These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2012-07-26 04:45:37 UTC
Also, while you're at it,

the Skiff only gets 70k ehp when you tank it and I can't fit a large shield booster on it. Can you up the power grid so I can?

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#82 - 2012-07-26 04:53:12 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Also, I just thought of something. If suicide-ganking wasn't meant to be profitable, wouldn't it make more sense to simply remove T2 salvage from exhumer wrecks, instead of giving them more EHP than the average armor-buffer T3 pvp fit?

Denidil wrote:
now you're just QQ'ing like a *****.

So you equate my promise that I will adapt to these changes and continue my activities to whining? Way to grasp at straws, little buddy.

CCP Soundwave wrote:
I don't want you to stop ganking nor am I going to remove aggression in high sec vOv

You most definitely will if marketing tells you to.


rofl


The devs have said only Hilmar and Unifex are allowed to make unilateral decisions. Not marketing. Gonna have to move up the food chain to get CCP Soundwave fired. I don't know who Unifex is or what he does, but I doubt he cares about you. Also Hilmar has shown he doesn't really care about marketing and other things. Seems your chances are pretty remote actually.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Jypsie
Wandering Star Enterprises
#83 - 2012-07-26 04:53:51 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
Gone are the days where EVE is a dangerous place.

I seem to have missed the part when they made all player ships immune to damage.


That won't happen as long as I'm around, btw.

Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted.


Boom, headshot

/thread

Entire ganking team is babies!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#84 - 2012-07-26 04:57:24 UTC
All we are going to get out of this are fleets of untouchable mining bots and a massive market crash in low end ore just when it became worth mining.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#85 - 2012-07-26 05:00:19 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
That won't happen as long as I'm around, btw.

Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted.


from what I see suicide ganking most people works exactly like that. luckily some people make themselves targets by carrying tons of phat loots. However miners are on the other side of that ratio, the profit aspect isn't exactly there but the lulz:isk outweighs it. I've always lulzed when ganking a hulk but tbh it was always rather easy targets. personally I would have boosted hulk hull hp and increased cargo expander hp penalty to give miners a choice, put em up to 40-50k ehp when fully buffer tanked.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Gustavus Adolphus
Croatoan Enterprises
#86 - 2012-07-26 05:02:26 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Also, I just thought of something. If suicide-ganking wasn't meant to be profitable, wouldn't it make more sense to simply remove T2 salvage from exhumer wrecks, instead of giving them more EHP than the average armor-buffer T3 pvp fit?

Denidil wrote:
now you're just QQ'ing like a *****.

So you equate my promise that I will adapt to these changes and continue my activities to whining? Way to grasp at straws, little buddy.

CCP Soundwave wrote:
I don't want you to stop ganking nor am I going to remove aggression in high sec vOv

You most definitely will if marketing tells you to.


rofl


I 100% support this product and/or service
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#87 - 2012-07-26 05:03:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Desturned
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
That won't happen as long as I'm around, btw.

Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted.


from what I see suicide ganking most people works exactly like that. luckily some people make themselves targets by carrying tons of phat loots. However miners are on the other side of that ratio, the profit aspect isn't exactly there but the lulz:isk outweighs it. I've always lulzed when ganking a hulk but tbh it was always rather easy targets. personally I would have boosted hulk hull hp and increased cargo expander hp penalty to give miners a choice, put em up to 40-50k ehp when fully buffer tanked.


a better solution would have been to give hulks the ability to fit better tanks than what they are currently capable of (say, 50-60k EHP without gang bonuses) at the expense of yield, rather than giving them 15k ehp without a single hardener fit (there is literally no other ship in the game short of battleships with those HP numbers)

in any case, even with a tank fit hulks were still capable of out-mining almost every other ship in the game, save for a yield-fit covetor, which still lacks the utility of a gigantic cargo hold

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2012-07-26 05:07:05 UTC
So many tears, so little cargo space to collect them all.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
pussnheels
Viziam
#89 - 2012-07-26 05:07:34 UTC
GAWD some of you profesional gankers are such crybabies
shouting how unfair it is to them that they suddenly can't play this game anymore because with these new barges the game becomes unbalanced
Was it fair to hunt down hulks and barges of people that want to play this game THEIR way and not yours , no it isn't
You ve been claiming that the only thing you do is to root out macro s , all the while it was clear that the real problem was ratting bots in nullsec mining with guns

