These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Not another high sec miner thread.....Oh yes it is

Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#321 - 2012-06-28 07:04:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentamon
When guys like Reech Yvormes quit really really mad you know you've got a good game. Usually people just yawn and quit.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#322 - 2012-06-28 07:19:46 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
A properly tanked Hulk cannot be profitably suicide ganked (.5 space is breakeven, higher is a direct loss).


True, but its not just Hulks. Anyone who loses a Hulk to a mere ganker must be either afk or have had some sort of system problem. [edit]But is it still true if you are getting paid extra?[end edit]

Hulkageddon isn't just about ganking Hulks though. It also includes Macs, transports, etc.


You were complaining about being a desirable target. Flying your ship in a way that makes it a desirable target is your choice because you can fly your ship in a way that doesn't make it a desirable target.

If you can fly a Mack, you can fly a Hulk. A Hulk can fit Ice Lasers just fine, Tank your Hulk and you'll mine ice without being a desirable target.
Transport ships don't qualify for the GSF bounties, so the rules of Isk tanking your transports remain the same as always.


Your job as a miner is to get the greatest quantity of Ore/Ice from the belt to the station safely that you can. If the ship with the best Belt->Cargo extraction rate keeps getting you shot, then pick another ship.


I'm always a desirable target; ask my many girlfriends. One more try at this.

I am complaining about being rendered one of many desirable targets by bored bullies empowered by CCP. There is a difference between being a potential target (as in the past) and a desirable target briefly (during past Hulkageddons).

Being rendered a desirable target permanently is indistinguishable from harassment only to the extent that an entire group is now being hounded out for wanting to play differently in the sand.

The only recourse is to play the game your way?

No, you should be playing the game my way. Mine more or die. Leader boards will be used henceforth solely to glorify those who mine the most every day, every week, every month.

Learn to play or go play Carebear PvP gankfest.


You're literally complaining about having to adapt.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#323 - 2012-06-28 07:36:28 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Andar Purvanen wrote:
No, you should be playing the game my way. Mine more or die. Leader boards will be used henceforth solely to glorify those who mine the most every day, every week, every month.

Learn to play or go play Carebear PvP gankfest.

You're literally complaining about having to adapt.

Ok, so where's your mineboards?

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 ?
Andar Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#324 - 2012-06-28 10:07:20 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
You're literally complaining about having to adapt.


No, I'm complaining about the evolution toward a ganking format.

CCP controls the game mechanics and there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.

Death does not deter.  I will mine until you surrender.
Dave stark
#325 - 2012-06-28 10:10:46 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You're literally complaining about having to adapt.


No, I'm complaining about the evolution toward a ganking format.

CCP controls the game mechanics and there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.


how exactly is the game moving towards a ganking format?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#326 - 2012-06-28 10:24:16 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You're literally complaining about having to adapt.


No, I'm complaining about the evolution toward a ganking format.

CCP controls the game mechanics and there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.


Only its been this way for 9 years and has infact, become safer for people in high sec.
Pipa Porto
#327 - 2012-06-28 10:25:16 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You're literally complaining about having to adapt.


No, I'm complaining about the evolution toward a ganking format.

CCP controls the game mechanics and there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.


Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?

Was it when Insurance was nerfed?

Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?

Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)

Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?

Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?

(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Andar Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#328 - 2012-06-28 10:43:18 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?

Was it when Insurance was nerfed?

Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?

Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)

Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?

Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?

(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)


Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!!

Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals.

Death does not deter.  I will mine until you surrender.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#329 - 2012-06-28 10:48:42 UTC
It's spelt cognitive dissonance. You seem to struggle with it, by the way.

.
Andar Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#330 - 2012-06-28 10:54:42 UTC
Roime wrote:
It's spelt cognitive dissonance. You seem to struggle with it, by the way.


I'm a miner not a scowler

Death does not deter.  I will mine until you surrender.
Pipa Porto
#331 - 2012-06-28 16:46:00 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?

Was it when Insurance was nerfed?

Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?

Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)

Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?

Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?

(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)


Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!!

Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals.


Which of those buffs to Ganking was it that newly empowered gankers to grief you (TOS says griefing's a bannable offense, so I assume you actually mean "Gank")?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Andar Purvanen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#332 - 2012-06-28 18:01:22 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?

Was it when Insurance was nerfed?

Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?

Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)

Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?

Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?

(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)


Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!!

Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals.


Which of those buffs to Ganking was it that newly empowered gankers to grief you (TOS says griefing's a bannable offense, so I assume you actually mean "Gank")?


None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.

You may play rules lawyer over the definition if you wish. Become one with Bill Clinton! Those being griefed know it when it happens to them.

To continue, despite heavy and repeated losses, PvPers still build and fight on and...have plenty of isk to do it with. Warships evolve and grow better.

And so ganking, always possible, is empowered in HighSec. But not particularly profitable. Except, potentially, during Hulkageddon when the rewards go up.

