These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Barges, Bacon, and You.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jim Era
#21 - 2012-08-02 18:18:22 UTC
I don't mine, or gank, I just lol at people who are so butthurt over this.

Wat™
Bommel McMurdoc
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-08-02 18:18:38 UTC
Beekeeper Bob wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Shukuzen Kiraa wrote:
Oh look, ANOTHER thread where Herr Wilkus whines about something.

Or you could realize that the other thread that was 200 pages long got locked and he wanted to have people discuss what the dev put into it.



And 99% of that thread was people laughing at the tears from the "Tears" guys for being unable to pvp against something that can fight back. Oops

It is truly halarious that you kids are whining about not being able to solo a barge with a Dessy anymore. Grow a pair, and learn to fight things that fight back.

CCP is simply trying to make the game a bit more newbie friendly, so that they stop bleeding numbers. The fact that a few people are whining about it, shows that you simply want the game to remain on "easy mode" for you only.


/End Thread



actually, I'm under the impression that CCP is trying to make it more difficult for gankers who do it for the killboards or hee hee's in cheap ships. While I support the whole suicide ganking theme from the economic standpoint. Slaughtering mining fleets to turn the tide on market mineral value's or eliminating competition for tasty rocks in certain systems is consistent with the whole "surviving the sandbox." You shouldn't need a cheap pillow to take out your opponent, it should be a fricken' sledgehammer.

I really do not think it has anything to do with being "newbie friendly." There's a reason why you cannot train advanced ships on trail accounts. =)
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#23 - 2012-08-02 18:18:41 UTC
Beekeeper Bob wrote:


It is truly halarious



Halarious

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **
Shukuzen Kiraa
F4G Wild Weasel
#24 - 2012-08-02 18:19:44 UTC
MIrple wrote:
If attacks at me are your only defense at this point when people in this thread are trying to put newbie and hulk in the same group? I am not a ganker so you can calm down a little. Hulks are infact not newbie ships and people that get into them as quickly as they can without training up and secondary skills like shield skills for example need to step back and calm down. there have been many post about how to fit a hulk to have a small tank. If these miners did so and still they were getting ganked I do not see the gankers being so upset about it getting a slight buff. All that is being argued is that mines refused to fit a tank and got there ship blown up. You can not fit a tank on a number of t2 cruisers and have the same EHP as a untanked hulk. I am not collecting any tears but seeing people attack others for a different point of view over a video game is damn childish.


Whining about changes to ships because they can't easily gank them anymore is what is childish. Plus, exhumers are the higher end mining ships, they deserve higher ehp. They will still totally be gankable, just bring extra destroyers. It will still cost the suicide gankers far less than it costs the miner.
Charles Baker
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-08-02 18:20:30 UTC
MIrple wrote:
If attacks at me are your only defense at this point when people in this thread are trying to put newbie and hulk in the same group? I am not a ganker so you can calm down a little. Hulks are infact not newbie ships and people that get into them as quickly as they can without training up and secondary skills like shield skills for example need to step back and calm down. there have been many post about how to fit a hulk to have a small tank. If these miners did so and still they were getting ganked I do not see the gankers being so upset about it getting a slight buff. All that is being argued is that mines refused to fit a tank and got there ship blown up. You can not fit a tank on a number of t2 cruisers and have the same EHP as a untanked hulk. I am not collecting any tears but seeing people attack others for a different point of view over a video game is damn childish.


I fitted a tank to my Hulk (2x Shield extender rigs, 1x Small shield extender, 2x Invul, 1x DCU) i'll admit it's not an impressive tank (remaining modules are 1x MLU, 1x Survey Scanner and 3x Strip miner) and all it achieved was instead of 1 Dessy being able to kill me, it would take 3-4, so yeah.... fitting tanks on hulks (unless they are ridiculously expensive officer fits Which actually encourage ganking for the modules)) was relatively pointless.
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-08-02 18:21:04 UTC
How does anything in that post indicate that EVE is "plowing Full Steam Ahead towards the "Hello Kitty Online" iceberg"? Have you actually played Hello Kitty Online, cause I'm fairly there isn't even the option to suicide gank other players in it...

Also spaceships.

Hows my posting? Call 1-800-747-7633 to leave feedback.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#27 - 2012-08-02 18:23:59 UTC
Charles Baker wrote:
MIrple wrote:
If attacks at me are your only defense at this point when people in this thread are trying to put newbie and hulk in the same group? I am not a ganker so you can calm down a little. Hulks are infact not newbie ships and people that get into them as quickly as they can without training up and secondary skills like shield skills for example need to step back and calm down. there have been many post about how to fit a hulk to have a small tank. If these miners did so and still they were getting ganked I do not see the gankers being so upset about it getting a slight buff. All that is being argued is that mines refused to fit a tank and got there ship blown up. You can not fit a tank on a number of t2 cruisers and have the same EHP as a untanked hulk. I am not collecting any tears but seeing people attack others for a different point of view over a video game is damn childish.


