These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP needs to take a hard look at Goonswarm and Hulkageddon to save EVE.

Author
Durgain
State War Academy
Caldari State
#241 - 2012-05-31 04:31:36 UTC
SmilingVagrant wrote:
Durgain wrote:

why do you assume there's no risk while mining? I don't know of a single asteriod belt without rats of some form, and the better the roids, the worse the rats.


No risk from other players. And rats aren't a risk. I know you'd like to think they are, but when I can throw a tanked T1 cruiser hull into a belt for 6 hours and 3 BS rats barely even scratch it: It's not a risk.

If all rats had sleeper AI, and say... decent fits, you may have some kind of argument.


do that in lowsec where the worthwhile ore is and see what happens :P
Frying Doom
#242 - 2012-05-31 04:34:30 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:
Wow, lots of pages since i left. :)

PvP is optional. Way back a few pages, whatshisface continues to insist that even miners are pvping when they are selling ore on the market because that goes towards PvP.

But one seems to forget that those ships and mods built can and are used for PvE purposes, and a person could theoretically mine and build their own ships for their own use for PvE.

The only real Valid reason people can suggest that PvP is not optional is the fact that eve gives people the ability to shoot at each other. But its the person's choice to shoot at another person.

0.0 can be used to get anything and everything you can get from hi sec and more, aside from missions. At least when it comes to Sovereignty. The only reason for people to oppose some "fix" for ganking is the fact that they can't stand the idea of actually using their space to get the same things they get in hi-sec.

The whole game is not about PvP and Pve it is about a player driven economy and risk vs rerward.

The whole I should be safe argument falls down in the risk vs reward. if you have 0 risk you should have 0 reward.

That simple there isn't anything else to it.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#243 - 2012-05-31 04:35:51 UTC
Durgain wrote:
SmilingVagrant wrote:
Durgain wrote:

why do you assume there's no risk while mining? I don't know of a single asteriod belt without rats of some form, and the better the roids, the worse the rats.


No risk from other players. And rats aren't a risk. I know you'd like to think they are, but when I can throw a tanked T1 cruiser hull into a belt for 6 hours and 3 BS rats barely even scratch it: It's not a risk.

If all rats had sleeper AI, and say... decent fits, you may have some kind of argument.


do that in lowsec where the worthwhile ore is and see what happens :P


WTF does that have to do with hi sec?


In a .7 belt you can kill the goddamn rats with 4 t1 drones. I know, I used to do it when mining in my barge.
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#244 - 2012-05-31 04:43:11 UTC
Durgain wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Durgain wrote:


I just liked mining because it was something I could do while I was raiding, or whatever i happened to be doing at the time.


I gotta ask.

Would you go afk in a WoW pvp server, out in the middle of a contested zone, get killed, and then go to the forums and ***** about it?

Cause that's what you're doing here.

You're afk mining in a FFA pvp game, while you raid in WoW, and you have a problem with getting ganked?

I'm trying not to be to big a **** here, but holy **** man, is a little common sense to much to ask?






Highsec isn't really a contested zone :P
and I've never gotten ganked mining, I just find it wrong that people would support a community that goes after the essentually harmless and defenseless.
There was a political commercial recently where they where talking about obama's healthcare with some guy wheeling an old lady through the woods, at the end of the commercial he tosses her over a cliff.
That's pretty much what goodsquad is promoting and people are happy about, if you take the time to think about it.
I donno if I want to be part of a group of people that finds that amusing.


Most people would agree here, so get together a huge alliance and crush us. I don't know why this hasn't happened yet, people have been whining for years about us. Do you not know where we are? We're in Deklein, come see us sometime.

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#245 - 2012-05-31 04:46:18 UTC
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Most people would agree here, so get together a huge alliance and crush us. I don't know why this hasn't happened yet, people have been whining for years about us. Do you not know where we are? We're in Deklein, come see us sometime.

VFK. Reds camp it all the time. People even get hotdropped in it because they're morons.

It isn't hard, come and camp it. If you bring enough people, we might even fight (but be prepared for some blob warfare Shocked)

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 ?

Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#246 - 2012-05-31 04:49:44 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Most people would agree here, so get together a huge alliance and crush us. I don't know why this hasn't happened yet, people have been whining for years about us. Do you not know where we are? We're in Deklein, come see us sometime.

VFK. Reds camp it all the time. People even get hotdropped in it because they're morons.

It isn't hard, come and camp it. If you bring enough people, we might even fight (but be prepared for some blob warfare Shocked)


OMG. You two are trying to make my life miserable.

I just wanna build ****!
SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#247 - 2012-05-31 04:52:09 UTC
Durgain wrote:
SmilingVagrant wrote:
Durgain wrote:

why do you assume there's no risk while mining? I don't know of a single asteriod belt without rats of some form, and the better the roids, the worse the rats.


No risk from other players. And rats aren't a risk. I know you'd like to think they are, but when I can throw a tanked T1 cruiser hull into a belt for 6 hours and 3 BS rats barely even scratch it: It's not a risk.

