These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3181 - 2012-09-03 20:34:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Buck Futz wrote:
I like the carebear dynamic CCP is pushing here.

Miners: "Mine all you want, you don't have to tank - or even pay attention anymore - here's your ISK."

Gankers: "Under no circumstances will you be allowed to profit from ganking miners. Here's your nerf." Roll

Mining in highsec was already incredibly safe. Its just that miners are incredibly slow to learn and incredibly quick to fire-up the whine-tank.

Plus we have DEVs who pop-off in the forums without even understanding the concept of 'profitable' ganking.



If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now"
Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant.

So then tank, don't be a ******* moron.


I do tank. But pre patch even a fully tanked hulk could be ganked by 2 low sp players in catalysts.
It's a serious balancing issue which would easily drive players to quit. Not saying ganking shouldn't be possible...of course it should but not to the extent that it was.
And now that griefers can't make any isk off of it...they are whining about it. Even if all it takes is a few more destroyers, it would seem most of them are to dumb to actually get a few more people together to do so.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3182 - 2012-09-03 20:39:35 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


It should have never been a possibility for a destroyer to solo gank an EXHUMER in the first place. Barge..maybe, but not a weak destroyer a week old character could get into ganking the highest tier mining ship you could possibly ever train for. It made zero sense.


It wouldn't have been possible if the miners didn't fly their ships with no defences at all. Even t3 cruisers can be blown up by a gank destroyers if the have zero tank mods fitted. The only thing that makes zero sense is the miners feeling entitaled to safety without putting any effort into it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3183 - 2012-09-03 20:41:44 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


I do tank. But pre patch even a fully tanked hulk could be ganked by 2 low sp players in catalysts.
It's a serious balancing issue which would easily drive players to quit. Not saying ganking shouldn't be possible...of course it should but not to the extent that it was.
And now that griefers can't make any isk off of it...they are whining about it. Even if all it takes is a few more destroyers, it would seem most of them are to dumb to actually get a few more people together to do so.


2 cata could not kill a well tanked hulk.

Also those extra ships required to kill a mack means there is no profit possible.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3184 - 2012-09-03 20:42:00 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:

If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now"
Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant.


Yes, because ships should be balanced based on what the dumbest pilots who fly them are capable of. Good plan.


FFS. You people just don't know how to read. CCP said themselves that all the ships are being rebalanced... it was just the time for barges/exhumers. How do you all know when it comes time to redo destroyers or battlecruisers that they wont get a buff that makes them strong enough to gank miners the way you used to?

And finally, you grifer/ganker/crybabies need to stop thinking you're entitled to have the game run the way YOU think it should, this isn't your game.



HAHA, you aren't even defending the patch anymore.

"Well, barges got a ridiculous buff - but who knows, maybe battlecruisers will get one too..."

Sure thing buddy. Weak argument.
I highly doubt the DEVs are sitting there saying:

"Ok, battlecruiser 'rebalance' - Give Tornado/Tempest 25K Alpha. Check!"

Really.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3185 - 2012-09-03 20:42:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


It should have never been a possibility for a destroyer to solo gank an EXHUMER in the first place. Barge..maybe, but not a weak destroyer a week old character could get into ganking the highest tier mining ship you could possibly ever train for. It made zero sense.


It wouldn't have been possible if the miners didn't fly their ships with no defences at all. Even t3 cruisers can be blown up by a gank destroyers if the have zero tank mods fitted. The only thing that makes zero sense is the miners feeling entitaled to safety without putting any effort into it.


EVEN tanked, exhumers were too weak. They are not too strong now...the only reason anyone has an issue with it is because you can't make profit off it anymore.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3186 - 2012-09-03 20:44:00 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


I do tank. But pre patch even a fully tanked hulk could be ganked by 2 low sp players in catalysts.


This is bullcrap. Why weaken your already sad arguments with false statements?
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3187 - 2012-09-03 20:44:37 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:

If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now"
Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant.


