These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Barge Fairy Tale

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pipa Porto
#21 - 2012-07-26 02:59:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Corina Jarr wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
......
Then what's the problem? You're spewing your opinion all over the place advocating for Mining vessels to be profitable gank targets. Why?


I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.

No, the low level ones are useless and have no purpose. The only reason Macks are flown is because of their ice bonus.

CCP is trying to make all of them have a reason to fly. They just need to (possibly) work on the details.


And yet they're giving the Hulk a tank buff, stealing thunder from the Skiff's role.
And yet they're giving the Skiff an enormous Ore bay, stealing thunder from the Mackinaw's role.
And yet they're giving the Mack a bigger tank buff than the new Hulk and better Yield than the new Skiff, stealing thunder from both.

A tanky ship, a cargoey ship, and a yield ship. Those are great. But make it a choice (though it's still certainly handholding because the Hulk could have done it).

The Tanky ship has an enormous Cargo.
The Cargoey ship has a pretty big Tank.
The Yield ship also has a pretty big Tank.

Why?

The new Hulk should be pretty flimsy, as should the new Mack. The Skiff shouldn't have an enormous Ore bay on top of its massive tank.

If you're gonna give each ship a role, don't diminish the value of the other roles.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
stoicfaux
#22 - 2012-07-26 03:01:57 UTC
So... the moral of the story is that the Big Bad Wolf has gone from being a windbag to a crybaby?

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
#23 - 2012-07-26 03:08:24 UTC
CCP is making EVE into MLP Online. High sec is going to become 100% safe haven for miners and the botters are going to grow in such numbers it is going to be stupid silly.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-07-26 03:09:35 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
eh mining is some of the worst income in game.... and now that they will be free to afk mine again lowends should crash making their income god awful again.


And then the stupid miner will whine that their profession is not profitable enough again.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
EvEa Deva
Doomheim
#25 - 2012-07-26 03:09:49 UTC
Another kick in the balls to gankers, im almost starting to feel sorry for you guys............almost
Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
#26 - 2012-07-26 03:11:52 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
......
Then what's the problem? You're spewing your opinion all over the place advocating for Mining vessels to be profitable gank targets. Why?


I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.

No, the low level ones are useless and have no purpose. The only reason Macks are flown is because of their ice bonus.

CCP is trying to make all of them have a reason to fly. They just need to (possibly) work on the details.


And yet they're giving the Hulk a tank buff, stealing thunder from the Skiff's role.
And yet they're giving the Skiff an enormous Ore bay, stealing thunder from the Mackinaw's role.
And yet they're giving the Mack a bigger tank buff than the new Hulk and better Yield than the new Skiff, stealing thunder from both.

A tanky ship, a cargoey ship, and a yield ship. Those are great. But make it a choice (though it's still certainly handholding because the Hulk could have done it).

The Tanky ship has an enormous Cargo.
The Cargoey ship has a pretty big Tank.
The Yield ship also has a pretty big Tank.

Why?

The new Hulk should be pretty flimsy, as should the new Mack. The Skiff shouldn't have an enormous Ore bay on top of its massive tank.

If you're gonna give each ship a role, don't diminish the value of the other roles.


With the changes on the barges you'd be silly not to use Mackinaw with it's new uber armor. Put on ice mods and 2 MLU's, use the mining implants and tada...park your Mackinaw in the ice field and go watch a movie. Wash - rinse - repeat - profit - 0 risk.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-07-26 03:16:05 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
......
Then what's the problem? You're spewing your opinion all over the place advocating for Mining vessels to be profitable gank targets. Why?


I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.

No, the low level ones are useless and have no purpose. The only reason Macks are flown is because of their ice bonus.

CCP is trying to make all of them have a reason to fly. They just need to (possibly) work on the details.


And yet they're giving the Hulk a tank buff, stealing thunder from the Skiff's role.
And yet they're giving the Skiff an enormous Ore bay, stealing thunder from the Mackinaw's role.
And yet they're giving the Mack a bigger tank buff than the new Hulk and better Yield than the new Skiff, stealing thunder from both.