If all rats had sleeper AI, and say... decent fits, you may have some kind of argument.


do that in lowsec where the worthwhile ore is and see what happens :P


Yeah it's the same in Null though. Rats simply aren't a threat. It's the other players that provide all the threat.

The difference is if I go AFK in highsec for 6 hours: I'll probably be fine.
If I go AFK in lowsec for 6 hours: I may be fine (Probably still fine, lowsec population is dead sadly).
If I go AFK in nullsec in deklein for 6 hours: It's a toss up on if we've pissed anyone off recently.

At one point when we were between wars I forgot to dock up and passed out. My drake sat of the station until an hour before downtime and got killed by a roaming gang. About 4 hours.

When we're actively fighting someone, or antagonizing them, or them us it's not unusual to have multiple gangs sweeping through at any given moment: So going AFK at all = death, usually quickly.

Rats have never killed a ship of mine that was setup to tank them, or had a proxy to tank them in this game. This includes incursion rats.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#248 - 2012-05-31 04:52:40 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:


Why do you feel that miners are entitled to mine is space without incurring the risk of having the ships blown up?


There is no logical way to counter a suicide gank.

Fitting a tank means the suicide ganker needs another friend or two, docking up means all you do is sit in station all day, knowing which characters in space are possible suicide gankers is next to impossible with the amounts of people who create and destroy alts just for that purpose.

But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.


Frying Doom
#249 - 2012-05-31 04:54:05 UTC
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Durgain wrote:

Highsec isn't really a contested zone :P
and I've never gotten ganked mining, I just find it wrong that people would support a community that goes after the essentually harmless and defenseless.
There was a political commercial recently where they where talking about obama's healthcare with some guy wheeling an old lady through the woods, at the end of the commercial he tosses her over a cliff.
That's pretty much what goodsquad is promoting and people are happy about, if you take the time to think about it.
I donno if I want to be part of a group of people that finds that amusing.


Most people would agree here, so get together a huge alliance and crush us. I don't know why this hasn't happened yet, people have been whining for years about us. Do you not know where we are? We're in Deklein, come see us sometime.

Or they could just evolve and not try to max their mining ships, so as to stop giving your alliance money.

As to the obama ad I haven't seen it. But as far as I know hasn't it always been the case in the USA if you were sick or injured and didn't have a HMO you might as well have jumped off a cliff.

Like your HMO's the Goonswarm are a business and Mittens is quite good at giving his members returns(I can't believe I said that).

Or would you prefer Medicare where everyone just automatically looses part of there pay as a tax to help protect suffering miners. Who are the reason they are getting shot in the first place.

Actually that makes mining in an Exhumer like smoking, you want to be able to be free to do what ever you want and then want someone else to foot the bill.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#250 - 2012-05-31 04:57:07 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:
But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.

Ah. Buff the hulk's tank. EXCELLENT


You can't wardec NPC corps. So if you did remove ganking, a lot of things would be safely done by NPC corp alts. Such as, yep - mining.

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 ?

SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#251 - 2012-05-31 04:57:35 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

As to the obama ad I haven't seen it. But as far as I know hasn't it always been the case in the USA if you were sick or injured and didn't have a HMO you might as well have jumped off a cliff.


Lets not do this. Any minute now a dozen freepers are going to barrel down on us and say "European style social medicine won't work in the US because communism/mexicans/abortions/JESUS"

I mean I wouldn't want these forums to become uncivil or anything.
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#252 - 2012-05-31 05:05:35 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Spikeflach wrote:
But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.

Ah. Buff the hulk's tank. EXCELLENT


You can't wardec NPC corps. So if you did remove ganking, a lot of things would be safely done by NPC corp alts. Such as, yep - mining.


Didn't they already buff the Hulk's tank? Repeatedly? And stupidly -- there is no reason at all CCP should be rewarding non-engaged, AFK, botters like that. In fact, lets be honest -- the Hulk needs it's EHP *nerfed*.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#253 - 2012-05-31 05:06:47 UTC
Xython wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Spikeflach wrote:
But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.

Ah. Buff the hulk's tank. EXCELLENT


You can't wardec NPC corps. So if you did remove ganking, a lot of things would be safely done by NPC corp alts. Such as, yep - mining.

Didn't they already buff the Hulk's tank? Repeatedly? And stupidly -- there is no reason at all CCP should be rewarding non-engaged, AFK, botters like that. In fact, lets be honest -- the Hulk needs it's EHP *nerfed*.

MOAR BUFFS

Hulk still being ganked, why u let them, need buff nao tia

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 ?

Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#254 - 2012-05-31 05:11:32 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Spikeflach wrote:
But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.

Ah. Buff the hulk's tank. EXCELLENT


You can't wardec NPC corps. So if you did remove ganking, a lot of things would be safely done by NPC corp alts. Such as, yep - mining.


Yeah, more tank is a thought, but i'm sure there's people that say that it will make hulks too tough or that with more tank it needs less yield.

