These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#221 - 2012-07-26 09:20:34 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Yeah my point is that I don't think they should be profitable to gank. I think it should be possible, but not necessarily profitable (profitable might be the wrong word, but more that the expenses should be higher for the attacker than the defender).

You can still make it so it's not profitable, yet also within the realms of what one might do if they were so inclined.

If you want to balance cost, then an *untanked* hulk should be killable to 1 or 2 Nado's, with a good reward for tanking them, making it say, 45-50k EHP fully fit.

What you want to do is offer a low base EHP but give it more fitting room to fit a stiff tank if the user wants to.

The current situation is such that even the mining barge designed to be weak and flimsy is immune to anything less than the focused aggression of 5 people, which is a buff the likes of which we have never seen.

By the way, the "making it unprofitable" part is just silly. If I want to make money doing it I can alpha a Tengu and collect all the Gist goodies that spill out. If people move here are you just going to put a 4x EHP buff to an active Tengu, as well?

This really looks like a change which does nothing else than protect players who are unable/refuse to protect themselves, and trying to balance the game to make it safer for the lowest common denominator just smacks of the wrong direction, totally.

The changes to the lower tier barges is mostly OK, but the massive Hulk buff does nothing but promote AFK mining with little to no risk. If they really want to do that, then they should accept they get EHP from lower yields.

This is really a best of both scenario.


To quote myself and make a further point, the real sadness here is that smart miners now no longer have an advantage over dumb miners and bots, which is basically a nerf to risk management and thinking things through.

This is sad, truly.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Patrakele
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#222 - 2012-07-26 09:26:13 UTC
More tears. MOAR!

Back in my days, pvpers had some balls. What happened? Did they drop off?
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#223 - 2012-07-26 09:26:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Khanh'rhh wrote:


By the way, the "making it unprofitable" part is just silly. If I want to make money doing it I can alpha a Tengu and collect all the Gist goodies that spill out. If people move here are you just going to put a 4x EHP buff to an active Tengu, as well?



First of all the buff to Hulk is not going to magically make it require 20 tornadoes.

Second you say it yourself: you gank the Tengu for the Gist goodies, not because its bare hull is so sexy.
Same applies to freigthers and Orcas and whatever other ships: if they are empty or have crap fits, they are not worth.

So what makes a mining ship different, that EMPTY and unfitted it should bring in about 16 to 33M worth of salvage (it's what I'd get yesterday when salvaging macks)? Now add the fittings and all of this with an expense off yours of 5-10M?

You should make negative ISK for ganking an empty or T1 fit ship. It costed you no selective skill to kill it, like if you ganked the first badger you see: ooops it was empty.

IF the Hulk has the deadspace fit or has the ORE miners / MLU then LIKE FOR THE GIST TENGU, you should kill it and really make good money. Like for the rest of the game.
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#224 - 2012-07-26 09:35:27 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
But the risk-free parking your exhumer in a belt and sucking up all the rocks or ice you can will be there.


This is false. You could increase the base EHP on a Hulk to 200,000, and it still would not be "risk free".

The only risk-free thing you can do in Eve is stay docked.


See this is the disingenuous thing again. Normally I'd ignore stuff like this, but we just watched CCP Soundwave post similar ideas. "Its not like we are making Exhumers invulnerable." Roll

Sure, lets use a theoretical 200K EHP Hulk as an example.
Suicide ganking one is still, technically, possible. It would *only* take 20 Tornados to kill.
Soundwave hasn't 'turned off' high sec aggression, so whats the beef?

Its this: 20 Tornados cost 2 Billion, and a replacement Hulk is only 300M - therefore it simply won't happen in any imaginable situation where ISK has value. And thats just ISK - we are also talking about 20 players spending time, vs one! Hulk.

Conclusion, while one should be careful speaking in absolutes... it also pays to dwell within the realm of realistic possibility.

Sure, someone could suicide gank the Veldnaught. But would it really happen? No.



That in itself is an absolute. Part of the uniqueness of New Eden comes from the unpredictability of what will happen next. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to participate in ganking the Veldnaught, they juts haven't found someone to coordinate them into a plan of action for doing so.

The complaining about the changes to mining barges and exhumers is senseless. People are taking up their proverbial torches and pitchforks over what is a small slice of time in the life of the game we argue so much about (EVE).
The Devs do not tell the players everything. The changes they make are not necessarily permanent, and we do not know what changes they have planned that will affect the current situation. Take the issue of mineral prices dropping, as many are complaining about. Who is to say that CCP isn't planning on decreasing refinery quality in high-sec in a future expansion? They cannot make the game perfectly balanced in one huge expansion.

