworth on 11/12/2008 05:17:58
The fact is, Swearingen, that the market has already spoken that they are indeed worth the cost for those that make large scale mining their trade. Orca's are selling at still large markups, the purchasers still happy with their ships. Also realize that there are a large number of Orca's being used NOT for mining as well, which exhibits the versatility of the craft, and helps to justify the cost even more.

Any decent mining op will benefit from the Orca, for more than just the director bonus. In fact, ops of 10-15 people actually would still benefit from TWO orca's. One in belt running links and tractoring in the Ore for collection, the other hauling from the in-belt orca to station/POS.

The rorqual is frequently used for non-mining/compressing purposes as well, being a decent jump freighter, and the smallest/cheapest ship that can fit a clone vat. These are other reasons to justify IT'S cost.

As others have stated, if you don't see the point in the ships, don't buy them. No-one here is going to complain that you will be working harder for your ore. Those of us that have been mining directors for years are happy to finally have some ships that will allow us to improve in our trade.

EDIT:
A calculation:
Using current Jita prices, mining veldspar, a basic retreiver (no upgrades, min skills to pilot and mine in retreiver) will mine 4.275mil/hour.

With a maxed mining director in a BC or CS, that goes up to 5.516 mil/hour.
With a maxed Orca pilot , it is brought up to 5.767 mil/hour.
And a maxed Rorqual pilot, brings the same retreiver to 5.948 mil/hour.

Looking at an Orca over a BC/CS, your looking at and incrememntal income of 251 k/retreiver-hour. This means that mining veldspar, with extremely unskilled and poorly fit miners would take about 3200 retreiver-hours of mining veldspar to pay 800 mil for the Orca outright.

The same situation using maxed, upgraded, implanted Hulk pilots calculates out to under 1700 hulk-hours of mining. For large scale mining operations, this is actually not that long, and this is ignoring all the NON yield benefits of the Orca. This is also based on strictly selling the Tritanium at Jita buy prices. Using it instead to manufacture improves the payoff situation even more.

Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.11 15:22:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Clansworth

The fact is, Swearingen, that the market has already spoken that they are indeed worth the cost for those that make large scale mining their trade. Orca's are selling at still large markups, the purchasers still happy with their ships.



In case you missed it, this IS a piece of the market speaking, ME. I am an early adopter that paid a large markup and I am NOT happy with my ship. I have spoken to other pieces of the market (more than have opposed my opinion here) and they feel the same way. You obviously haven't spoken to us before you formulated your over-reaching generalizations of the introduction phase of this ship, stating them as facts. If you think that the market has returned it's final verdict after less than a month since the first ship sailed, you are losing even more credibility. If you think that those who are dissatisfied with the ship won't buy more and use them for much less than what they are supposed to do (and thus become a tool for you to claim everyone's happy with the ship), then you don't understand the complete picture once again.

Originally by: Clansworth

Also realize that there are a large number of Orca's being used NOT for mining as well, which exhibits the versatility of the craft, and helps to justify the cost even more.




This ship has been termed INDUSTRIAL COMMAND SHIP. When it fails in its' title role, it doesn't matter what else it does. Maybe the cost would be different and the capabilities better for these non-mining roles if it were commissioned as an INDUSTRIAL SHIP MOVER, without the worthless mining gang link slots. Maybe then CCP would hear the cries of those that want to move rigged BS around empire that they can't pilot.

Until it can do all that I do with my max director in his vulture to benefit the productivity of the mining crew, it isn't worth the approximate 4.5% yield bonus that it gives to have him use it. If I put 5 T2 mining lasers on the vulture, I could outyield that bonus in a smallish mining crew. Don't even get me started that this ship only benefits large mining crews, I am sure they wouldn't scoff at adjusted bonuses and slots that align it with precedents already set. If it wasn't designed, as it's top priority, to have your best mining director sit in it and boost the mining fleet, then what was it designed to do?

Dee Carson
Caldari
Child Head Injury and Laceration Doctors
Posted - 2008.12.11 16:20:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Clansworth
Any decent mining op will benefit from the Orca, for more than just the director bonus. In fact, ops of 10-15 people actually would still benefit from TWO orca's. One in belt running links and tractoring in the Ore for collection, the other hauling from the in-belt orca to station/POS.


This.

Our experience at Eve University has been that with a mixed fleet of 10-12 miners flying everything from Hulks to Bantams, two Orca's used in this manner provide significant over all improvements in our take. Fewer haulers means more miners. More range means fewer relocations to cover a belt. No cans out means can flippers can't bother us.

And to the OP, with all respect, just because it isn't working to your liking, doesn't mean that it's broken. All aspects of the Orca were tested on Sisi before it was released and the ship's stats, layout and skill requirements were changed as a result of those tests and user feedback where CCP felt adjustments were required to make the ship fit their vision. Also of note is that CCP refused to increase the size of the ship bay to allow transport of a battleship hull because such a change did not reconcile to their vision of the ship. These events should lead to the conclusion that CCP understands the math and is happy with it.

Regards,
Dee Carson
Director of Operations
Eve University



Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.11 16:30:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Dedaf

You assumption is just wishful thinking donít blame CCP for that.



Dude, I am blaming CCP for 2 underwhelming ships, not my wishful thinking. My arguments haven't been about assumptions. I am not concerned that I assumed one way and it turned out another. I chose to evaluate the ship in my hands and how I use it. After that, I am concerned that neither ship entices me to get out of my vulture.


