These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc
#641 - 2012-07-26 19:41:10 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC.
…which are a response to the “but it's meaningless, they'll bring more” argument. It's not something you have to do — it's an escalation in response to their escalation that disproves a completely different myth about the tankability of Hulks.

Quote:
Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit.
Answer to what? It has nothing to do with what you quoted. In fact, the issues caused by this fundamentally flawed concept of cost-balancing were fundamentally flawed exactly because there was no adaptation to it, and that's why they had to actually fix it by using some real balance measures.

When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.

We should argue about the cost of supercaps .... at least that makes them rare compared to untanked.badly tanked hulks...


The best thing about the barge/exhumer changes is that low end minerals are going to be hilariously low meaning for hilariously cheap supers.

I can't ******* wait :3
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#642 - 2012-07-26 19:42:32 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Yes. His proposed solution is counter-productive.


So risk free, high profit is best for the game?


ask the goons.. they should know since that's how they profit.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#643 - 2012-07-26 19:43:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC. End of MLU.

In the meanwhile I don't recall EVER having had to fit a MLU in any of my other PvP or PvE ships. And I have loads.


You don't fit MLU's into PvP ships. You fit Gyrostabilizers/TE's. And Nanos.

You balance Tank with Yield and Cargo - just as combat ships balance Tank with Speed and Firepower.

Gank ships are effective because they pile everything onto Firepower - to the exclusion of almost everything else, simply because Tank and Speed are useless vs the godlike CONCORD. Combat ships do not get to pick all three (unless they are Minmatar). Blink

When a miner gets to pick all three - its no longer balanced. Except this is worse: you aren't even picking them with mods and rigs - they are being handed to you right off of the factory floor.

My reaction when I find miners learning and 'doing it right' is actually quite positive. It means they are playing the game smart and I respect that.

If they warp out. I don't get mad. I think, 'Great - they were paying attention - good for them."
When I find a Hulk, clad in a DCII, MSEII and Shield Rigs - I don't cry about it - I respect it, and go looking for another target. (and there is ALWAYS another target....)

I just don't understand why as a group, why these 'intelligent' miners are such an extreme minority.

Is it just blind 'Goon hatred?'
Or are these people who lost an Exhumer 3 weeks ago (or 2 years ago in the case of Krixtal Icefluxor) - and rather than learn from it, they just get mad and lose sight of the forest for the trees?





Way to create a blurb off an obvious copy paste typo (MLU <=> MAPC).

Also, when I see a DCII and shield rigs Hulk I think: "what a moron" or "what an overtank AFKer". Not respect.
He's making easily 30% less than everybody else, who can get a ship exploded every now and then but make it back in 2 days and come well ahead off the overtanked scared afker.

The real risk vs reward does not come from having zero deaths in your life but from earning much more than you lose.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Mara Tessidar
Perkone
Caldari State
#644 - 2012-07-26 19:43:54 UTC
evil goonie overlord checking in
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#645 - 2012-07-26 19:44:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
What I find tasty is the hypocrisy exposed
You mean the “adapt or gtfo” dribble now coming from the exact class of people who could never adapt and who had to be helped by CCP to no longer be idiots? The dribble directed at those who have proven time and a gain that they can adapt just fine?

Yes, it's pretty hypocritical. But then, their lack of cognitive clarity was the entire problem to begin with and why their preferred tools apparently needed to be made idiot-proof.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
The real risk vs reward does not come from having zero deaths in your life but from earning much more than you lose.
…and much like the simple steps that could be taken to solve the perceived issues the miners said they had, this advice was also far too complicated a concept for them to wrap their heads around.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#646 - 2012-07-26 19:45:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Richard Desturned wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yesterday in Sirseshin, several times.


a tornado is a pretty expensive way to kill a hulk

it seems that you're angry because hulks are able to die in hisec???????


but not unfairly expensive..considering the price of the target. Belly up to the bar if you want to drink otherwise move on.