Profit favors the prepared

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2012-07-26 09:36:15 UTC
Evei Shard wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
But the risk-free parking your exhumer in a belt and sucking up all the rocks or ice you can will be there.


This is false. You could increase the base EHP on a Hulk to 200,000, and it still would not be "risk free".

The only risk-free thing you can do in Eve is stay docked.

I think you understand the flaw in your argument has more to do with the feasibility of suicide ganking rather than the possibility.

Of course it's possible to suicide gank a Hulk, whether it has 20,000 EHP, 200,000 EHP, or 20,000,000 EHP. Nobody's going to bother suicide ganking Hulks with EHP much higher than they are now because it will simply cost too much.

Again, this promotes lazy gameplay, and makes mining ultra easy-mode in highsec.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Dave Stark
#226 - 2012-07-26 09:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Dave stark wrote:


really? i guess it has been a while since i've been mining in a retriever in high sec; still my drone skills aren't any thing special and 0.7 space rats pop within 2 volleys. it's about what, 9 days training for 5x t2 light drones? and up to 14 days if you add drone interfacing IV to that. i'm sure new players can tolerate mining in 1.0 systems for 2 weeks. it's skills they want anyway.

not to mention the lucrative ores (atm, scordite) can be found in 0.7 systems which have laughable rats.


Right 2 days ago I needed 999 trit to complete a R&D mission on an alt who sits at 40 jumps away off Jita.
I checked the market of this 0.6 sec system and the closest trit for sale was 22 jumps away.

So I thought: "well she's in a frig and by chance I got 1 mining laser I fitted, let's just take from a roid in this system".

Now that alt is one of the 2008 "900k SP" ones, that is well better suited than modern new characters yet I could not do a single cycle before I was taken to hull by the 3 rats in there.

Sucks to be new in EvE. Game should entice new players go discover around (other MMOs grant XP or unlocks for that) not to stick to 1.0 sec for 2 months or else...


1day 17hours to get in to an osprey (give or take if you're not caldari) that'll have more durability than a frigate. also we've no idea how durable the new mining frigate will be. again; the real issue here is that exhumers must be able to tank belt rats in 0.0 which means a triple bs spawn which in turn is just pure overkill for high sec belts.

however i see no reason why we shouldn't put battleships in high sec ice belts; nothing less than a mining barge can mine in those belts anyway.
Jypsie
Wandering Star Enterprises
#227 - 2012-07-26 09:38:11 UTC
Quote:
This really looks like a change which does nothing else than protect players who are unable/refuse to protect themselves, and trying to balance the game to make it safer for the lowest common denominator just smacks of the wrong direction, totally


No...just, no.

See, Ruby Porto there, loves to post that list of "how not to die as a miner" in every thread he comes across where someone bitches and whines about getting ganked. I like it, I like alot of it. I actually have done quite a bit of it myself. I mine in grav sites and mission sites when I'm in high sec, otherwise I'm hidden in WH's.

Here's my problem with his list when it comes to fitting. Which is really what we're arguing about in this thread. The stat changes and fitting changes to barges.

He includes the exhumers using every single slot fitted for tank.

It is not acceptable that just to survive vs. a T1 dessie for all of 25 seconds a T2 Exhumer commit every single slot and rig to tanking.

Imagine if you flew anything other than an Abaddon in a Lvl 4 with every slot packed with T2 tank mods you were expected to explode within 30 seconds. There would be people complaining about the ship imbalance. People might feel that either the difficulty of the missions or the tanks of other batteships was off.

Needless to say, there would be some bittervet screaming about back in his day, there were no Abaddon's and they ran Lvl 4's in Fleets, exploded, and they liked it!

If an exhumer with half slots tank, half slots yield, had a chance against a decent ass dessie fit, we wouldn't be where we are today. But it doesn't, and here we are.

Suck it up, HTFU, and adapt.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#228 - 2012-07-26 09:39:43 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
1day 17hours to get in to an osprey (give or take if you're not caldari) that'll have more durability than a frigate. also we've no idea how durable the new mining frigate will be. again; the real issue here is that exhumers must be able to tank belt rats in 0.0 which means a triple bs spawn which in turn is just pure overkill for high sec belts.

however i see no reason why we shouldn't put battleships in high sec ice belts; nothing less than a mining barge can mine in those belts anyway.


