These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Destroyer vs 325mil is balanced.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Abannan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2012-05-14 01:42:14 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Abannan wrote:
A hulk has 3 turret hardpoints and a destroyer has 8. With 8 mining lasers, the destroyer yields less then the hulk

clearly unbalanced


A hulk has 0, actually.


You know what I mean't ;) You know how unbalanced and unfair it is that a catalyst has more mining lasers then a hulk but doesn't mine as much as a hulk.
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#142 - 2012-05-14 04:00:48 UTC
Abannan wrote:
Five Thirty wrote:
Abannan wrote:
A hulk has 3 turret hardpoints and a destroyer has 8. With 8 mining lasers, the destroyer yields less then the hulk

clearly unbalanced


A hulk has 0, actually.


You know what I mean't ;) You know how unbalanced and unfair it is that a catalyst has more mining lasers then a hulk but doesn't mine as much as a hulk.


Hulks don't use mining lasers, yet another invalid point.

If hulks could fit turrets... that would be hilarious. Can anyone imagine a battle hulk? It would be totally awful, but very funny when you pop the -10 guy preparing a gank before he gets a shot off.
Dheeradj Nurgle
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#143 - 2012-05-14 12:02:53 UTC
In reaction to OP,

Combat Ship vs Mining Ship.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#144 - 2012-05-14 13:24:20 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
If hulks could fit turrets... that would be hilarious. Can anyone imagine a battle hulk? It would be totally awful, but very funny when you pop the -10 guy preparing a gank before he gets a shot off.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndWUlntJ58U
Abannan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2012-05-14 14:59:19 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Abannan wrote:
Five Thirty wrote:
Abannan wrote:
A hulk has 3 turret hardpoints and a destroyer has 8. With 8 mining lasers, the destroyer yields less then the hulk

clearly unbalanced


A hulk has 0, actually.


You know what I mean't ;) You know how unbalanced and unfair it is that a catalyst has more mining lasers then a hulk but doesn't mine as much as a hulk.


Hulks don't use mining lasers, yet another invalid point.

If hulks could fit turrets... that would be hilarious. Can anyone imagine a battle hulk? It would be totally awful, but very funny when you pop the -10 guy preparing a gank before he gets a shot off.


How comes hulks get to use better mining equipment then my Destroyer????????????

(In other news, battlehulks exist)
Kaomi Zorbaz
Claint Industries
#146 - 2012-05-14 16:56:01 UTC
I read my fellow miners complaining about this situation. Unfortunately when I am scanning my home system for kills in the past 24 hours. 99 out of 100 times an exhumer goes down it is completely untanked. From a risk aversion perspective why wouldnt somebody spend a few million on shield hardeners and extenders and a DCU II if they can fit them? So you can't mine that extra 3.75%. How long does it take to earn that new hulk with that 3.75% bonus?

If they bring in a wolfpack that is life. Monitor local and if a group of people you dont recognize show up be wary.

Hrothgar Nilsson
#147 - 2012-05-14 17:09:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Hrothgar Nilsson
Don't buy/use hulks.

Not sure when people will get it through their thick heads that:

A) There will be a roughly consistent, finite number of miners in Eve.
B) The stuff used to make Hulks is produced by the same people organizing Hulkageddon.
C) To ensure steady demand and steady prices, the producers are destroying the product they sold you, to force you to buy another.

Just don't buy Hulks, don't use them, and stow the ones you have.

If you're stupid enough to buy Hulks, you deserve what you get. It's people who buy Hulks who are funding the bounties on Hulks, funding Hulkageddon gankships, and so on.

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe...

Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion...
Dbars Grinding
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2012-05-14 17:57:17 UTC
stop postin in this thread, holy **** it was a troll.

I have more space likes than you. 
Calfis
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#149 - 2012-05-14 18:03:35 UTC
Dbars Grinding wrote:
stop postin in this thread, holy **** it was a troll.


Don't be mad at your own success Roll
Dbars Grinding
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#150 - 2012-05-14 18:12:30 UTC
Calfis wrote:
Dbars Grinding wrote:
stop postin in this thread, holy **** it was a troll.


Don't be mad at your own success Roll



+1 more for me. toooooo ez

I have more space likes than you. 
Hrothgar Nilsson
#151 - 2012-05-14 18:44:12 UTC
Garphunkle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2012-05-14 20:53:55 UTC
Sounds like your spending that 325mil the wrong way. Instead of using a cheap celestis to sensor damp, I could use an expensive pirate cruiser to damp. The celestis is still better at damping though, just like a battleship is better at tanking than a rokh. If you want to tank a thrasher, buy a rokh. If you want to strip mine, buy a hulk. However each of these ships has a role to fill, and the Hulk shouldn't tank like a Rokh, just like a Rokh shouldn't obsolete the hulk.