An untanked T1 battle crusier will have nearly double the tank of an untanked T2 hulk... seems fine to me.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Arvantis Sauril
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#647 - 2012-07-26 19:46:04 UTC
Quote:


The day every null sec player is not aloud by any means starting by NPC or Alt corporations to have full industrial organisations in high sec, mission corporations, shipping corporations, trading alts, High sec research/invention POS's and more funky stuff, then yep it will be time to change high sec.
But as far as every major null alliance has hundreds/thousands of those in high sec and don't stop crying about high sec they will always be laughed at for not being serious for one second.



Alts of every shape, kind, and variety are definitely a problem. On the one hand its awesome to think about how this feature or that feature could make EVE into an even more complicated and intensive Space War Economy game, but you are correct, for every such feature, someone will "alt" their way around any consequences for their behavior.

Its a problem in almost every online game I can think of. Kills are rewarded. Losses are reimbursed, or marginalized. Die? Respawn. Punishments are evaded by logging out or logging in a new account. Even the most heinously one sided game of Counter Strike will eventually end and then you can just escape out and never go back to that server again. Having ramifications for behavior in a game, and enforcing those ramifications, will always be an issue. As there will always be people who just really want to ruin someone else's fun, I'm not sure what the answer is. But super buffing every tank of every mining ship, while leaving the mining asteroids themselves unchanged, definitely isn't the answer.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#648 - 2012-07-26 19:46:45 UTC
Haquer wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC.
…which are a response to the “but it's meaningless, they'll bring more” argument. It's not something you have to do — it's an escalation in response to their escalation that disproves a completely different myth about the tankability of Hulks.

Quote:
Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit.
Answer to what? It has nothing to do with what you quoted. In fact, the issues caused by this fundamentally flawed concept of cost-balancing were fundamentally flawed exactly because there was no adaptation to it, and that's why they had to actually fix it by using some real balance measures.

When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.

We should argue about the cost of supercaps .... at least that makes them rare compared to untanked.badly tanked hulks...


The best thing about the barge/exhumer changes is that low end minerals are going to be hilariously low meaning for hilariously cheap supers.

I can't ******* wait :3



Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.

Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.

As you can see, there's no problem, just cry babies tears by millions of M3

brb
Andre Jean Sarpantis
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#649 - 2012-07-26 19:46:45 UTC
reading the whole thing i come to the conclusion CCP did a well thougth change if Gankers are whinning that hard in this thread.

Ahhh yes!! Ganker tears so delicious and tasty...so sweet and enjoyable.

Well...to be honest....as it is rigth now before the changes kicking in its far t easy to kill a Exhumer, even if the pilot to tries acting best as possible, even with tank fit....currently Exhumers are simply to easy killable.

So with the changes are kicking in 8th of august, Gankers just need to bring in more Firepower and more efforts to bring down this lousy Miner pilot and collect his tears...so what....its a fair change...More efforts needed...adapt or look out new easier prey! P

sincerly

Andre Jean Sarpantis ( Roleplayed nephew from the Serpentis founder )
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#650 - 2012-07-26 19:48:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC.
…which are a response to the “but it's meaningless, they'll bring more” argument.


... which is a wrong adding to a wrong. Does not make it a right.


Tippia wrote:

When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.


Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The gankers generally refuse to and instead argue about cost (of bringing *1* more catalyst for 1 hulk) and other irrelevancies.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#651 - 2012-07-26 19:49:34 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.
Lol No.
Far more sturdier ships than these are lost already because the difference in rules means that the friends will not get there in time…

Quote:
Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.
Not really, no. Unless you're talking about highsec, in which case what you said is already true if you choose to make it so.
DrSmegma
Smegma United
#652 - 2012-07-26 19:49:56 UTC  |  Edited by: DrSmegma
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Tippia wrote:

When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.


Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The gankers generally refuse to and instead argue about cost (of bringing *1* more catalyst for 1 hulk) and other irrelevancies.


This is simply wrong as the gankers are not arguing like that. It has more to do with miners having an average IQ of about 75 (which is sadly too low to survive in a game of social darwinism like EvEO) and being unable to adapt, then crying until CCP makes the game idiot-proof for them which it was never meant to be.