A tanky ship, a cargoey ship, and a yield ship. Those are great. But make it a choice (though it's still certainly handholding because the Hulk could have done it).

The Tanky ship has an enormous Cargo.
The Cargoey ship has a pretty big Tank.
The Yield ship also has a pretty big Tank.

Why?

The new Hulk should be pretty flimsy, as should the new Mack. The Skiff shouldn't have an enormous Ore bay on top of its massive tank.

If you're gonna give each ship a role, don't diminish the value of the other roles.


I didn't notice this at the time but this screams homogenization and bad design. Instead of giving mining ships a unique role and letting the miner determine which tool is the best for the job we're just going to make them all the same and let the trisomy 32 miners fly the 500mill isk ship that is clearly the best because it costs 500mill isk.

I don't mine but isn't diversity and choice part of the fun in this game? This is basically an antifun change as you no longer have to think to accomplish the task you want to perform while mining because there aren't any choices to make.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Herr Hammer Draken
#28 - 2012-07-26 03:17:15 UTC
I would like to know where it is written that you have to make money ganking a miner?
I imagine after this change CCP is telling all of you the same thing.
In fact reading between the lines of dev speak it seems it was never intended to be able to make isk while ganking miners.

Note none of these new barges are gank proof. So quite your whinning and adapt.
Players can still effect their own economies of scale but they just can not do it as a career. Unless....

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Pipa Porto
#29 - 2012-07-26 03:20:30 UTC
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
I would like to know where it is written that you have to make money ganking a miner?
I imagine after this change CCP is telling all of you the same thing.
In fact reading between the lines of dev speak it seems it was never intended to be able to make isk while ganking miners.

Note none of these new barges are gank proof. So quite your whinning and adapt.
Players can still effect their own economies of scale but they just can not do it as a career. Unless....


The only reason Ganking Hulks is profitable is the fact that Miners are too lazy to tank their ships.

Now, they won't have to do anything to do so.

A properly fit Hulk cannot be profitably ganked.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
stoicfaux
#30 - 2012-07-26 03:21:34 UTC
Adapt. It's now easier to gank the asteroids than the miners. Trade in your destroyers and tie3 BCs for mining ships and gank the asteroids out from under the miners.

Imagine the tears when the AFK miner comes back to see that his ore hold is nearly empty and his lasers shut off ten minutes ago because you and your wolfpack stripped the rocks out from under him!

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Herr Hammer Draken
#31 - 2012-07-26 03:25:42 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
I would like to know where it is written that you have to make money ganking a miner?
I imagine after this change CCP is telling all of you the same thing.
In fact reading between the lines of dev speak it seems it was never intended to be able to make isk while ganking miners.

Note none of these new barges are gank proof. So quite your whinning and adapt.
Players can still effect their own economies of scale but they just can not do it as a career. Unless....


The only reason Ganking Hulks is profitable is the fact that Miners are too lazy to tank their ships.

Now, they won't have to do anything to do so.

A properly fit Hulk cannot be profitably ganked.



Why are you still whinning about the change. Adapt. Or complain about it like a proper carebear.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Suqq Madiq
#32 - 2012-07-26 03:25:55 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.


Clearly they aren't fine as they are or CCP wouldn't be devoting their time to re-balancing them. I know, I know, you and your ilk are far better equipped to determine what CCP should be devoting their time to than the people who actually run the company, but you're just regurgitating the same tired rhetoric over and over at this point. Don't you get tired of being wrong all the time?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2012-07-26 03:26:50 UTC
If these changes go through I'd like to see CCP put bot hunting into overdrive. These changes will make botting all the more easier because you don't need to worry about that mining ship getting ganked.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#34 - 2012-07-26 03:28:27 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Instead of giving mining ships a unique role and letting the miner determine which tool is the best for the job we're just going to make them all the same and let the trisomy 32 miners fly the 500mill isk ship that is clearly the best because it costs 500mill isk.


so "mercoxit ship", "ice ship", "everything else ship" is letting miners determine which tool is better for the job? Well fancy that.
Suqq Madiq
#35 - 2012-07-26 03:28:42 UTC
Ginseng Jita wrote:
CCP is making EVE into MLP Online. High sec is going to become 100% safe haven for miners and the botters are going to grow in such numbers it is going to be stupid silly.


