These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1561 - 2012-07-28 00:04:25 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

This is the very simple fact of ganking, 99% of the time it is done for profit.


I have seen a number of ganks, now, the wrecks usually sit there. I just watched one two days ago, he ganked, sat in station for 15 minutes, then left the system. The hulk was still sitting there.

So ganking for fun is obviously done more often than your made up statistic would suggest.
Pipa Porto
#1562 - 2012-07-28 00:09:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


Now, I think the Mackinaw's tank should be nerfed a bit so that the Skiff has a role. If that happens, it will be best to AFK in a Skiff because of its 17k Ore Hold. Which should be nerfed a bit so the Mack has a role.


Nice way to give roles. "I make this crappier so they will use the other. But hey, let's also make the other ship more crappier so people will have to pick the less worst".

Made with this mentality, the current Retriever keeps a fraction price tag and is almost a copy of the Mack.

I suggest you file for a position at CCP, the results would be pyroclastic.


They're ALL getting buffed, and RADICALLY so. The question is how to buff them so that they're ALL viable options.

With the changes as currently PROPOSED, the Skiff is entirely worthless, because the Mackinaw is not reasonably gankable (not being reasonably gankable is the Skiff's job). The only way to fix that is to reduce the Mack's PROPOSED tank. Then the Mack becomes worthless because of the Skiff's Ore Hold (having an enormous Ore Hold is the Mack's job). The only way to fix that is to reduce the Skiff's PROPOSED ore hold.

It's not a Nerf if the result is better than the current TQ, unless you've already decided that you're entitled to the SISI stats.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1563 - 2012-07-28 00:09:48 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

This is the very simple fact of ganking, 99% of the time it is done for profit.


I have seen a number of ganks, now, the wrecks usually sit there. I just watched one two days ago, he ganked, sat in station for 15 minutes, then left the system. The hulk was still sitting there.

So ganking for fun is obviously done more often than your made up statistic would suggest.


I've also seen very often Leviathans and Erebus trying to dock at Geneva airport, believe me because I just said it, it's funny.

brb
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1564 - 2012-07-28 00:12:23 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

This is the very simple fact of ganking, 99% of the time it is done for profit.


I have seen a number of ganks, now, the wrecks usually sit there. I just watched one two days ago, he ganked, sat in station for 15 minutes, then left the system. The hulk was still sitting there.

So ganking for fun is obviously done more often than your made up statistic would suggest.


Not since the days of M0o. You found one example, my corp has over 700 examples of us looting everything including the wreck.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1565 - 2012-07-28 00:15:01 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


Now, I think the Mackinaw's tank should be nerfed a bit so that the Skiff has a role. If that happens, it will be best to AFK in a Skiff because of its 17k Ore Hold. Which should be nerfed a bit so the Mack has a role.


Nice way to give roles. "I make this crappier so they will use the other. But hey, let's also make the other ship more crappier so people will have to pick the less worst".

Made with this mentality, the current Retriever keeps a fraction price tag and is almost a copy of the Mack.

I suggest you file for a position at CCP, the results would be pyroclastic.


The irony here being that all of these ships are going to be better than what we currently have.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1566 - 2012-07-28 00:15:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Lin-Young Borovskova
Soundwave Plays Diablo wrote:
Right, broken mechanics half a decade or older aren't sad, they will be fixed soon™.


I'm ok with that, not because I mine (I don't) not because I gank (I actually don't because I don't like it) but because balance is needed and I see no valid reason to keep the nonsense that is actual mining/ganking stupid game, Eve in general has nothing to win with because for a so called "Sand Box" this behavious was nothing else than a mindless mongoloid FPS has absolutely no chance by game design provided the ganker had some brains (and this is the hard part, that's why so many love it so much)

Quote:
People 'whining' and 'crying' about them with 'irrational arguments' are whats 'sad'.


If you start reading this thread from the beginning you're going to have good laughs.

brb
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#1567 - 2012-07-28 00:29:05 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


Now, I think the Mackinaw's tank should be nerfed a bit so that the Skiff has a role. If that happens, it will be best to AFK in a Skiff because of its 17k Ore Hold. Which should be nerfed a bit so the Mack has a role.


