There should be armor bonused equivalent ships for ORE mining barges & exhumers for those who would rather do that play style instead of shield tanking.
People will ignore the armor tanking modules and fill the lowslots with mining upgrades anywayâŚ
7 Likes
No there shouldnât.
1 Like
This. Unless all low-slot mining modules were removed from the game, a mining ship with additional low slots will end up primarily fit for yield, not for tank, and end up overpowered from a yield perspective.
2 Likes
No I donât mean any slot differences. I mean just hull bonuses, so replacing the shield bonuses on Procurer, Hulk, Skiff & Mackinaw with Armor resistance bonuses instead.
This is a garbage highsec miner scrublord version of âIf you give a mouse a cookieâ
First youâre gonna say this.
Next youâre gonna say, âhey, when weâre armor tanking (as per the bonuses), we canât fit Mining Enhancers, we should buff up the ships by giving them more low slots / better mining bonuses âto make it fairâ with shield ships.â
Then youâre going to complain about how itâs too easy to get popped by ganks when you have zero tank, and stack mining bonuses while ignoring the resistance bonuses.
Then youâre going to whine about CODE. and start asking for Concord to start mind reading players and stop them before a gank happens.
And then⌠and then⌠etc.
You arenât very good at reading comprehension, obviously. A decision was made to add shield hull bonuses to these ships, there could just as easily be other ships that have armor enhancement hull bonuses. Slots have nothing to do with it.
Youâre just a veteran player dick who doesnât like miners, I get it. Thereâs hordes of those like you in this game.
Except armor bonuses mean having to fit armor modules, which forces giving up yield - which wonât happen on any significant basis because the purpose of mining is yield. Thatâs the whole reason they get shield buffs and extra mid-slots: so they can be moderately tanky while still having some yield boosting modules fit in the lows.
1 Like
well actually⌠no one is forcing anyone to fit tank mods on anything. if someone wants to max yield mine they can and if someone wants to tank then they can. you can barely tank a covetor or retriever if its max yield mining so generally people have to pick mining or tank. the only real barge that can tank and fit a yield mod or 2 is the proc and skiff.
I could care less if armor bonuses were introduced because i fit for max yield anyway in my hulks and just a survey scanner in the mids. thereâs no such thing as âbeing forced toâ its gonna have to be one orthe other anyway
1 Like
Slots have everything to do with it.
Cargo expanders and mining upgrades are all low slots. So any armour tank would have come at the expense of efficiency.
Shield tank barges will therefore always be more efficient. So itâs a waste of time to make an armour barge.
Before barges we had mining battleships, and people overwhelmingly preferred using shield tanks.
1 Like
I propose a compromise - we should just remove the shield resistance bonuses from the mining barges. This way, everybody can equip their ship according to their own unique needs, rather than feeling constrained.
1 Like
Shield tank barges can always be found & targeted faster than armor tanked ones. The increase in sigrad from shields shows up on scans/probes. At least now I know why armor tank barge idea canât get the same hull bonus. Thank you guys who answered the question to explain that to me. Extra hull bonus or not Space Force Merrimac barge under construction.
I have a better idea: Give them hull bonuses instead. Hull is almost like armor anyway. And hull reps are mid-slot modules like shield boosters, so everyone should be satisfied, right?
1 Like
Ah yes. That is a nice meme.
WaitâŚ
Now that I think about it, if the bonus was like 100% bonus to Hull Repairer repair amount per level, that could actually work. That is so goofy.
Real men hull tank, and the only way to hull tank properly is with a mining barge.
2 Likes
Prophesy vs Skiff, duel at the sun! Whose tank will last longer?
1 Like
Skiff, but a procurer would wreck both of them combined
procurer pvp is cool
Yes alternate versions of the barges with hull bonuses instead of shield bonuses (for those that have shield bonuses so Procurer + the Exumers).
No extra/different slots same as their shield versioned counterparts.
No. Wrong. They should have shield OR hull bonuses, and the choice of tank comes down to rig placement.
Also Damage Controls and Transverse Bulkheads are lowslot modules.
Armor is all in all a crap idea. Hull is meh.
Shield tanks can in a way float above the low slot. Resist mods are mids, extenders are mids, and reppers are mids. They all act in a way that negates the use of low slots for tank. Shield tankers can even forgo a damage control easily.
Now mining barges should actually have a real cruiser sized number of mid slots.
Well⌠really there should just be 1 barge and fittings determine how tanky the fit is or how high yield and ore hold it is.
You have a funny meaning of the word compromise. Given the shield bonus is in line with standard ship bonus layout, I think perhaps you meant ânerf just because I hate minersâ
You have it all wrong. How could I hate miners? That would be like saying I hate bacon. Or fireworks.