I fitted a tank to my Hulk (2x Shield extender rigs, 1x Small shield extender, 2x Invul, 1x DCU) i'll admit it's not an impressive tank (remaining modules are 1x MLU, 1x Survey Scanner and 3x Strip miner) and all it achieved was instead of 1 Dessy being able to kill me, it would take 3-4, so yeah.... fitting tanks on hulks (unless they are ridiculously expensive officer fits Which actually encourage ganking for the modules)) was relatively pointless.


After you fitted the tank and mined in this ship were you ganked?
Charles Baker
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-08-02 18:26:00 UTC
MIrple wrote:
Charles Baker wrote:
MIrple wrote:
If attacks at me are your only defense at this point when people in this thread are trying to put newbie and hulk in the same group? I am not a ganker so you can calm down a little. Hulks are infact not newbie ships and people that get into them as quickly as they can without training up and secondary skills like shield skills for example need to step back and calm down. there have been many post about how to fit a hulk to have a small tank. If these miners did so and still they were getting ganked I do not see the gankers being so upset about it getting a slight buff. All that is being argued is that mines refused to fit a tank and got there ship blown up. You can not fit a tank on a number of t2 cruisers and have the same EHP as a untanked hulk. I am not collecting any tears but seeing people attack others for a different point of view over a video game is damn childish.


I fitted a tank to my Hulk (2x Shield extender rigs, 1x Small shield extender, 2x Invul, 1x DCU) i'll admit it's not an impressive tank (remaining modules are 1x MLU, 1x Survey Scanner and 3x Strip miner) and all it achieved was instead of 1 Dessy being able to kill me, it would take 3-4, so yeah.... fitting tanks on hulks (unless they are ridiculously expensive officer fits Which actually encourage ganking for the modules)) was relatively pointless.


After you fitted the tank and mined in this ship were you ganked?


No i've never ever in my entire two years of EVE lost a mining barge to a gank, but i ran numbers the tank would only take 3-4 Dessies to be broken, which i think you'll agree is neither difficult nor expensive.
Nostradamouse Riraille
S.M.U.G.G.L.E.
#29 - 2012-08-02 18:26:56 UTC
I guess the bacon was a lie...


Damnit... Got drawn into another thread with a misleading title...

I want bacon and retrievers.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#30 - 2012-08-02 18:29:17 UTC
Nostradamouse Riraille wrote:
I guess the bacon was a lie...


Damnit... Got drawn into another thread with a misleading title...

I want bacon and retrievers.


Depends on what bacon are you talking about, seems some around this place still use it despite being "verboten" by CCP Blink

brb
Bommel McMurdoc
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-08-02 18:29:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Bommel McMurdoc
Charles Baker wrote:
MIrple wrote:
If attacks at me are your only defense at this point when people in this thread are trying to put newbie and hulk in the same group? I am not a ganker so you can calm down a little. Hulks are infact not newbie ships and people that get into them as quickly as they can without training up and secondary skills like shield skills for example need to step back and calm down. there have been many post about how to fit a hulk to have a small tank. If these miners did so and still they were getting ganked I do not see the gankers being so upset about it getting a slight buff. All that is being argued is that mines refused to fit a tank and got there ship blown up. You can not fit a tank on a number of t2 cruisers and have the same EHP as a untanked hulk. I am not collecting any tears but seeing people attack others for a different point of view over a video game is damn childish.


I fitted a tank to my Hulk (2x Shield extender rigs, 1x Small shield extender, 2x Invul, 1x DCU) i'll admit it's not an impressive tank (remaining modules are 1x MLU, 1x Survey Scanner and 3x Strip miner) and all it achieved was instead of 1 Dessy being able to kill me, it would take 3-4, so yeah.... fitting tanks on hulks (unless they are ridiculously expensive officer fits Which actually encourage ganking for the modules)) was relatively pointless.



yeah, the more buffer you put on the ship the less chance you'll find yourself in a pickle. I found that a lot of these solo gankers go after the hulks that aren't protected or fit badly.

Moreover, just like as there are a lot of players who fit their hulks badly, there are players who gank that follow a similar mindset of not scanning down the ships fits and go in expecting the win.

I agree that a badly fitted hulk should be destroyed and the victim should learn that a ship with a 300 million isk price tag should be protected. But I do digress, there are people who can afford to do that.=)
Danny Diamonds
Fabricated Reality
#32 - 2012-08-02 18:29:58 UTC
You should be ashamed of yourself, OP.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#33 - 2012-08-02 18:33:48 UTC
I am not going to argue that 4 Cat is hard or expensive but I will say that those 4 Cats would rather find 4 Hulks that are not tanked and kill 4 ships vs just your one ship. That is the beauty of fitting a tank its making your ship not worth the effort when there are other people out there that fit zero tank. I really wish all the miners would have truely fitted tanks to there ships. It would be interesting to see the numbers from that. On the other hand the Mak prepatch needed some love you couldn't fit any sort of tank on that ship with the CPU PG it had.
Charles Baker
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2012-08-02 18:35:24 UTC
MIrple wrote:
I am not going to argue that 4 Cat is hard or expensive but I will say that those 4 Cats would rather find 4 Hulks that are not tanked and kill 4 ships vs just your one ship. That is the beauty of fitting a tank its making your ship not worth the effort when there are other people out there that fit zero tank. I really wish all the miners would have truely fitted tanks to there ships. It would be interesting to see the numbers from that. On the other hand the Mak prepatch needed some love you couldn't fit any sort of tank on that ship with the CPU PG it had.


4 Catalysts for 1 Hulk is still very much worth it.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#35 - 2012-08-02 18:37:37 UTC
Charles Baker wrote:
MIrple wrote:
I am not going to argue that 4 Cat is hard or expensive but I will say that those 4 Cats would rather find 4 Hulks that are not tanked and kill 4 ships vs just your one ship. That is the beauty of fitting a tank its making your ship not worth the effort when there are other people out there that fit zero tank. I really wish all the miners would have truely fitted tanks to there ships. It would be interesting to see the numbers from that. On the other hand the Mak prepatch needed some love you couldn't fit any sort of tank on that ship with the CPU PG it had.


4 Catalysts for 1 Hulk is still very much worth it.


It is but what I am saying is look at the killboards most hulks are solo or 2 ship killed after you make you ship take 4 ships to bring you down the number of ganked ships falls off quickly.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#36 - 2012-08-02 18:50:35 UTC
MIrple wrote:


It is but what I am saying is look at the killboards most hulks are solo or 2 ship killed after you make you ship take 4 ships to bring you down the number of ganked ships falls off quickly.



Strong point, because there is more than ISK at play - getting that many Cats together isn't always possible. BCs (Tornados, Talos) tended to compensate for lack of numbers - at a steep cost, but EHP numbers I am seeing make BCs highly inefficient for ganking these new Exhumers - as in, you spend far more than the cost of the Exhumer to kill it.

Net result: far less ganking due to individuals not having large enough groups to gank , suicide BCs are forced off of the field due to inefficiency. Less ganking = much safer high sec, because, sadly, ganking was the ONLY real threat left in highsec.

And did highsec REALLY need to become safer?
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#37 - 2012-08-02 18:53:47 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
MIrple wrote:


It is but what I am saying is look at the killboards most hulks are solo or 2 ship killed after you make you ship take 4 ships to bring you down the number of ganked ships falls off quickly.



Strong point, because there is more than ISK at play - getting that many Cats together isn't always possible. BCs (Tornados, Talos) tended to compensate for lack of numbers - at a steep cost, but EHP numbers I am seeing make BCs highly inefficient for ganking these new Exhumers - as in, you spend far more than the cost of the Exhumer to kill it.

Net result: far less ganking due to individuals not having large enough groups to gank , suicide BCs are forced off of the field due to inefficiency. Less ganking = much safer high sec, because, sadly, ganking was the ONLY real threat left in highsec.

And did highsec REALLY need to become safer?



The only dudes for who high sec is safe is for you. You shouldn't even be able to pass a high sec gate without being poded by local police.
Then what you'd cry and ragewuit because null/low is too hard and about blobs?

brb
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-08-02 18:56:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Herr Wilkus wrote:
-Mackinaw: Unfortunately, miners are already theorycrafting the 'AFK/bot miner' of their dreams - the 'max yield Mackinaw'. Its ridiculously buffed base EHP stats mean it will be safe from all but the most dedicated gankers. I don't believe that CCP wants to reward 'AFK play' - but that is exactly what the current Mackinaw iteration does. So give it a weakest natural tank. Allow gankers to regulate AFK abuse.


That could work if miner has logi tanking those gankers.
It's meant for solo miners. Solo. No logis. Comprende?
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#39 - 2012-08-02 19:00:22 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Herr Wilkus wrote:
-Mackinaw: Unfortunately, miners are already theorycrafting the 'AFK/bot miner' of their dreams - the 'max yield Mackinaw'. Its ridiculously buffed base EHP stats mean it will be safe from all but the most dedicated gankers. I don't believe that CCP wants to reward 'AFK play' - but that is exactly what the current Mackinaw iteration does. So give it a weakest natural tank. Allow gankers to regulate AFK abuse.


That could work if miner has logi tanking those gankers.
It's mean for solo miners. Solo. No logis. Comprende?



There is no problem with AFK playing, but there is one with ganking exhumers that needs to be regulated. Just change your targets for T1 haulers, and please start doing it massively. CCP might finally figure out those needs some buffs too.

brb
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#40 - 2012-08-02 19:08:49 UTC
Nostradamouse Riraille wrote:
I guess the bacon was a lie...


Damnit... Got drawn into another thread with a misleading title...

I want bacon and retrievers.

Bacon covered retrievers...
OR
Retrievers that mine bacon!

...
Previous page123Next page