You claim that this this game should only be about pvp , but you are too scaredof real pvp because you are too aftraid of losing a fight to a real person who is actual better than you, ooh imagine the shame and embarrassment

You claim that miners only want to turn this game into a theme aprk game , while you don't realize that you only want to turn this game into a arcade game

during the last 10 months every price rise in minerals was blamed on miners and your answer to that , lets go and gank some more miners .... ouch why does my tornado suddenly costs me more than 75 mil

My opinion you brought these changes on to yourself , now deal with it , adapt or leave

I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire
Crove
Spreadsheet Aces
#90 - 2012-07-26 05:08:45 UTC
What's odd about this whole thread / proposed change is that it will make low end ore mining less profitable, encouraging and rewarding higher risk mining. Isn't that what we want? For reward to match risk?

If you're really trying to teach the "stupid pigs" lessons, they'll learn them when profits plummet. Or, they will become low paid wage slaves for those of us who want cheap expensive ships. They'll be the eve equivalent of third world labor.

Yay third world labor!
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2012-07-26 05:08:55 UTC
pussnheels wrote:
adapt or leave


ahahahaha that's the same advice we gave to the miners, "fit a tank" "try drones that don't mine" "try not going AFK" but they felt entitled to have their max-yield fits AND a damnation-sized tank so they cried to CCP

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
#92 - 2012-07-26 05:10:21 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
All we are going to get out of this are fleets of untouchable mining bots and a massive market crash in low end ore just when it became worth mining.


This. Watch the return of botters like never before.
stoicfaux
#93 - 2012-07-26 05:13:19 UTC
IMO, the only real solution that will satisfy both sides is simply to have meaningful consequences for having a criminal record.

If you gank in real life, you don't get forgiven after a few minutes. In Eve, if you gank, you should wind up on the faction's/corporation's Most Wanted list, flashy red to faction navies to gate guns to players associated with that faction/corporation, for *forever* or until you pay restitution plus a hefty penalty. Criminals are locked out of the faction/corporation: no station services, no docking, no running around safely in a pod, no one cares about how much ratting you do because security status doesn't exist anymore, etc.. You do the crime, you get shot at for all time.

Gankers can still gank but they have to be really sneaky about it (i.e. raid from low-sec or from friendly faction territory.) High-sec players can band together to keep their local communities safe from marauders. Nobody has to deal with quirky, nonsensical, and unrealistic aggression mechanics. CONCORD goes away except for newbies systems. It's win win.


Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#94 - 2012-07-26 05:14:21 UTC
pussnheels wrote:
GAWD some of you profesional gankers are such crybabies
shouting how unfair it is to them that they suddenly can't play this game anymore because with these new barges the game becomes unbalanced
Was it fair to hunt down hulks and barges of people that want to play this game THEIR way and not yours , no it isn't
You ve been claiming that the only thing you do is to root out macro s , all the while it was clear that the real problem was ratting bots in nullsec mining with guns

You claim that this this game should only be about pvp , but you are too scaredof real pvp because you are too aftraid of losing a fight to a real person who is actual better than you, ooh imagine the shame and embarrassment

You claim that miners only want to turn this game into a theme aprk game , while you don't realize that you only want to turn this game into a arcade game

during the last 10 months every price rise in minerals was blamed on miners and your answer to that , lets go and gank some more miners .... ouch why does my tornado suddenly costs me more than 75 mil

My opinion you brought these changes on to yourself , now deal with it , adapt or leave


This is a factual post if you ignore the fact that all 3 exhumers could be tanked, the rise in ships was mostly down to massive inflation and minerals jumped due to drone alloy nerf. Or in other words, you just lied.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#95 - 2012-07-26 05:17:06 UTC
Crove wrote:
What's odd about this whole thread / proposed change is that it will make low end ore mining less profitable, encouraging and rewarding higher risk mining. Isn't that what we want? For reward to match risk?

If you're really trying to teach the "stupid pigs" lessons, they'll learn them when profits plummet. Or, they will become low paid wage slaves for those of us who want cheap expensive ships. They'll be the eve equivalent of third world labor.

Yay third world labor!

This is not how carebearism/botting works. Increasing safety will lead to, and always has led to, an increase in safety-centric activity. Do you really think that if barges become invulnerable, that miners will move to null to chase the better rocks, instead of making more alt accounts to mine Veld in .9?

