These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

so the hulk WTF CCP?!!?!?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#581 - 2012-04-12 17:11:35 UTC
even if they buff the hulk's tank none of you will be happy until it tanks like a vulture, maneuvers like a dramiel and mines twice as much as it does now

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#582 - 2012-04-12 17:12:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Whitehound wrote:
Lanasak wrote:
The same way it's not a combat ship, and the same way no other ship can mine anywhere near the amount of ore that it is capable of.

In EVE is every ship exposed to combat if you want to or not. To have ships that are particularly weak at it is what makes this a joke.


I can't really agree with that.

Industrial or freight vessels historically are less able to deal with hostilities than combat oriented vessels, primarily due to being purpose built to excel at whatever industrial task they were designed for.

Just as battleships in game are at best only poor/average miners, because they were not specifically built to excel at this task.

Examples of this are everywhere, from present day Oil Tankers/pleasure boats/etc. victimized by Somali pirates, to the cargo vessels that were preyed upon so heavily by Uboats during WWII, to supply lines/caravans interdicted by the Visigoths during the fall of the Roman Empire.

I don't see anything wrong with industrial vessels being vulnerable to combat vessels, although it's debatable if the Hulk is really all that vulnerable.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Whitehound
#583 - 2012-04-12 17:15:18 UTC
Lanasak wrote:
No, it does not - you are supposed to avoid combat with such ships at all costs.

Then which attribute of the mining ships supports your claim?

Is it their tank, is it their speed, their manoeuvrability or their ability to dock at a station?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Lanasak
Doomheim
#584 - 2012-04-12 17:23:27 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Lanasak wrote:
No, it does not - you are supposed to avoid combat with such ships at all costs.

Then which attribute of the mining ships supports your claim?

Is it their tank, is it their speed, their manoeuvrability or their ability to dock at a station?


You're claiming that the Hulk needs to be a combat-capable ship simply because of its cost, or because it is "exposed" to an environment where combat can happen at any time. I'm saying that this is blatantly false.
Whitehound
#585 - 2012-04-12 17:26:00 UTC
Lanasak wrote:
You're claiming that the Hulk needs to be a combat-capable ship simply because of its cost, or because it is "exposed" to an environment where combat can happen at any time. I'm saying that this is blatantly false.

Why?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Marl Xun
Xun Armaments Corporation
#586 - 2012-04-12 17:28:56 UTC
Revolution Rising wrote:

Keep in mind, people have been mining in 0.0 for years without this. But it requires more to do it.


And in that time we've seen:

Tech 3 battlecruisers
T3 battlecruisers
Destroyer buff
Blaster/railgun buff

So when do Hulks get some love to counter this?
Lanasak
Doomheim
#587 - 2012-04-12 17:29:34 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Lanasak wrote:
You're claiming that the Hulk needs to be a combat-capable ship simply because of its cost, or because it is "exposed" to an environment where combat can happen at any time. I'm saying that this is blatantly false.

Why?


Because it's a ship that can mine 3000 m3 of ore per minute. It's ridiculously powerful for mining - that power comes at the expense of any real combat capability.
Lanasak
Doomheim
#588 - 2012-04-12 17:30:03 UTC
Marl Xun wrote:
Revolution Rising wrote:

Keep in mind, people have been mining in 0.0 for years without this. But it requires more to do it.


And in that time we've seen:

Tech 3 battlecruisers
T3 battlecruisers
Destroyer buff
Blaster/railgun buff

So when do Hulks get some love to counter this?


Show me these mythical tech 3 battlecruisers
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#589 - 2012-04-12 17:30:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Marl Xun wrote:
Revolution Rising wrote:

Keep in mind, people have been mining in 0.0 for years without this. But it requires more to do it.


And in that time we've seen:

Tech 3 battlecruisers
T3 battlecruisers
Destroyer buff
Blaster/railgun buff

So when do Hulks get some love to counter this?

Strange how Hulks seem to do very well at their intended role.

Deep space mining.

In nullsec.

Where it is actually used correctly!

So odd that flying a boat properly virtually ensures its continued existence.

And without a buff!

