These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#3381 - 2012-09-07 15:42:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Why it's so important to be able to profit from ganking?


Again, what does that have to do with what I said?


Read OP.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3382 - 2012-09-07 15:46:11 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Why it's so important to be able to profit from ganking?


Again, what does that have to do with what I said?


Read OP.

You're not talking to him. You're talking to me.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3383 - 2012-09-07 15:47:48 UTC
Why don't I approach this from a different angle.

Why is it so important for you to be able to AFK ice mine?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3384 - 2012-09-07 15:50:31 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Why is it so important for you to be able to AFK ice mine?


Because nullseccers can do it too?
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3385 - 2012-09-07 16:05:28 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Ok so if you bring down the Mackinaws base hitpoints to that of the Hulks of close to it, what about giving the Mackinaw say 40 more CPU to make up for it. Would that be an even trade off?


As a ganker, I think the 'base EHP' of a Mackinaw should be below 10K.
A fail-tanked Mackinaw (Max yield, Civilian Shield boosters) should be instapopped by a Tornado, or soloed by a max-Skill T2 Catalyst. A max-tanked Mackinaw should top out around 30K.

Don't have a big problem with the Hulk getting a minor EHP buff, to make it 2nd overall in EHP. After all, mining in a fleet doesn't confer all that much protection from suicide ganking. In one sense, non-bot Hulk-miners are earning their pay through ore hold micromanagement. But it should still be low enough to be vulnerable - otherwise the Skiff becomes pointless.

And the Skiff should simply be 'not rationally gankable' - but the ISK/hr should be significantly less. (not 'equal' to the Mackinaw, except for the lack of MLU low-slots.)

I'd also dial back the Macks Ore hold size.....but allow Cargo Expanders to increase its size beyond what is currently possible.
Give miners a reason to cargo-fit again. Right now its just a 'Tank vs Yield'. The choice should be 'Tank vs Yield vs Cargo'.

That was originally the point of the thread - that CCP is simply patronizing miners by taking away fitting choices and trade offs with one-size-fits all.

Mackinaw: Easiest mining, but riskiest vs ganking
Hulk: Fastest mining, slightly safer - but pain in the ass due to micro and needing an Orca.
Skiff: Safest mining, but not as convenient as the Mack, nor as fast as the Hulk.

Barges need a similar adjustment.

Done right, I think you'd see a much healthier mixture of the 3 Exhumers in highsec.

Oh, also - as a ganker, I wish CCP would make the ORE Strip Miners have a Yield increase instead of a silly range increase. Give miners a reason to use them.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3386 - 2012-09-07 16:15:36 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Ok so if you bring down the Mackinaws base hitpoints to that of the Hulks of close to it, what about giving the Mackinaw say 40 more CPU to make up for it. Would that be an even trade off?


As a ganker, I think the 'base EHP' of a Mackinaw should be below 10K.
A fail-tanked Mackinaw (Max yield, Civilian Shield boosters) should be instapopped by a Tornado, or soloed by a max-Skill T2 Catalyst. A max-tanked Mackinaw should top out around 30K.

Don't have a big problem with the Hulk getting a minor EHP buff, to make it 2nd overall in EHP. After all, mining in a fleet doesn't confer all that much protection from suicide ganking. In one sense, non-bot Hulk-miners are earning their pay through ore hold micromanagement. But it should still be low enough to be vulnerable - otherwise the Skiff becomes pointless.

And the Skiff should simply be 'not rationally gankable' - but the ISK/hr should be significantly less. (not 'equal' to the Mackinaw, except for the lack of MLU low-slots.)

I'd also dial back the Macks Ore hold size.....but allow Cargo Expanders to increase its size beyond what is currently possible.
Give miners a reason to cargo-fit again. Right now its just a 'Tank vs Yield'. The choice should be 'Tank vs Yield vs Cargo'.

That was originally the point of the thread - that CCP is simply patronizing miners by taking away fitting choices and trade offs with one-size-fits all.

Mackinaw: Easiest mining, but riskiest vs ganking
Hulk: Fastest mining, slightly safer - but pain in the ass due to micro and needing an Orca.
Skiff: Safest mining, but not as convenient as the Mack, nor as fast as the Hulk.

