These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Plea for Rationale in the System of Natural Consequences
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#401 - 2012-05-29 14:38:20 UTC
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
No, they don't.



really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS


In those three words please tell me where tippia said that was possible.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#402 - 2012-05-29 14:38:34 UTC
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Ludi Burek wrote:


6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.


ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then.

RubyPorto wrote:
wiskyjack wrote:
It's simple, just think of eve as being like WW II


Jesus...


no... WWII, youre thinking too far back


But you can still mine. With proper support, a decent tank, or even moving to a less traveled system. For example, there are systems in khanid kingdom that are hi sec, but are empty. It take little to no time to gain the standing needed to anchor a pos. If anyone shows up, warp to pos.

The converse, removing ganking would eliminate a style or play.

See, part of the problem is that miners wish to put minimal effort in, and still gain maximum yield and profit. It would be similar to level 4 mission runners demanding the ability to tank and tear through all missions with a rookie frig. Allowing tanking simply balances out the risk verse reward for miners, much like risk vs reward being balanced in other fields.
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
#403 - 2012-05-29 15:11:45 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:

See, part of the problem is that miners wish to put minimal effort in, and still gain maximum yield and profit.


I totally agree with this. A lot of highsec miners are lazy. They fit 3 x cargo rigs which lowers their armor even more, so they can AFK mine more efficiently, or simply because they don't know any better.

The other day I saw an Orca in a belt, mining with mining drones... I suppose that's a bit better than slapping a mining laser on an industrial ship lol.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#404 - 2012-05-29 15:15:22 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


I pointed out the insurance Nerf to point out the fact that it's not a buff to the Hulk/nerf to the Gankers that the miners want, it's the banning of the practice of suicide ganking entirely. The calls for buffs/nerfs are just the baby steps they're trying to get through on the way.

You got gankers nerfed (it now costs ~15m or so to kill a tanked Hulk when it used to cost ~10m in an insured Brutix). You're not happy with that. You got miners income buffed (Drone poop nixed, a good thing overall), and you're not happy with that.

Years ago, you got CONCORD buffed to what it is today (before the buff, Suicide Ganks involved a lot less suicide), and you're not happy with that.

If we buff Hulks, whaddya wanna bet you won't be happy with that?


"You" did this "you" did that...

No, "I" recall asking for nerfs on hi sec missions and incursions not on suicide ganking.

I am not happy or unhappy, I am writing simple considerations.

One of these considerations is this: there's failfit expensive ships going all around hi sec yet they are not made targets.

Why?

I mean, why would a suicide ganker only go after mining ships with all the expensive stuff flying under their nose?

If they ignore most Tengus / CNR / Golem and similar (show me the 8500 killmails...), it's certainly NOT because:

- Killing them is impossible
- Concord protects them better
- It's not profitable
- They are all fitted like a pro, with awesome buffer tank and all round resists.
- They warp like a nano cov ops
- Their pilots would never shower tears in local when killed

So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"?
What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?

Since on paper it seems a nonsense, it means there are other factors not involving Concord, not involving cost, not involving insurance, not involving general suicide ganking mechanics and not involving tears.

These are the factors that should be equalized. The first one that comes to mind, is the fact that everybody except miners need a tiny effort to scan them down. This would be easily fixed by just keeping belts in 1.0 sec (small Trit for new players) and the rest moved in anomalies. I mean more frequent ones than grav sites of course.

Do you see this as an unfair nerf to suicide ganking?

I am pretty sure there are other factors for making miners the default targets and they all are a delta:

Suicide miner - Suicide everyone else = Delta

This Delta is the subtraction of all the unique factors and mechanics covering miners vs everyone else. I.e. failfit or concord are not unique so subtracting them = 0 and therefore they don't contribute to Delta.

Once you find out Delta, then that's where the game balance would be looked at.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#405 - 2012-05-29 15:17:34 UTC
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
really...
Yes, really. It can give up some yield for more tank or vice versa. At no point does it need to (or, indeed, can it) give up all of one to get more of the other.

Quote:
post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia
But that wasn't what he was saying, now was it?

Quote:
Im calling you on that BS
Good thing that I didn't say anything like that then.
Andoria Thara
Fallen Avatars
#406 - 2012-05-29 15:18:09 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"?
What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?


The factor = hulkageddon V, which is now over.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#407 - 2012-05-29 15:18:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
RubyPorto wrote:


Ok, so you're claiming that it's impossible to reasonably escape a suicide gank attempt without trying it yourself? Really?


I had my own mining operation and indeed still have 1 x 4 years old Hulk somewhere. I stopped once I realized mining was the equivalent of what in other MMOs are the "UP classes", those only played by alts for fun and similar, with no chance to compete.


Andoria Thara wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
So what's the factor that tells the suicide ganker: "let's ignore all juicy this stuff and just go for overall less profitable targets"?
What tells the suicide ganker: "let's go after the 20k EHP Hulk even if actively piloted and not vs a Tengu"?


The factor = hulkageddon V, which is now over.


No, Hulkageddon is a byproduct of the factor, not the cause.

In fact you can easily go back and find pre-Hulkageddon ganks and even other initiatives (see Bat Country).
You will NOT find Bat "Tengu" Country or other things, all and only against miners.

