These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3301 - 2012-09-05 06:55:28 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
Hulk should have the best yield, worst cargo and in the middle on EHP.
Mack should have the best cargo, middle yield and worst EHP.
Skiff should have the best EHP, middle cargo and worst yield.


So you want old system back. Welcome back Retriever and Hulk. And goodbye everything else.

Hulk actually has best cargo:
Since Hulk is now fleet ship you have to remember that Mack can't beat Orca in cargo capacity. You also have haulers in fleets: please tell me a cheap ship that can beat Itty5 in cargo capacity. No need to hurry, take your time.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3302 - 2012-09-05 15:29:14 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Buck Futz wrote:
Hulk should have the best yield, worst cargo and in the middle on EHP.
Mack should have the best cargo, middle yield and worst EHP.
Skiff should have the best EHP, middle cargo and worst yield.


So you want old system back. Welcome back Retriever and Hulk. And goodbye everything else.

Hulk actually has best cargo:
Since Hulk is now fleet ship you have to remember that Mack can't beat Orca in cargo capacity. You also have haulers in fleets: please tell me a cheap ship that can beat Itty5 in cargo capacity. No need to hurry, take your time.


No. Pay attention.

Old system was Hulk 1-1-1, Mackinaw, 2-2-2 (except ice yield), and Skiff 3-3-3 (except Merx yield)
I'm proposing 1-2-3 for each ship. Its really simple to understand if you try.

If the Mackinaw is properly balanced by reducing the base EHP, do you seriously think an occasional gank will stop miners from using the Mackinaw?

"Hulk has the best cargo, because it has an Orca."
Right now we see Mackinaws mining in fleets, even through that is what the Hulk is for. Simply for the convenience factor of not having to move ore every 90 seconds. Even in fleets, miners like to AFK it.

Mining with a Hulk and a hauler is just not worth it when you can simply use two Mackinaws instead.
I know you are trying to protect your overbuffed Mackinaw (if I mined, I would too.)

But as sad as I was when my Vagabond got nerfed, I have to admit the game is better since ships were slowed down.
All Mackinaw, all the time, is clear evidence of a problem given the stated goals of 'Tiericide'.
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#3303 - 2012-09-05 15:31:26 UTC
What you and other here are proposing is not 1-2-3, it's 1-3-3 for every ship... just saying.

It already IS 1-2-3.

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3304 - 2012-09-05 15:57:27 UTC
Shalua Rui wrote:
What you and other here are proposing is not 1-2-3, it's 1-3-3 for every ship... just saying.

It already IS 1-2-3.


If so, I don't think you will have trouble pointing out which category the Mackinaw is #3 in.
Cargo? Tank? or Yield?
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3305 - 2012-09-05 16:10:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
Buck Futz wrote:
Shalua Rui wrote:
What you and other here are proposing is not 1-2-3, it's 1-3-3 for every ship... just saying.

It already IS 1-2-3.


If so, I don't think you will have trouble pointing out which category the Mackinaw is #3 in.
Cargo? Tank? or Yield?


Ok, so slightly lower the yield but leave everything else alone. That will solve your precious "IT'S UNBALANCED!" issue without needlessly nerfing its ehp.
Only..the yield isn't that great unless you have mining bonuses and multiple mining laser upgrades. So to get better yield we have to sacrifice tank like it's supposed to be. So why are you still complaining?
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#3306 - 2012-09-05 16:14:01 UTC
Pure mathematics? Yield...

Skiff +200% strip miner yield on one module
Mack +50% strip miner yield on two modules

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3307 - 2012-09-05 16:56:16 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
No. Pay attention.


You forgot one little thing you gankers keep repeating: "risk vs. reward"

Why should Mack get highest risk factor if it doesn't get highest yield (reward)?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3308 - 2012-09-05 17:10:06 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Buck Futz wrote:
No. Pay attention.


You forgot one little thing you gankers keep repeating: "risk vs. reward"

Why should Mack get highest risk factor if it doesn't get highest yield (reward)?


It wouldnt get the highest risk factor. It would be on the same level as the hulk.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3309 - 2012-09-05 17:18:16 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Ok, so slightly lower the yield but leave everything else alone. That will solve your precious "IT'S UNBALANCED!" issue without needlessly nerfing its ehp.
Only..the yield isn't that great unless you have mining bonuses and multiple mining laser upgrades. So to get better yield we have to sacrifice tank like it's supposed to be. So why are you still complaining?


Why are you so terrorfied of gankers being able to make a profit on the stupid?
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3310 - 2012-09-05 17:21:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Ok, so slightly lower the yield but leave everything else alone. That will solve your precious "IT'S UNBALANCED!" issue without needlessly nerfing its ehp.
Only..the yield isn't that great unless you have mining bonuses and multiple mining laser upgrades. So to get better yield we have to sacrifice tank like it's supposed to be. So why are you still complaining?


Why are you so terrorfied of gankers being able to make a profit on the stupid?


Im not, untanked exhumers should be easy to gank...AND THEY ARE. There is nothing that needs fixing/nerfing/changing with the Mackinaw.

Untanked ships are still easy to kill.
Tank ships are not so easy.

Show me the problem with this.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3311 - 2012-09-05 17:25:08 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Im not, untanked exhumers should be easy to gank...AND THEY ARE. There is nothing that needs fixing/nerfing/changing with the Mackinaw.


Apart from the ehp that makes the skiff redundent.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3312 - 2012-09-05 17:25:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Im not, untanked exhumers should be easy to gank...AND THEY ARE. There is nothing that needs fixing/nerfing/changing with the Mackinaw.