Yes, because ships should be balanced based on what the dumbest pilots who fly them are capable of. Good plan.


FFS. You people just don't know how to read. CCP said themselves that all the ships are being rebalanced... it was just the time for barges/exhumers. How do you all know when it comes time to redo destroyers or battlecruisers that they wont get a buff that makes them strong enough to gank miners the way you used to?

And finally, you grifer/ganker/crybabies need to stop thinking you're entitled to have the game run the way YOU think it should, this isn't your game.



HAHA, you aren't even defending the patch anymore.

"Well, barges got a ridiculous buff - but who knows, maybe battlecruisers will get one too..."

Sure thing buddy. Weak argument.
I highly doubt the DEVs are sitting there saying:

"Ok, battlecruiser 'rebalance' - Give Tornado/Tempest 25K Alpha. Check!"

Really.


Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually. Roll
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3188 - 2012-09-03 20:49:09 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:

EVEN tanked, exhumers were too weak. They are not too strong now...the only reason anyone has an issue with it is because you can't make profit off it anymore.


The Exhumers were never too weak and the mack is definatly too strong. Evidence of this is the fact that you only see macks in highsec belts now. Their base tank should be reduced to that of the hulk.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3189 - 2012-09-03 20:49:36 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Buck Futz wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:

If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now"
Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant.


Yes, because ships should be balanced based on what the dumbest pilots who fly them are capable of. Good plan.


FFS. You people just don't know how to read. CCP said themselves that all the ships are being rebalanced... it was just the time for barges/exhumers. How do you all know when it comes time to redo destroyers or battlecruisers that they wont get a buff that makes them strong enough to gank miners the way you used to?

And finally, you grifer/ganker/crybabies need to stop thinking you're entitled to have the game run the way YOU think it should, this isn't your game.



HAHA, you aren't even defending the patch anymore.

"Well, barges got a ridiculous buff - but who knows, maybe battlecruisers will get one too..."

Sure thing buddy. Weak argument.
I highly doubt the DEVs are sitting there saying:

"Ok, battlecruiser 'rebalance' - Give Tornado/Tempest 25K Alpha. Check!"

Really.


Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually. Roll


I already did.
Valid solution:
Switch the EHP of the Mackinaw and the Hulk.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3190 - 2012-09-03 20:51:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them.
So you get back the easier targets of players who don't tank their exhumers, but force the botters into harder to kill ships. That makes a worse situation than the one that already exists.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3191 - 2012-09-03 20:58:47 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually. Roll


Nonsense? Aren't you the one that said a prepatch 'fully tanked Hulk' dies to two low-skill Catalysts?

Because I have a pretty firm grasp on the mechanics of ganking and tanking - I can recommend adjustments.
You, obviously, do not when you make clearly false statements. Just another butthurt miner.

Either way, its pretty clear that, on its face, that CCP botched the Aug 8 patch and massively overbuffed the Mack and the Retriever.

Before Aug 8, we saw plenty of Hulks and Mackinaws in highsec. Two out of 3 ain't bad.
Now? We almost exclusively find Mackinaws in the belts.

GJ, CCP, nice 'balance'.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3192 - 2012-09-03 21:01:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
Buck Futz wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually. Roll


Nonsense? Aren't you the one that said a prepatch 'fully tanked Hulk' dies to two low-skill Catalysts?

Because I have a pretty firm grasp on the mechanics of ganking and tanking - I can recommend adjustments.
You, obviously, do not when you make clearly false statements. Just another butthurt miner.

Either way, its pretty clear that, on its face, that CCP botched the Aug 8 patch and massively overbuffed the Mack and the Retriever.

Before Aug 8, we saw plenty of Hulks and Mackinaws in highsec. Two out of 3 ain't bad.
Now? We almost exclusively find Mackinaws in the belts.

GJ, CCP, nice 'balance'.