But guys, we can blame miners all we want. Who really ****** up is CCP.

Eve too complicated? Try Astrum Regatta.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#653 - 2012-07-26 19:50:03 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yet we are presented with those LOL YOU MUST HAVE 32 K EHP OR YOU PLAY WRONG LOL fittings and they use a MAPC.
…which are a response to the “but it's meaningless, they'll bring more” argument. It's not something you have to do — it's an escalation in response to their escalation that disproves a completely different myth about the tankability of Hulks.

Quote:
Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit.
Answer to what? It has nothing to do with what you quoted. In fact, the issues caused by this fundamentally flawed concept of cost-balancing were fundamentally flawed exactly because there was no adaptation to it, and that's why they had to actually fix it by using some real balance measures.

When people tell miners to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting. The miners generally refuse to and instead argue about cost and other irrelevancies.

We should argue about the cost of supercaps .... at least that makes them rare compared to untanked.badly tanked hulks...


The PL screenshot in the EvE news should show how rare are supercaps these days...

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#654 - 2012-07-26 19:50:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls.
Incorrect.


Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#655 - 2012-07-26 19:52:37 UTC
JamesCLK wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Exhumers? Need a DCU II just to not suck complete balls.

FYP


No, because the DCU does not enable fitting shield mods to get to those conservative 30k EHP. The MAPC does.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Dave stark
#656 - 2012-07-26 19:53:39 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Exhumers? Need a MAPC just to not suck complete balls.
Incorrect.


Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships.


don't try and argue the point with them, they just keep coming up with the same crap.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#657 - 2012-07-26 19:54:06 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Then the answer is the same your ilk has always given to everybody else: adapt or quit.


yeah but at least your mining bots can operate in peace :shobon:


strawman: you know mining bots are against the EULA.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#658 - 2012-07-26 19:55:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
What I find tasty is the hypocrisy exposed
You mean the “adapt or gtfo” dribble now coming from the exact class of people who could never adapt and who had to be helped by CCP to no longer be idiots? The dribble directed at those who have proven time and a gain that they can adapt just fine?


Then harden up and adapt. Your adaptable superiority should show, having it been proven time and again.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#659 - 2012-07-26 19:56:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
... which is a wrong adding to a wrong. Does not make it a right.
No. It's a right correcting a wrong, making it right. Whether or not it's actually a good solution isn't the question — it's whether or not the initial claim has any basis in reality (which it doesn't).

Quote:
Well when you tell gankers to adapt or quit, it's because there are ways of adapting.
…except that we're talking about the general failed strategy of cost-balancing, to which there is no adaptation. It is not an answer to the quote in question.

Quote:
Had it been incorrect they'd not change the mining ships.
Fallacy. It can be (and is) just as correct anyway, especially if the decision behind the change is driven by a fundamentally flawed and disproven balancing concept.

Quote:
No, because the DCU does not enable fitting shield mods to get to those conservative 30k EHP.
…except, of course, that 30k EHP isn't the qualifier for “not sucking balls”. The DCII is quite sufficient, and an MAPC isn't needed.

Quote:
Then harden up and adapt.
So you agree that the barge EHP changes are completely unnecessary then. Good. A but confusing given your previous statements, but still good.
Arvantis Sauril
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#660 - 2012-07-26 19:56:54 UTC
Quote:



Nothing show your claiming is true, what is true on the other hand is that now you will be able to mine in low/null and have enough tank so your friends come help you, this is good for the game.

Now you need REAL organisations and EFFORT to achieve the same ganking, leading to more ships destroyed witch is also good for the game.

As you can see, there's no problem, just cry babies tears by millions of M3




This is good for the game!!!!


But only if there are more reasons for people to be out in low and null. Mining, missioning, whatever. If everyone is generating income behind Concord, this game doesn't happen. I'm just worried, with what I understand of CCP's track record, that even if this is their vision (Which would be a good vision) it will take 2 + years to get there...