Nice way to give roles. "I make this crappier so they will use the other. But hey, let's also make the other ship more crappier so people will have to pick the less worst".

Made with this mentality, the current Retriever keeps a fraction price tag and is almost a copy of the Mack.

I suggest you file for a position at CCP, the results would be pyroclastic.


They're ALL getting buffed, and RADICALLY so. The question is how to buff them so that they're ALL viable options.

With the changes as currently PROPOSED, the Skiff is entirely worthless, because the Mackinaw is not reasonably gankable (not being reasonably gankable is the Skiff's job). The only way to fix that is to reduce the Mack's PROPOSED tank. Then the Mack becomes worthless because of the Skiff's Ore Hold (having an enormous Ore Hold is the Mack's job). The only way to fix that is to reduce the Skiff's PROPOSED ore hold.

It's not a Nerf if the result is better than the current TQ, unless you've already decided that you're entitled to the SISI stats.


How is the hulk getting buffed? Also what good is a big cargo hold, if you get ganked? Perhaps you should think a bit more. Also how is the nerf to hulk suppose to be helpful, if that gets gank. Lets imagine, I just finished doing one or two cycle, I have to dock now, since CCP nerfed the hulk, then I get ganked and lose it and the cargo. How did CCP buff me?

Lets say I am in a mack, I am half way filling my cargo hold, when I get ganked. How did that big cargo size help me? I lost the money in the bay, as well as the ship. I don't see any buff there.

I don't want to do procurer for you. Not all of us are in PL and don't have to worry about isk anymore.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1568 - 2012-07-28 00:33:08 UTC
rodyas wrote:


How is the hulk getting buffed? Also what good is a big cargo hold, if you get ganked? Perhaps you should think a bit more. Also how is the nerf to hulk suppose to be helpful, if that gets gank. Lets imagine, I just finished doing one or two cycle, I have to dock now, since CCP nerfed the hulk, then I get ganked and lose it and the cargo. How did CCP buff me?

Lets say I am in a mack, I am half way filling my cargo hold, when I get ganked. How did that big cargo size help me? I lost the money in the bay, as well as the ship. I don't see any buff there.

I don't want to do procurer for you. Not all of us are in PL and don't have to worry about isk anymore.


Buy a skiff if you want the best survivability.
Werst Dendenahzees
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1569 - 2012-07-28 00:37:53 UTC
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Counterpoint: you use the term corpie ans thus are a halfwit.


Counterpoint to your counterpoint: You misspelled "and" as "ans" thus you are an idiot.


Tomorrow when I am sober, I will no longer spell and as ans. You, however, will still use the term corpie.
Pipa Porto
#1570 - 2012-07-28 00:40:12 UTC
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Counterpoint: you use the term corpie ans thus are a halfwit.


Counterpoint to your counterpoint: You misspelled "and" as "ans" thus you are an idiot.


Tomorrow when I am sober, I will no longer spell and as ans. You, however, will still use the term corpie.


Good Evening, Mr Churchill.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1571 - 2012-07-28 00:49:11 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Talus Veran wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
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.


You may have missed this. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28628

CCP Screegs' team ramped up bot Hunting in March 2012


That's all well in good but we haven't had an update on the botting safari in a while. It'd be nice to have some numbers from CCP about the amount banned and what the bots were doing. As well as the amount of characters that are no longer eligible for character transfers because of botting offenses. The proposed changes would be a huge buff to botting/afk mining which is a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to those at the keyboard/nonbotting miners who are trying to get a decent return on their chosen profession.

I don't think they should buff the hull/armor/shield HP at all and should instead mess with the PG/CPU on all of the ships.

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
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1572 - 2012-07-28 00:53:58 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Talus Veran wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
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.


You may have missed this. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28628

CCP Screegs' team ramped up bot Hunting in March 2012


That's all well in good but we haven't had an update on the botting safari in a while. It'd be nice to have some numbers from CCP about the amount banned and what the bots were doing. As well as the amount of characters that are no longer eligible for character transfers because of botting offenses. The proposed changes would be a huge buff to botting/afk mining which is a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to those at the keyboard/nonbotting miners who are trying to get a decent return on their chosen profession.