Apart from the ehp that makes the skiff redundent.


Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3313 - 2012-09-05 17:29:31 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs.


The mack will tank enough to deture gankers but gets a bigger ore bay and mines more. There is no reason to use the skiff.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3314 - 2012-09-05 17:33:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs.


The mack will tank enough to deture gankers but gets a bigger ore bay and mines more. There is no reason to use the skiff.


Safer in a Skiff, much less likely to be the target of a suicide gank while only giving up a tiny bit of yield/ore space.
I've seen lot's of Skiffs since the patch.
Mackinaw tanks enough to avoid a few destroyers looking for an easy gank if he is tanked, Mackinaw can still be brought down easily if he has no tank. So the stupid miners will still be easy targets.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3315 - 2012-09-05 17:37:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
It wouldnt get the highest risk factor. It would be on the same level as the hulk.


Lowest EHP does mean highest risk factor.

After all you wanted that 1-2-3 thing.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3316 - 2012-09-05 17:40:52 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Safer in a Skiff, much less likely to be the target of a suicide gank while only giving up a tiny bit of yield/ore space.
I've seen lot's of Skiffs since the patch.
Mackinaw tanks enough to avoid a few destroyers looking for an easy gank if he is tanked, Mackinaw can still be brought down easily if he has no tank. So the stupid miners will still be easy targets.


It doesnt matter how much safer the skiff is, the mach reaches the point thatits not profitable to gank and that means just about every single ganker will not go for it. 99% of ganking is done for profit, something miners such as yourself seemingly cannot understand. It doesn't matter how much more the skiff will tank, once you hit the magic marker where you cost more to gank then you are worth you become safe from ganks.

The skiff will remain pointless so long as the mack tanks as well as it does now which goes against the entire point of the barge update.
Trindara Eayil
Renegades of Eve
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#3317 - 2012-09-05 18:06:07 UTC
The new mackinaw is too powerful from an afk perspective, especially for ice mining.

I don't necessarily agree that requires a reduction in tank (with its obvious attractions to the ganking community), a reduction in yield would be effective.

For instance, changing the ice harvester accelerator rig so it could only be fit to hulks...
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#3318 - 2012-09-05 18:42:21 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:


Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs.


The mack will tank enough to deture gankers but gets a bigger ore bay and mines more. There is no reason to use the skiff.


Safer in a Skiff, much less likely to be the target of a suicide gank while only giving up a tiny bit of yield/ore space.
I've seen lot's of Skiffs since the patch.
Mackinaw tanks enough to avoid a few destroyers looking for an easy gank if he is tanked, Mackinaw can still be brought down easily if he has no tank. So the stupid miners will still be easy targets.

Right now the Mack can be tanked with 2MLUs to be nearly impossible to break even with a suicide (I think a few thousand newb ships can do it cheap enough).

So, unless the ganker is just doing it for the sake of ganking, a Mack is as safe as a Skiff, but gets better yield and cargo.

If the ganker is doing it for fun, the Skiff is no safer than any other ship. The only thing that might make the Skiff any safer is that it cost less and so may not generate the tears the ganker is looking for. Other than that, it is just as likely to be ganked for fun as a Mack.

Now, the Skiff may survive that for fun gank better, but that only tends to lead to more of them showing up.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3319 - 2012-09-05 18:59:11 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
Right now the Mack can be tanked with 2MLUs to be nearly impossible to break even with a suicide (I think a few thousand newb ships can do it cheap enough).

So, unless the ganker is just doing it for the sake of ganking, a Mack is as safe as a Skiff, but gets better yield and cargo.

If the ganker is doing it for fun, the Skiff is no safer than any other ship. The only thing that might make the Skiff any safer is that it cost less and so may not generate the tears the ganker is looking for. Other than that, it is just as likely to be ganked for fun as a Mack.

Now, the Skiff may survive that for fun gank better, but that only tends to lead to more of them showing up.


- Risk vs. reward
- 1-2-3

Mack gets worst tank. Ok, that means it should have best yield. Now we get to important part. What it needs so that 1-2-3 would happen? Yes, ore bay from Skiff. Do you know where that would lead to? It's bloody obvious: one ship to rule them all.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3320 - 2012-09-05 19:05:11 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
Right now the Mack can be tanked with 2MLUs to be nearly impossible to break even with a suicide (I think a few thousand newb ships can do it cheap enough).

So, unless the ganker is just doing it for the sake of ganking, a Mack is as safe as a Skiff, but gets better yield and cargo.

If the ganker is doing it for fun, the Skiff is no safer than any other ship. The only thing that might make the Skiff any safer is that it cost less and so may not generate the tears the ganker is looking for. Other than that, it is just as likely to be ganked for fun as a Mack.

Now, the Skiff may survive that for fun gank better, but that only tends to lead to more of them showing up.


- Risk vs. reward
- 1-2-3

Mack gets worst tank. Ok, that means it should have best yield. Now we get to important part. What it needs so that 1-2-3 would happen? Yes, ore bay from Skiff. Do you know where that would lead to? It's bloody obvious: one ship to rule them all.

No. Rewards are yield and cargo. Risk is mitigated by tank.
Best tank is Skiff, has lowest total reward (worst yield, second best cargo)
Second best tank should be Hulk (best yield, worst cargo)
Worst tank should be Mackinaw (second best yield, best cargo)

Want tank? Get a Skiff. Want yield? Get a Hulk. Want cargo? Get a Mackinaw. But now you can't sit there and AFK ice mine or semi-AFK mine in your Mackinaw forever.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)