My original mention was about a Retriever, which has considerably less tank than an Osprey.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#229 - 2012-07-26 09:42:09 UTC
Jypsie wrote:
Quote:
This really looks like a change which does nothing else than protect players who are unable/refuse to protect themselves, and trying to balance the game to make it safer for the lowest common denominator just smacks of the wrong direction, totally


No...just, no.

See, Ruby Porto there, loves to post that list of "how not to die as a miner" in every thread he comes across where someone bitches and whines about getting ganked. I like it, I like alot of it. I actually have done quite a bit of it myself. I mine in grav sites and mission sites when I'm in high sec, otherwise I'm hidden in WH's.

Here's my problem with his list when it comes to fitting. Which is really what we're arguing about in this thread. The stat changes and fitting changes to barges.

He includes the exhumers using every single slot fitted for tank.

It is not acceptable that just to survive vs. a T1 dessie for all of 25 seconds a T2 Exhumer commit every single slot and rig to tanking.

Imagine if you flew anything other than an Abaddon in a Lvl 4 with every slot packed with T2 tank mods you were expected to explode within 30 seconds. There would be people complaining about the ship imbalance. People might feel that either the difficulty of the missions or the tanks of other batteships was off.

Needless to say, there would be some bittervet screaming about back in his day, there were no Abaddon's and they ran Lvl 4's in Fleets, exploded, and they liked it!

If an exhumer with half slots tank, half slots yield, had a chance against a decent ass dessie fit, we wouldn't be where we are today. But it doesn't, and here we are.

Suck it up, HTFU, and adapt.


I can figure out how to avoid getting suicide ganked in a Hulk without any tank mods at all.
If you can't, why should I stand back and let you get coddled by CCP?
It's your own damn fault if you can't be creative enough to play this game properly.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Dave Stark
#230 - 2012-07-26 09:42:37 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
1day 17hours to get in to an osprey (give or take if you're not caldari) that'll have more durability than a frigate. also we've no idea how durable the new mining frigate will be. again; the real issue here is that exhumers must be able to tank belt rats in 0.0 which means a triple bs spawn which in turn is just pure overkill for high sec belts.

however i see no reason why we shouldn't put battleships in high sec ice belts; nothing less than a mining barge can mine in those belts anyway.


My original mention was about a Retriever, which has considerably less tank than an Osprey.


does it? jeez i haven't flown those ships for such a long time i forget what tanks better than what.
also, if i'm not mistaken an osprey can fit a launcher as well as miners due to the 5 high slots and less than 5 turrets etc so new players aren't really at the mercy of high sec rats.

Whoopie
Doomheim
#231 - 2012-07-26 09:45:32 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.


This is exactly it. It's a perfectly reasonable way to re-balance, and it is really necessary.

Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#232 - 2012-07-26 09:46:55 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
But the risk-free parking your exhumer in a belt and sucking up all the rocks or ice you can will be there.


This is false. You could increase the base EHP on a Hulk to 200,000, and it still would not be "risk free".

The only risk-free thing you can do in Eve is stay docked.

I think you understand the flaw in your argument has more to do with the feasibility of suicide ganking rather than the possibility.

Of course it's possible to suicide gank a Hulk, whether it has 20,000 EHP, 200,000 EHP, or 20,000,000 EHP. Nobody's going to bother suicide ganking Hulks with EHP much higher than they are now because it will simply cost too much.

Again, this promotes lazy gameplay, and makes mining ultra easy-mode in highsec.


Not arguing that, just regurgitating an oft used position taken by gankers when carebears make the mistake of assuming high-sec is 100% safe.


Profit favors the prepared

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2012-07-26 09:49:18 UTC
Evei Shard wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Evei Shard wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
But the risk-free parking your exhumer in a belt and sucking up all the rocks or ice you can will be there.


This is false. You could increase the base EHP on a Hulk to 200,000, and it still would not be "risk free".

The only risk-free thing you can do in Eve is stay docked.

I think you understand the flaw in your argument has more to do with the feasibility of suicide ganking rather than the possibility.

Of course it's possible to suicide gank a Hulk, whether it has 20,000 EHP, 200,000 EHP, or 20,000,000 EHP. Nobody's going to bother suicide ganking Hulks with EHP much higher than they are now because it will simply cost too much.

Again, this promotes lazy gameplay, and makes mining ultra easy-mode in highsec.


Not arguing that, just regurgitating an oft used position taken by gankers when carebears make the mistake of assuming high-sec is 100% safe.