Originally by: Dedaf

And it has never been the intent to just have 1Rorqual/Orca + 1 Hulk, since itís a Fleet bonus.



Did I say that I use 1 of these ships with only 1 hulk?

Originally by: Dedaf

Anyway I use the Rorqual myself sometimes, and even if Iím just myself and the Rorqual, then I make 5mill more pr hour than I would if I just used a command ship. With the right fitting I can tank almost any 0,0 spawn in the hulk, so no need to risk the Rorqual in the belt.
Okay the Rorqual uses fuel, but the price of that is less than 500k pr hour.




Get out of the Rorqual and get into another hulk and make much more than 5 mil per hour additionally. Your wording makes me think you mean just rorqual and 1 hulk, which would contradict what you said above about fleet bonuses. The math makes me think that you are talking 1 or 2 hulks.


Yeah, hulks can tank but they are much more vulnerable when they do and you lose some of your MLU II gains (at least 4%, if not another 4% for using 2 MLU Is) and it is harder to fit a survey scanner on top of that to minimize the time each laser spends sucking on an asteroid. These considerations will vastly outweigh any gains you get from the orca or rorqual bonuses, and that doesn't even consider the value of the hulks you will be losing more frequently.


Originally by: Dedaf

And in 0,0 you donít have to worry about can flippers, so you can jet-can mine for hours and then haul it back in 5-10min



Yeah, you just have to worry about hostile roamers that fly through and become can poppers rather than can flippers. Have you ever measured how long it takes to haul your ore in a transport? Your numbers make me think you haven't, but I have. 1 hulk in one belt mining for 2.5 hours make enough cans for my rigged mastodon to haul for 30 minutes. Thus, hauling accounts for a 16.67% productivity decrease, since the hulk pilot has to do the hauling, while the command pilot tanks, before the mining op can move to a new belt. Sometimes it isn't worth the risk to leave even that many cans out there for that long. Hauling sooner reduces the efficiency of the mining op even more. You do it your way for a long time and I will do it my way for a long time and we will see how much ore gets lost to roamers that negates the miniscule productivity bonuses that we are discussing for the orca and rorqual. On a side note, please don't assume that just because this example references a single hulk that I don't boost my hulks and others' hulks on a regular basis.


Swearingen
Posted - 2008.12.11 17:27:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Swearingen on 11/12/2008 17:29:30
Um, yeah, so now I am supposed to waste 1 director and 1 hulk pilot to run 2 orcas in a multi-ship mining op. If you are using less than all hulks in a 10 man op, losing 1 hulk pilot to hauling in an orca is much more than 10% of your overall gang yield. Does ~4% more from 8 others in "everything from a bantam to a hulk" make up for not putting that pilot in a hulk?


Originally by: Dee Carson



All aspects of the Orca were tested on Sisi before it was released and the ship's stats, layout and skill requirements were changed as a result of those tests and user feedback where CCP felt adjustments were required to make the ship fit their vision.



Yeah, because we all know that once ships get introduced to Tranquility, they never get changed. Just because I didn't talk about the link bonuses then, means I can't talk about it now? You are also assuming that the decision makers read and considered each and every entry of that feedback thread. I think my input started towards the back... Way back there, I did talk about other aspects of the ship that are broken and they did add a mid slot to help it tank like I ask my vulture to do, but then the high slots are still lacking. They can't even fit a tractor and the 3 mining links, or even a tractor and the 2 worthwhile mining links and a shield link (for the hulks that need to tank now) let alone what else I put on the vulture. CCP Chronotis' justification for 3 high slots was that the 3rd mining link for cap efficiency was useless anyway. Hmm, someone from CCP admitting that their released content on Tranquility is broken. This revelation in itself should put into question all the other decisions he made or didn't make about this ship.

If the utility of the orca to my mining crew equaled my vulture, I probably wouldn't even bother discussing the lack of bonuses.

Originally by: Dee Carson

Also of note is that CCP refused to increase the size of the ship bay to allow transport of a battleship hull because such a change did not reconcile to their vision of the ship. These events should lead to the conclusion that CCP understands the math and is happy with it.




Change your SHOULD to COULD, and I might give you points for effort. You give engineering and design teams way too much credit for thoroughness, especially when money is the bottom line to their bosses. See my point above about Chronotis and the broken cap mining link. Furthermore, maybe we should have believed that POS reactors were thoroughly vetted many years ago...

I would like to point out that this thread is simply a way to discuss this issue further and to make it as visible to CCP and Chronotis as I possibly can. IF they don't get fixed, then at least I can say I tried.

Estel Arador
Posted - 2008.12.11 19:44:00 - [29]
 

I might be a bit simple-minded, but if the ships are not worth it just don't use them?

(Sorry I don't like long posts as much as you seem to do.)

Vutamar
Dark Sun Ascending
Posted - 2008.12.11 21:10:00 - [30]
 

Yeah agreed with previous poster, DONT LIKE IT DONT USE IT, continue using your vulture then. Really though its still a bonus and its stilling making your op better. I'm happy with it and yes i am training to lvl5 just for that 2secs.

I think everyone who uses it and everyone who just looks at it would like if CCP made it have more of bonus to links, but it doesnt so deal with it.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only