Nobody believes this drivel. Nowhere is 100% safe. You can still gank any ship you want by applying the correct amount of force.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-07-26 03:29:38 UTC
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.


Clearly they aren't fine as they are or CCP wouldn't be devoting their time to re-balancing them. I know, I know, you and your ilk are far better equipped to determine what CCP should be devoting their time to than the people who actually run the company, but you're just regurgitating the same tired rhetoric over and over at this point. Don't you get tired of being wrong all the time?



Wow remember Incarna just because CCP does something doesn't mean its the right thing to do.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Suqq Madiq
#37 - 2012-07-26 03:31:54 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
I'm saying they don't need a tank buff because they're fine as they are.


Clearly they aren't fine as they are or CCP wouldn't be devoting their time to re-balancing them. I know, I know, you and your ilk are far better equipped to determine what CCP should be devoting their time to than the people who actually run the company, but you're just regurgitating the same tired rhetoric over and over at this point. Don't you get tired of being wrong all the time?



Wow remember Incarna just because CCP does something doesn't mean its the right thing to do.


Given the choice between you and your ilk determining ship redesigns or CCP taking on that role I think it's pretty obvious who the level-headed among us would choose.

Protip: It isn't you.
Herr Hammer Draken
#38 - 2012-07-26 03:35:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Hammer Draken
What is really funny about all of this. Right now in game only 1 out of 20 miners has any clue that these changes are comming.
And for that 5% that do have a clue 90% of them are still going to use their hulks without any changes.
They are all worried that their hulks will get downgraded. When they find out that the hulk gets a slight boost they are all happy and content and almost to a man nobody cares about the rest of the changes.

I predict it will be months before these new barge changes impact any significant changes to miner behavior.

Note the people that post here on this forum represent far less than even 1% of the eve population.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#39 - 2012-07-26 03:38:16 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
So... the moral of the story is that the Big Bad Wolf has gone from being a windbag to a crybaby?



Nope, this Big Bad Wolf will probably go back to ganking haulers. (until Crimewatch kills that profession off)

And there are always Tengus to pop.

But Exhumers will likely be off the menu.

Sure, there will be the odd holdout 5 or 6 man dessie team. But really, the last (and ONLY) credible threat to miners in high-sec has been largely removed. Most gankers are sharp enough to realize that spending 300M for a 'chance' to pop a 180M ISK Mackinaw is an abject waste. Orcas are rarely attacked as well - same principle. No drops + massive EHP + relatively cheap cost = waste of time.

As for the AFKer and bots, while being like cockroaches (they NEVER go away) - at least you could have fun squashing them and earn a little ISK doing it. Now - they will operate with complete impunity, 60K EHP Mackinaw, HO!!!!

Has nothing to do with 'adjusting' or 'being smart' about ganking. There is no way to 'trick' anyone in this process. (unlike ninja salvaging - which, also repeatedly nerfed, I fear is breathing its last....safeties anyone?)

Ganking is all hard numbers, proper scouting, and execution - but its clear what side of the scale CCP's thumb is on. Eventually you are simply beating your head against endless nerfs, ISK disincentives and massive EHP.

Yeah, THATS creative - force all gankers exclusively into roving packs of Catalysts. Yet other 'clever' tactics and tricks have been all been removed, by one means or another - in record time, the minute CCP discovers them....

So spare me the crybaby comments.

The Goons are right on this one.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-07-26 03:44:12 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Nope, this Big Bad Wolf will probably go back to ganking haulers. (until Crimewatch kills that profession off)

What part of proposed crimewatch changes prevents hauler ganking?