So there's a kickstart factor that all the other factors being equal, still pushes gankers to go after one target and not the other, even if both are failfit, both share the same Concord mechanics, both are not exactly awake at the keyboard and so on.

I found one easy factor: miners are easily found while all the others need to be scanned (unless they autopilot the pinata thru Uedama). I am sure there are others.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#408 - 2012-05-29 15:25:07 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk.
5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).

Sounds really profitable.

You can't legitimately add in the GSF bounty, because that's a player run event, and not something that you can use for a balance argument.


I get from 2 to 3 intact amor plates and similar per wreck, some bad times just 1.

They are 15M a piece. As I told you, are you sure you really know everything about suicide ganking Hulks and Macks? Pirate

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#409 - 2012-05-29 15:27:24 UTC
EVE isn't a mining simulator.

Mining has risks, and those risks vary from sec zone to sec zone.

This is by design.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#410 - 2012-05-29 15:27:48 UTC
Jeniam Retriat wrote:

As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now.

RubyPorto wrote:
Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed.


That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks.


Finally I found someone who understands my points!

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Haulie Berry
#411 - 2012-05-29 15:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
No, they don't.



really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS


Pretty sure you misunderstood what he meant by "No, they don't".

You don't "have" to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. You CHOOSE to.

EVERY ship has fitting tradeoffs, why should the hulk be any different?
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#412 - 2012-05-29 15:31:02 UTC
Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#413 - 2012-05-29 15:33:38 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Ten Bulls wrote:
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
No, they don't.

really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS

Pretty sure you misunderstood what he meant by "No, they don't".

You don't "have" to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. You CHOOSE to.

EVERY ship has fitting tradeoffs, why should the hulk be any different?

Because highsec... CONCORD makes highsec safe..

Why are gankers allowed here?!

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#414 - 2012-05-29 15:33:48 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked
To be fair, Hulks have a stronger tank than some HACs…
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#415 - 2012-05-29 15:34:01 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Jeniam Retriat wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it.


Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you.


No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship.


Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty.
10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#416 - 2012-05-29 15:34:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Jeniam Retriat wrote:

As to the rest of your points, there is a connecting theme with why miners aren't happy; it's still possible to suicide gank our ships and turn a profit, even if we're fitting them defensively. The insurance nerf didn't mean that players had to choose between not ganking and ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss, it meant they had to choose between easily ganking in a Brutix at an ISK loss or ganking in a Catalyst with a couple of friends/alts and still breaking even or making a profit. Same with the CONCORD buff and same with the complaints/requests for tougher mining ships we have now.

RubyPorto wrote:
Anyway, the miners are using a Solid Gold Spatula to flip burgers at a McDonalds in South Central LA, and expressing surprise and anger when they get robbed.


That's what the OP is doing, sure. The rest of us are asking why our profession is the only one that got handed the Solid Gold Spatula, and why we can't just get a high quality Stainless Steel Spatula that performs the same job just as well but isn't a magnet for muggers. To put it more clearly, why is it that Mining is the only profession whose best ship is an automatic target for for-profit ganking even outside of Hulkageddon? If an L4 mission runner moves into one of their high end ships like a Navy Raven, that ship isn't automatically a target for gankers just for being used; you have to fit it out in high end deadspace/faction/officer mods before it's a target (would that be a gold-plated spatula?). A mission runner doesn't get in a Rattlesnake and get told that that ship is too valuable to use in hisec, or that they have to drastically alter their way of playing to use it without getting killed, or that they should just use a Dominix because it's a lot cheaper and only a bit worse, and yet that's exactly what happens to miners when they move from Covetors to Hulks.


Finally I found someone who understands my points!


Actually, people are told they are doing nothing more than making targets of themselves in those ships all the time... and they die frequently simply because they are a high value target and look good on a killboard regardless of how they are fit.

It's simply not as widely advertised.

If there was a 'Navygeddon" campaign going on to pop expensive Navy ships, those folks would (quite rightly) be told they were being incredibly stupid to do their missions in their Navy Raven anyway.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#417 - 2012-05-29 15:38:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Ludi Burek wrote:


6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.


ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then.



Because miners are the only people getting attacked and killed in space.


Well tbh you can find systems in The Forge with up to 73 miners kills in 24h, how many L4 Tengus and CNR kills do you get in the most busy L4 system? I bet less than 73.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#418 - 2012-05-29 15:39:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Hulls intended for combat have stronger tanks and are thus more difficult to gank in hisec, color me shocked
To be fair, Hulks have a stronger tank than some HACs…


miners want their hulks to tank like fully bricked Damnations while fitting a max-yield setup with cargo rigs

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#419 - 2012-05-29 15:40:06 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Jeniam Retriat wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it.


Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you.


No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship.


Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty.
10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero.

Not bad, 10 catalysts.

Blobbing is coming to highsec, it seems.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#420 - 2012-05-29 15:42:53 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Only once in my life I have seen 3 destroyers fail to kill any Mack. For failfit ones 2 are plenty.
10 x 2.5M ships to kill a supertank Hulk will net 1+ intact salvage + 10 x their own wrecks + half Hulk mods. The final balance is still positive or about zero.


okay, this is a problem how?

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration