EVE General Discussion

Freighters have huge cargo holds and huge tank to protect their goods.

ORE ships should have high yield and huge tank to protect them while mining.

How is that concept too hard to grasp?

Fitting a Battleship with Mining Laser is apparently reasonable. But what if someone suggested to equip one with Cargo Hold Expanders and haul in it?

MADNESS!

Battleship mining ! Those were the days. Barges made it dull and have an awefull laser sound.

Personally i look forward to the revival of Battleship mining racked with miner 2's. It's a bit going back in time though but hey, atleast it makes mining marginally more fun and active.

Freighters are huge ships and have a tiny tank compared to a similar sized combat ship, just like the Hulk. How is that concept to hard to grasp? Are you so one dimensional in your thinking that you can't even see that sometimes "ORE" ships are not the best for the job. I bet you can't even think of a reason why you would salvage in a destroyer instead of a Noctis.

You can push an orcas tank to almost ungodly amounts - it would take a decent sized gang to gank one in high sec before Concorde showed up. With a fully tanked orca and overheating you can push it to well over 300k ehp. It wouldn't be worth the trouble or the losses to gank such a ship.

To all players trying to get our great game to pander to your carebear mediocre crap. **** off.
I work hard and have fun playing this game in fear of my fellow players - that's how I want it.
If you can't hack it. Go to one of the amazing MM o experiences you fled to be here.

And no I am not rich or own an alliance. I thrive on the threat of death.

Actually, a freighter only has about 1/10 of a tank of a carrier. A Hulk has almost the tank of a combat cruiser but a Rokh has the the tank of a battleship. Difficult for you? Maybe you should write all this down.

:LOL: You beat me too it. hulks can't shoot. In low sec as soon as you have a point on them their dead, giving them a more reasonable tank won't change outcomes (well it might give a defense force chance to respond, but thats not really a bad thing).

You want more tank, battleships have more tank. You want more yield, ORE ships have more yield.

The point is, you can't have it all. People have presented you tanky solutions, and you reject them. In other threads people (usually gankers, actually) have given excellent advice for how to tank a hulk - yet those are also ignored. And why is tanking the only solution to your problem? Tanking is only one aspect of flying a 300MISK ship safely.

This is why it is frustrating to write in these miner threads. No matter what advice is given, it is ignored because they seem to have such a narrow perspective on the problem and acceptable solutions. And those solutions basically amount to: "change the game to make it easier for me without any effort on my part."

In the miner's game, there is no challenge to overcome, no curiosity or creativity. It is brute force, bull headed plowing ahead in the simplest possible manner. And if that doesn't work then the game must be stacked against you.

It's an attitude that penalizes creativity, and actually kills the sandbox. Emergent gameplay - of which suicide ganking is an excellent example - disappears when every task is replaced by an optimal cookie-cutter solution that is handed to you by a dev. That uncreative, incurious, push-button-collect-reward play style that they are trying to bring to the game is why the current generation of hi-sec miners are a genuine threat to Eve.

That's all well and good -except- (as claimed by an above poster) a battleship can reach 80% of the yield of an ORE barge with a lot more tank to back it up.

If that claim proves to be true, there are some serious issues here.

This has to be a troll right? Or are you actually claiming that 80%>100%?