Now that it is year around the penalty/reward balance has skewed in favor of the Gankers/Griefers. Some sort of adjustment is required to offset the griefing directed against Miners while still permitting some forms of ganking in HighSec. I suggest it NOT be to ban the griefers.

It would appear to be a delicate balance sure to please no one.

Death does not deter.  I will mine until you surrender.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#333 - 2012-06-28 18:10:56 UTC
I love how so many care bears fight to get rid of suicide ganking, on the grounds that it isn't "real" or fair combat.

Then they corp hop every chance they get, and vehemently oppose any fixes to war dec evasion that would render suicide ganking obsolete.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Nuckin Futz
Ironhorse Holdings
#334 - 2012-06-28 19:26:07 UTC
Ahhh sweet sweet miners tears... oh wait I am one. Guess that makes me a cannibal?
Dave stark
#335 - 2012-06-28 19:29:37 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Andar Purvanen wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Which game mechanics have changed to make ganking easier or cheaper?

Was it when Insurance was nerfed?

Was it the several times Concord Reaction time was Buffed?

Maybe it was when bomeranging got declared an exploit for you? (despite being legal for years)

Or was it way back when CONCORD stopped being tankable?

Which one is the evidence that's leading you to believe that EvE's mechanics are changing to encourage ganking?

(Oh, and CCP has always said HS isn't meant to be safe, so stop expecting it to be safe.)


Tears!!! Real tears!!! I can die happy now. At last, miner ganking, even with inferior gear, is win!!!

Odd, I never claimed HS was safe. I claimed gankers were sufficiently empowered to be griefing whole categories of other players rather than just individuals.


Which of those buffs to Ganking was it that newly empowered gankers to grief you (TOS says griefing's a bannable offense, so I assume you actually mean "Gank")?


None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.

You may play rules lawyer over the definition if you wish. Become one with Bill Clinton! Those being griefed know it when it happens to them.

To continue, despite heavy and repeated losses, PvPers still build and fight on and...have plenty of isk to do it with. Warships evolve and grow better.

And so ganking, always possible, is empowered in HighSec. But not particularly profitable. Except, potentially, during Hulkageddon when the rewards go up.

Now that it is year around the penalty/reward balance has skewed in favor of the Gankers/Griefers. Some sort of adjustment is required to offset the griefing directed against Miners while still permitting some forms of ganking in HighSec. I suggest it NOT be to ban the griefers.

It would appear to be a delicate balance sure to please no one.

then go and address the balance. players have made it such that ganking is profitable. if people don't want to be ganked it's up to them to tip the scales in their favour again.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#336 - 2012-06-28 19:30:02 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:


None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.



No it is not griefing.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#337 - 2012-06-28 19:34:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Andar Purvanen wrote:
None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.

No it is not griefing.

Just keep saying at, at some point CCP will believe it and ban the gankers, then you'll be safe ...

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 ?
Pipa Porto
#338 - 2012-06-28 20:18:43 UTC
Andar Purvanen wrote:

None. Its a cumulative and likely unintended consequence of other changes over time. It is also Griefing though admittedly a large scale generalized form rather than directed against an individual.

You may play rules lawyer over the definition if you wish. Become one with Bill Clinton! Those being griefed know it when it happens to them.

To continue, despite heavy and repeated losses, PvPers still build and fight on and...have plenty of isk to do it with. Warships evolve and grow better.

And so ganking, always possible, is empowered in HighSec. But not particularly profitable. Except, potentially, during Hulkageddon when the rewards go up.

Now that it is year around the penalty/reward balance has skewed in favor of the Gankers/Griefers. Some sort of adjustment is required to offset the griefing directed against Miners while still permitting some forms of ganking in HighSec. I suggest it NOT be to ban the griefers.

It would appear to be a delicate balance sure to please no one.


Which specific changes have made HS game mechanically less safe? T3s and Dessy buffs are more than offset by the insurance nerf.

And, as I've mentioned, Ganking has been nerfed for you dozens of time. When is it going to be enough?

A Hulk already cannot be profitably ganked even with the GSF bounty, despite that bounty being a player run event (other HAGs had no bounty, just prizes, btw).

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#339 - 2012-06-28 20:19:43 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
I love how so many care bears fight to get rid of suicide ganking, on the grounds that it isn't "real" or fair combat.

Then they corp hop every chance they get, and vehemently oppose any fixes to war dec evasion that would render suicide ganking obsolete.


Shhh, it's only hypocrisy if the carebears disagree with it.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#340 - 2012-06-28 20:28:32 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

And, as I've mentioned, Ganking has been nerfed for you dozens of time. When is it going to be enough?


It will be enough when highsec players are invincible, obviously.

Sometimes I wonder if certain elements of the playerbase would be more happy playing X3: Terran Conflict.