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
CCP Soundwave
C C P
C C P Alliance
#96 - 2012-07-26 05:18:04 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
I don't want you to stop ganking nor am I going to remove aggression in high sec vOv


You got the Insurance Nerf.
You got the Suddenly CONCORD fix to aggro kiting.
You got the wardec changes that Dramatically favor the defenders.
You got the proposed Crimewatch changes that make it essentially impossible to loot the cargo of a ganked Freighter.
You got the proposed Crimewatch changes that were originally going to allow RR with CONCORD protection.

It all paints a picture, no matter what your stated objectives are.

Hulks can be fit such that they are not profitable to gank right now. The others need roles to fill, but if one ship's going to have the role of Tankey Miner, why are they all getting buffs that take away from that role bonus?

To fit the roles, the Skiff should have a great Tank, a middling Yield, and a smallish Cargo.
The Mackinaw should have a small Tank, a middling Yield, and a Great Cargo.
The Hulk should have a small Tank, a Great Yield, and a smallish Cargo.

You're giving the Skiff an insane Tank, a middling Yield, and a very good Cargo.
The Mackinaw a great Tank, a middling Yield, and a Great Cargo.
The Hulk a great Tank, a Great Yield, and a smallish Cargo.

When the Mack can have ~60k EHP, why bother with the Skiff?
When the Hulk can have ~45k EHP, why bother with the Skiff?

35k EHP is already unprofitable to Gank. The Extra 10k will remove Exhumer ganking entirely.


Oh, and the other 2 Exhumers with max MLUs should be able to out-mine a 0 MLU Hulk. Otherwise people are going to keep using the Hulk and tanking it (probably badly).


If I wanted to remove aggression, I'd just shut it off, instead of going through all these hoops to keep it alive. The reality is that suicide ganking is an integral part of the game that I quite like, but every now and then we need to make changes because the current setup doesn't work.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#97 - 2012-07-26 05:19:17 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
IMO, the only real solution that will satisfy both sides is simply to have meaningful consequences for having a criminal record.

If you gank in real life, you don't get forgiven after a few minutes. In Eve, if you gank, you should wind up on the faction's/corporation's Most Wanted list, flashy red to faction navies to gate guns to players associated with that faction/corporation, for *forever* or until you pay restitution plus a hefty penalty. Criminals are locked out of the faction/corporation: no station services, no docking, no running around safely in a pod, no one cares about how much ratting you do because security status doesn't exist anymore, etc.. You do the crime, you get shot at for all time.

Gankers can still gank but they have to be really sneaky about it (i.e. raid from low-sec or from friendly faction territory.) High-sec players can band together to keep their local communities safe from marauders. Nobody has to deal with quirky, nonsensical, and unrealistic aggression mechanics. CONCORD goes away except for newbies systems. It's win win.

So, will criminals also get the opportunity to avoid the police (CONCORD) entirely with these changes? You know, just like in "real life?"

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#98 - 2012-07-26 05:22:48 UTC
i remember when a couple of dudes in frigates kept a proteus tackled long enough for us to arrive and murder it

clearly two dudes in 500k isk ships deciding the fate of a 2bn isk ship is totally unfair

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Pipa Porto
#99 - 2012-07-26 05:26:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
CCP Soundwave wrote:
If I wanted to remove aggression, I'd just shut it off, instead of going through all these hoops to keep it alive. The reality is that suicide ganking is an integral part of the game that I quite like, but every now and then we need to make changes because the current setup doesn't work.


Why do you think it doesn't work? Right now, Hulks can fit for Tank (sacrificing Yield and convenience), and be unprofitable to gank.
Hulks can fit for convenience (sacrificing Yield and Tank), and be profitable to gank.
Hulks can be fit for yield (sacrificing Tank and convenience), and be profitable to gank.

Hulks can also fit themselves to make it easy to mine while aligned.


If these changes weren't designed as a straight nerf to Suicide ganking, why has every Exhumer gotten a significant Tank increase?

Why are you devaluing the Skiff's new role with both the Hulk and Mack tank buff before it's even on TQ?
Why are you devaluing the Mack's new role with the Skiff's new cargo hold?

And none of them will be profitable to gank, so why use the Skiff?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2012-07-26 05:26:58 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
i remember when a couple of dudes in frigates kept a proteus tackled long enough for us to arrive and murder it

clearly two dudes in 500k isk ships deciding the fate of a 2bn isk ship is totally unfair

If in a different security, different engagement rules and irrelevant to the situation being discussed.
If the frigates were able to trick the proteus into engaging then the proteus chose to engage and irrelevant to the situation being discussed.