Well if you're not arguing that, then I think you can agree that this is a terrible change. It's like mining in a Rokh with a larger cargohold and a bonus to mining laser yield.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Jypsie
Wandering Star Enterprises
#234 - 2012-07-26 09:50:40 UTC
Quote:
I can figure out how to avoid getting suicide ganked in a Hulk without any tank mods at all.
If you can't, why should I stand back and let you get coddled by CCP?
It's your own damn fault if you can't be creative enough to play this game properly.


Where did I say I have ever been caught? I avoid em by actions. Its fittings/stats that are the subject of disagreement. Keep up with the conversation.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#235 - 2012-07-26 09:51:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Another little story.

Carpet bombing belts is as lame and unskillful as it was playing Rain of Fire bright wizards in Warhammer.

The natural selection should apply to the gankers at least if not more (because they are the predators) than on miners.

Few weeks ago I went with one of my Cheetahs and scanned an Hulk and lo and behold, it has the Halada's fitting, that is the nice deadspace small shield booster.

I have a caldari alt (I know, sucky choice Oops) with a series of dessies, one for ninja looting, some for asploding and so on. So I got the guy popped, and the shield alone sold for 162M at Jita.

Since then I also discovered other miners use Caldari Navy small shield boosters (eve mail me I can even tell you where to find them).

That's The Ganking, that is a mindful operation helped with intelligence and aimed at sniping the pinatas.

The rest is dumb carpet farming, why should you reap hundreds of millions a day for that? Yesterday I ninjaed 240M worth of stuff off exploded Macks, the ganker seemed not interested beyond taking the mods (even if he wasn't, QQ I ninjaed it anyway)


With the same Cheetah I find DED4/10 not far from Jita (!) and then use the Caldari alt with a Drake to do them.
Guess what, doing a DED 4/10 takes longer, there's always 3-4 competitors (happens in minmatar space too) trying to steal the cans and the cans will contain from 5M worth of crap to the a 70M module (never got anything above that).

Now, match the effort of scanning and winning over competitors to get from 5M to 70M and see how it measures with "warp in, melt Mackinaw, get 1-2 intact armor playes at 16,500,000 a piece + random lesser scraps".
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#236 - 2012-07-26 09:53:31 UTC
Jypsie wrote:
Quote:
I can figure out how to avoid getting suicide ganked in a Hulk without any tank mods at all.
If you can't, why should I stand back and let you get coddled by CCP?
It's your own damn fault if you can't be creative enough to play this game properly.


Where did I say I have ever been caught? I avoid em by actions. Its fittings/stats that are the subject of disagreement. Keep up with the conversation.

So by your own admission you can take actions to avoid ganks without fitting a tank at all.
I don't see what the problem is, then.
You want to be able to mine without taking any action at all to defend yourself apart from fitting a mild tank?
In other words, you want CCP to help you be lazy.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Patrakele
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2012-07-26 09:53:47 UTC
Evei Shard wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
But the risk-free parking your exhumer in a belt and sucking up all the rocks or ice you can will be there.


This is false. You could increase the base EHP on a Hulk to 200,000, and it still would not be "risk free".

The only risk-free thing you can do in Eve is stay docked.


Boot.ini

Nowhere is safe.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#238 - 2012-07-26 09:57:12 UTC
Jypsie wrote:
Suck it up, HTFU, and adapt.

I can make a Retriever safe from a Dreadnought. That's adapting, no? You can warp off. It's not rocket science. Mining AFK ought to be risky.

The problem with the buff is exactly this: it promotes doing nothing at all to help yourself, whilst having the solution just given to you.

There's nothing to say that you can't mix tank and yield and still have a Hulk that can survive, if you decide you need to sit still and not watch Dscan. The fact a Hulk now has more EHP than a fully fit Heavy Assault ship is nonsense.

If people want to mine AFK/as a dumbie then they should be using a ship which supports that, and offers lower yield. This change makes even the thinnest of the barges ungankable so does nothing but say "train Hulk, AFK mine."

It's a buff to the current situation and does nothing to improve gameplay. The solution is making a fully fit hulk tough but an unfit/max yield Hulk thin.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Jypsie
Wandering Star Enterprises
#239 - 2012-07-26 09:57:18 UTC
Quote:
I don't see what the problem is, then.


Quote:
Its fittings/stats that are the subject of disagreement.


*sigh*
Acac Sunflyier
The Ascended Academy
#240 - 2012-07-26 09:58:34 UTC
I like the changes.