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Lanasak
Doomheim
#590 - 2012-04-12 17:38:29 UTC
https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras/status/179947277178241025

When Hulks are the most popular shiptype in the game, I see little need for a buff.
Whitehound
#591 - 2012-04-12 17:40:51 UTC
Lanasak wrote:
Because it's a ship that can mine 3000 m3 of ore per minute. It's ridiculously powerful for mining - that power comes at the expense of any real combat capability.

Not all mining ships can mine 3000m3/min. Only two can where one of them costs 300m ISKs. It is not ridiculously powerful for mining.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#592 - 2012-04-12 17:42:03 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Lanasak wrote:
Because it's a ship that can mine 3000 m3 of ore per minute. It's ridiculously powerful for mining - that power comes at the expense of any real combat capability.

Not all mining ships can mine 3000m3/min. Only two can where one of them costs 300m ISKs. It is not ridiculously powerful for mining.

WORKING AS INTENDED.

SEE ALSO: MOST POPULAR SHIP IN EVE.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#593 - 2012-04-12 17:45:42 UTC
I wouldn't worry about him too much Darth, Tippia rather enjoys stringing along the trolls who think they are getting Tip worked up because he keeps responding.

Tippia will outlast them, much to their disgust, and in the meantime letting their post history show without a doubt that they are nothing more than a troll.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Whitehound
#594 - 2012-04-12 18:01:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Lanasak wrote:
https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras/status/179947277178241025

When Hulks are the most popular shiptype in the game, I see little need for a buff.

And it is followed closely by the pod. Lol

But seriously, we are not talking about buffs here. We are talking about the reasons for why it needs ships to be as weak as they are while EVE is a PvP game. Who likes flying a mining ship? I know I do not. You can talk about how the game needs to be, but one needs to be fair and talk about it. No one cares for people who just say that it has to be like this without having a good reason for it. For example, rookies should start in weak ships, because they need to learn a lot about EVE and its players, its organizations and how to fit in. You cannot give them a strong ship at start or else you have them rampaging all over the place. So if you can then give reasons why miners need to be the designated victims in EVE.

I think we have many victims every day for plenty of reasons and I see no demand to create a ship class only to have some more. I see the weak tanks of the mining ships as a design flaw in the concept of EVE as being a PvP game. It does not need ships for victims.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#595 - 2012-04-12 18:04:36 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I wouldn't worry about him too much Darth, Tippia rather enjoys stringing along the trolls who think they are getting Tip worked up because he keeps responding.

Tippia will outlast them, much to their disgust, and in the meantime letting their post history show without a doubt that they are nothing more than a troll.


It's more like a sword and board tank in a medievall MMO. They stand there silly and unmovable, the others look at them, ignore them and move on.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#596 - 2012-04-12 18:06:27 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Lanasak wrote:
https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras/status/179947277178241025

When Hulks are the most popular shiptype in the game, I see little need for a buff.

And it is followed closely by the pod. Lol

But seriously, we are not talking about buffs here. We are talking about the reasons for why it needs ships to be as weak as they are while EVE is a PvP game. Who likes to flying a mining ship? I know I do not. You can talk about how the game needs to be, but one needs to be fair and talk about it. No one cares for people who just say that it has to be like this without having a good reason for it. For example, rookies should start in weak ships, because they need to learn a lot about EVE and its players, its organizations and how to fit in. You cannot give them a strong ship at start or else you have them rampaging all over the place. So if you can then give reasons why miners need to be the designated victims in EVE.

I think we have many victims every day for plenty of reasons and I see no demand to create a ship class only to have some more. I see the weak tanks of the mining ships as a design flaw in the concept of EVE as being a PvP game. It does not need ships for victims.

Tell me how strong they should be then.

You keep ducking the issue, there.

The truth is you will always be a victim if you refuse to think of yourself in any other role.

No amount of buff can save you from that.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#597 - 2012-04-12 18:45:09 UTC  |  Edited by: malcovas Henderson
It still remains a fact. In a fleet the Hulk cannot fullfil it's intended use, as it is required to tank for survivabilty.

Name any other ship that gimps it's role withing a fleet, by tanking to the max for survivabilty. The fact that the ganker has first dibs on engagement, already puts the hulk at a disadvatage.