But, in a way it would probably be along the lines of how they buffed destroyers by removing the old penalties.

I mean, it could make for a more even field where a gankers loss to concord is actually more equivalent to a hulk loss to a suicide.

maybe it would take 8 destroyers as opposed to 3, or 2 tier 3 battlecruisers etc...when the hulk is tanked correctly.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#255 - 2012-05-31 05:18:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Natsett Amuinn wrote:


It's a FFA pvp game. You don't have to like it, but that's the reality of it. The game is built around that single premise. Ships MUST be destroyed, everywhere. The game is dependant upon that singular fact.


It's a flawed FFA PvP game.

Its rounds don't end. Nobody really "wins" after a while. Battle objectives never reset nor have a "kick off" time or anything.

Therefore who achieves a critical mass - that's basically the only skill needed - will go to the FFA map battle objectives (moons) and stranglehold the whole FFA game and will dictate and impose their rules on everybody else. Those battle objectives also provide endless amount of renewable power so basically it's almost granted such stranglehold will last multiple RL years until something blows the battle objective holders from inside.

A FFA game like this would be easily classed as "sh1t" and it is.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#256 - 2012-05-31 05:19:20 UTC
Xython wrote:
[quote=Alavaria Fera]

Didn't they already buff the Hulk's tank? Repeatedly? And stupidly -- there is no reason at all CCP should be rewarding non-engaged, AFK, botters like that. In fact, lets be honest -- the Hulk needs it's EHP *nerfed*.


Lets see, an option to make ganking a ship more challenging, or an option to make ganking a ship not possible?

Its a mining ship, the most it gets from buffing the tank is the ability to survive a suicide gank.

Though i still like the idea of making ganking less possible, with say making concord instant. But unfortunately the noisy people here think it will all be hellfire and brimstone if that happens.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#257 - 2012-05-31 05:21:52 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Spikeflach wrote:
But people seem to fail to realize that even if there was the impossibility of gank, there are still wardecs.

Though i think the best solution to the suicide gank problem could possibly lie in the idea of buffing the hulk with another midslot for that extra tank which may actually make it so gankers will have to work a little harder to achieve their results.

Ah. Buff the hulk's tank. EXCELLENT


You can't wardec NPC corps. So if you did remove ganking, a lot of things would be safely done by NPC corp alts. Such as, yep - mining.


Yeah, more tank is a thought, but i'm sure there's people that say that it will make hulks too tough or that with more tank it needs less yield.

But, in a way it would probably be along the lines of how they buffed destroyers by removing the old penalties.

I mean, it could make for a more even field where a gankers loss to concord is actually more equivalent to a hulk loss to a suicide.

maybe it would take 8 destroyers as opposed to 3, or 2 tier 3 battlecruisers etc...when the hulk is tanked correctly.

And then those 8 destroyers ... tsk, still to cheap compared to the hulk, so we better up the tank a bit more.

So it takes 100 T1 catalysts to do it. But nope, they're still a good bit cheaper, maybe need to knock it up a notch...

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 ?

Frying Doom
#258 - 2012-05-31 05:25:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Spikeflach wrote:
Xython wrote:
[quote=Alavaria Fera]

Didn't they already buff the Hulk's tank? Repeatedly? And stupidly -- there is no reason at all CCP should be rewarding non-engaged, AFK, botters like that. In fact, lets be honest -- the Hulk needs it's EHP *nerfed*.


Lets see, an option to make ganking a ship more challenging, or an option to make ganking a ship not possible?

Its a mining ship, the most it gets from buffing the tank is the ability to survive a suicide gank.

Though i still like the idea of making ganking less possible, with say making concord instant. But unfortunately the noisy people here think it will all be hellfire and brimstone if that happens.

I really wish this would hurry up and go away I hate standing up for goons.

The ganking mechanics are fine. The hulks are fine the way they are.

It is the people who are broken. The goonswarm are acting perfectly within the rules of the game, all that has happened is that the conditions imposed by players have evolved so the current victims need to evolve as well.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#259 - 2012-05-31 05:27:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Spikeflach
Alavaria Fera wrote:

And then those 8 destroyers ... tsk, still to cheap compared to the hulk, so we better up the tank a bit more.

So it takes 100 T1 catalysts to do it. But nope, they're still a good bit cheaper, maybe need to knock it up a notch...


We're not talking about the hulk loss isk rates, we're talking the ganker ship loss rates. If, say 8 destroyers were needed to suicide a hulk, the possibility to cover the loss of the destroyers with the loot is less likely.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#260 - 2012-05-31 05:32:14 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

I really wish this would hurry up and go away I hate standing up for goons.

The ganking mechanics are fine. The hulks are fine the way they are.

It is the people who are broken. The goonswarm are acting perfectly within the rules of the game, all that has happened is that the conditions imposed by players have evolved so the current victims need to evolve as well.


You don't have to post here if you don't want to.

People insist "fixing" ganking won't ever happen, so there is no logical reason for anyone to legitimize this thread by responding to it aside from the fear that it might actually be something that CCP will look into.