I don't think they should buff the hull/armor/shield HP at all and should instead mess with the PG/CPU on all of the ships.



That makes a lot of "if'

Why CCP Shreegs hasn't come yet laughing and trolling you guys because of this idiot bot argument? -probably because he's still laughing.

brb
Tesal
#1573 - 2012-07-28 01:01:16 UTC
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
Counterpoint: you use the term corpie ans thus are a halfwit.


Counterpoint to your counterpoint: You misspelled "and" as "ans" thus you are an idiot.


Tomorrow when I am sober, I will no longer spell and as ans. You, however, will still use the term corpie.


So you're a drunk AND you can't spell.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1574 - 2012-07-28 01:02:43 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Talus Veran wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
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.


You may have missed this. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28628

CCP Screegs' team ramped up bot Hunting in March 2012


That's all well in good but we haven't had an update on the botting safari in a while. It'd be nice to have some numbers from CCP about the amount banned and what the bots were doing. As well as the amount of characters that are no longer eligible for character transfers because of botting offenses. The proposed changes would be a huge buff to botting/afk mining which is a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to those at the keyboard/nonbotting miners who are trying to get a decent return on their chosen profession.

I don't think they should buff the hull/armor/shield HP at all and should instead mess with the PG/CPU on all of the ships.



That makes a lot of "if'

Why CCP Shreegs hasn't come yet laughing and trolling you guys because of this idiot bot argument? -probably because he's still laughing.


Why don't you explain how the bot argument is a bad argument to us all then :allears:. Surely as someone who is an internet security expert you can educate us all in the intricacy of bot enabling buffs.

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
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1575 - 2012-07-28 01:10:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Lin-Young Borovskova
La Nariz wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Talus Veran wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
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.


You may have missed this. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28628

CCP Screegs' team ramped up bot Hunting in March 2012


That's all well in good but we haven't had an update on the botting safari in a while. It'd be nice to have some numbers from CCP about the amount banned and what the bots were doing. As well as the amount of characters that are no longer eligible for character transfers because of botting offenses. The proposed changes would be a huge buff to botting/afk mining which is a poke in the eye with a sharp stick to those at the keyboard/nonbotting miners who are trying to get a decent return on their chosen profession.

I don't think they should buff the hull/armor/shield HP at all and should instead mess with the PG/CPU on all of the ships.



That makes a lot of "if'

Why CCP Shreegs hasn't come yet laughing and trolling you guys because of this idiot bot argument? -probably because he's still laughing.


Why don't you explain how the bot argument is a bad argument to us all then :allears:. Surely as someone who is an internet security expert you can educate us all in the intricacy of bot enabling buffs.



No need to be an expert to realise a simple buff to some "pixels" will not and suddenly make bots be smarter.
Thinking or pretending the other way around is just being idiot, paranoid, lacking totally of software knowledge (this is harder than be able to count up to 3) and talking out of an hairy pubbie arse.

brb
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1576 - 2012-07-28 01:14:17 UTC
I guess our arguments against this change aren't "easy mode" enough for the hordes of hisec miners who feel entitled to handed out protection without working one iota for it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1577 - 2012-07-28 01:17:33 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I guess our arguments against this change aren't "easy mode" enough for the hordes of hisec miners who feel entitled to handed out protection without working one iota for it.



If you have a problem with that just gank them, they'll not be invincible. And since cost is not a balance argument... Lol

brb
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1578 - 2012-07-28 01:19:03 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
pubbie

You're not allowed to use that word.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Matius Toskavich
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1579 - 2012-07-28 01:22:55 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
I guess our arguments against this change aren't "easy mode" enough for the hordes of hisec miners who feel entitled to handed out protection without working one iota for it.


Sounds like someone can't adapt to having their "easy mode" ganking made "hard mode".. Roll
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#1580 - 2012-07-28 01:24:37 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
pubbie

You're not allowed to use that word.



Lol


Gn ladies, gents and pubbies Lol

brb