And please. Do not use the "Combat" arguement. All ships are in a combat zone. The tank on all ships should reflect this. As standard. Also you can argue All combat ships have a minimum of 2 defensive mechanisms some 3. The hulk, has the lowest of these mechanisms.

Now I am not saying the Hulk needs a buff. But it is not in a good place. It is only popular because there is not a choice of top end mining ships. Most miners fly a Hulk. How does it compare with all 4 T3 BC's or standard BC's added together. Also Mining probably has the largest amount of people doing it, for iskie making.

The cost of the Hulk does affect the ganking amount. there is no denying that. But it should not ever reflect it's performance. The value of a product is what people are prepared to pay for it. nothing more.

As in all cases solo play should require you to find a happy medium, between role and survivabilty. The Hulk does this exceptionally well. I cannot argue with that. Unfortunately buffing the Hulk for fleet play, will give solo play a buff it does not need. Added to this. Most miners will use any buff to tank, to increase yield.

All in all it is the mentality of most miners that need to change. Play as the situation dictates.


o7
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#598 - 2012-04-12 18:55:50 UTC
do not mean to derail this thread.


An option is to create another Hulk. instead of mining yield bonus. give it a power grid bonus
Prince Kobol
#599 - 2012-04-12 18:58:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
malcovas Henderson wrote:
It still remains a fact. In a fleet the Hulk cannot fullfil it's intended use, as it is required to tank for survivabilty.


Its intended use is to mine which it does better then any other ship.

malcovas Henderson wrote:
Name any other ship that gimps it's role withing a fleet, by tanking to the max for survivabilty. The fact that the ganker has first dibs on engagement, already puts the hulk at a disadvatage.


You do not need to tank your hulk for max survivabilty, its called balance. Also you can use the same argument for many other types of industrial ships.

malcovas Henderson wrote:
And please. Do not use the "Combat" arguement. All ships are in a combat zone. The tank on all ships should reflect this. As standard. Also you can argue All combat ships have a minimum of 2 defensive mechanisms some 3. The hulk, has the lowest of these mechanisms.


In which case I want my noob ship to have more tank, same with my shuttles

malcovas Henderson wrote:
Now I am not saying the Hulk needs a buff. But it is not in a good place. It is only popular because there is not a choice of top end mining ships. Most miners fly a Hulk. How does it compare with all 4 T3 BC's or standard BC's added together. Also Mining probably has the largest amount of people doing it, for iskie making.


A hulk is not a combat ship so do not compare it with other combat ships.

malcovas Henderson wrote:
The cost of the Hulk does affect the ganking amount. there is no denying that. But it should not ever reflect it's performance. The value of a product is what people are prepared to pay for it. nothing more.


I have seen many Tengu's ganked by ships worth less then a 10th of its price, does this mean that tengu's need to be buffed?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#600 - 2012-04-12 19:16:10 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
It still remains a fact. In a fleet the Hulk cannot fullfil it's intended use, as it is required to tank for survivabilty.
In a fleet, the Hulk can fulfil its intended use even better than it can on its own and while maintaining a better tank than when flying solo. The fleet means it doesn't need to fit anything other than tank and mining equipment, and both can be supplemented by fleet bonuses. In this context, its tank should be approaching 40k EHP and its yield should be far above what it can otherwise reach.

In other words, your fact is a complete fabrication.
Quote:
Name any other ship that gimps it's role withing a fleet, by tanking to the max for survivabilty.
All of them. Any ship that tanks for max suvivability gimps its primary role, regardless of whether it's in a fleet or not.

Quote:
The cost of the Hulk does affect the ganking amount.
How does it do that?

Whitehound wrote:
No, I do not expect it.
You do not expect a resource-harvesting, non-combat ship to be weaker than the combat ships? Really? You need to adjust your expectations because they are not realistic. They contradict pretty much every game on the market. Hell, in many games, resource harvesters aren't even engaged in combat — they are just outright destroyed or conquered without a fight.

Moreover, that is the reason why the Hulk is weaker than combat ships, and that is what you were asking about: because its weakness (which, again, isn't actually all that severe) is part of defining its role.