Where? I see plenty of Hulks, Covetors, Skiffs, Procurers... the only place I ever see giant groups of Mackinaws is in icefields still...just like pre patch. I didn't have any issues pre patch so no, I am not just another "butthurt" miner. I have a problem with the amount of whining you people produce over losing your easy targets.
CCP gave all the barges/exhumers more purpose, of course you're going to see large groups of people in the same ships...there are only 6 friggin barges total.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3193 - 2012-09-03 21:02:00 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them.
So you get back the easier targets of players who don't tank their exhumers, but force the botters into harder to kill ships. That makes a worse situation than the one that already exists.


The skiff mines the least and the hold is rather small. The bots will either continue with macks, roll retriver fleets because of their ease. The only reason they swapped to the macks from hulks is because of the cargo hold change.
Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
#3194 - 2012-09-03 21:03:44 UTC
Adapt or die Heir Wilkens! Quit whining for damm sakes Attention
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3195 - 2012-09-03 21:03:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them.
So you get back the easier targets of players who don't tank their exhumers, but force the botters into harder to kill ships. That makes a worse situation than the one that already exists.


The skiff mines the least and the hold is rather small. The bots will either continue with macks, roll retriver fleets because of their ease. The only reason they swapped to the macks from hulks is because of the cargo hold change.



Has a 100k ehp if tanked, 15,000 ore hold and a 200% bonus to yield. Bots don't care if they lose a tiny bit of yield...they are not actually playing.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3196 - 2012-09-03 21:08:16 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Has a 100k ehp if tanked, 15,000 ore hold and a 200% bonus to yield. Bots don't care if they lose a tiny bit of yield...they are not actually playing.


All it took to beat our ganking machine pre buff was a DCU in the lows, a small sheild extender and t1 strips. We know our enemy, they will continue using the macks.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3197 - 2012-09-03 21:19:08 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them.
So you get back the easier targets of players who don't tank their exhumers, but force the botters into harder to kill ships. That makes a worse situation than the one that already exists.


No, the problem is currently that there is 'no choice' for miners.
(**Just as, increasingly, - there is 'no choice' for gankers either - its becoming 'go Catalyst or go home')

Why use the Skiff?
Even max-yield, the Mackinaw is well beyond the damage threshold of the average highsec gank attempt.
The Skiff's extra EHP is simply redundant.

Why use the Hulk?
Extra yield is not worth the massive AFK-cargo bay convenience of the Mackinaw. EHP deficiency tilts the scales even further towards the Mack.

Lack of balance is self evident to anyone who visits the belts on a regular basis.

Giving the Mackinaw the lowest EHP of the three would force miners to make an actual decision.

Skiff: lowest yield, 99.99% safe from high sec ganks.
Hulk: highest profit potential, most 'work', more gank resistant.
Mackinaw: most vulnerable to ganks, least amount of 'work' per ISK earned.

Yes, it was an unwarranted buff....but they could have at least gotten the balance right.

But go ahead, I understand that you think you benefit from an OP, overbuffed Mackinaw.
But long term, you don't - and the game suffers.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#3198 - 2012-09-03 21:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Shalua Rui
Buck Futz wrote:
Giving the Mackinaw the lowest EHP of the three would force miners to make an actual decision.


Sure... and while you're at it, rename it "Gankercandy"... you know, potentially the most ore in it's hold... most probably alone when encountered... AND lowest EHP, of course.

Come on! Blink

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3199 - 2012-09-03 21:33:21 UTC
Vigilant wrote:
Adapt or die Heir Wilkens! Quit whining for damm sakes Attention

Every single person who says this in response to what we have to say about this patch is a damn hypocrite and they know it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3200 - 2012-09-03 21:35:43 UTC
Shalua Rui wrote:
Buck Futz wrote:
Giving the Mackinaw the lowest EHP of the three would force miners to make an actual decision.


Sure... and while you're at it, rename it "Gankercandy"... you know, potentially the most ore in it's hold... most probably alone when encountered... AND lowest EHP, of course.

Come on! Blink


It got more room to fit a tank. So fit one.