Barges need a similar adjustment.

Done right, I think you'd see a much healthier mixture of the 3 Exhumers in highsec.

Oh, also - as a ganker, I wish CCP would make the ORE Strip Miners have a Yield increase instead of a silly range increase. Give miners a reason to use them.


This guy gets it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3387 - 2012-09-07 16:21:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
This guy gets it.


Sure, if we all can wardec Goons and Razer for free. And their alts.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3388 - 2012-09-07 16:22:17 UTC
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3389 - 2012-09-07 16:46:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Buck Futz
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.



Oh, I just want miners to scratch their heads a little bit about which Exhumer to use....
....and then scratch their head again when they figure out how to fit it.

Some will do fine, others will fail. Gankers want to be able to kill the failures without spending a fortune to do it.

I also want miners to have some options.

How would you like a Mack that could be Cargo expanded/rigged up to say, 40 or even 50K? (even if the base size is lower)I'm sure a lot of miners would like that. And with the EHP penalty, gankers would too.

Too bad that CCP doesn't allow those kinds of choices anymore. Today its "How many MLU II do you want?"

For combat ships, it would be as if CCP just decided to remove all speed mods, and then gave some types of ships built-in MWDs. Thats what they did here, for Exhumers. Tiericide shouldn't mean 'dumbing down'.

Also, I the 'special rigs' for Ice or Merx concept was a slapped on, rushed fail-job. Goes a long way to illustrate how little thought or effort they put into the Aug. 8 Patch. It was simply a reactive lurch to get it done ASAP, rather than doing it properly in the winter expansion.

At minimum there should have been a 3rd rig for 'standard Ore'. Why should miners be punished for mining Ice or Merx?
Why not just get rid of them entirely?
Buck Futz
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3390 - 2012-09-07 17:10:05 UTC
Incidentally, this same 'lack of fitting choices' is one of the reasons I was irritated about the Boomerang nerf.

Gankers, for the first time in a long time, actually had an actual fitting choice, beyond, "Duhhhhhhh, Maximum gankage!"
As it is, Concord makes 95% of all the mods you could put on a suicide gankship completely pointless.

There were significant benefits to be had if you fit the Tornado for agility.
The only problem? More agility meant lowering your damage potential.

Some interesting fits emerged in the (very) brief time between when the tactic 'went public' and when it was patched out/became exploit.

So now, we are back to "Duhhhhhh...maximum gankage!"

No room for cleverness in CCP's post-Incarna ant farm, apparently - for ganker or victim alike.
Guttripper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3391 - 2012-09-07 17:30:35 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
No room for cleverness in CCP's post-Incarna ant farm, apparently - for ganker or victim alike.


Lowest common denominator rakes in the most money in the bean counter's mind.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3392 - 2012-09-07 17:34:34 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.


Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp.

I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3393 - 2012-09-07 17:37:20 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
This guy gets it.


Sure, if we all can wardec Goons and Razer for free. And their alts.

Go ahead and wardec us, and realize just how much of a waste of money it is when you can shoot us for free where we live anyway.

Not to mention if you really want to hurt our tech supply chains, you can do that just fine in highsec and you don't even need a wardec.

All the tools are there, it's your fault and yours alone for not using them.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3394 - 2012-09-07 17:45:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.


Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp.

I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.


But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.

Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3395 - 2012-09-07 17:47:16 UTC
Buck Futz wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.



Oh, I just want miners to scratch their heads a little bit about which Exhumer to use....
....and then scratch their head again when they figure out how to fit it.

Some will do fine, others will fail. Gankers want to be able to kill the failures without spending a fortune to do it.

I also want miners to have some options.

How would you like a Mack that could be Cargo expanded/rigged up to say, 40 or even 50K? (even if the base size is lower)I'm sure a lot of miners would like that. And with the EHP penalty, gankers would too.

Too bad that CCP doesn't allow those kinds of choices anymore. Today its "How many MLU II do you want?"

For combat ships, it would be as if CCP just decided to remove all speed mods, and then gave some types of ships built-in MWDs. Thats what they did here, for Exhumers. Tiericide shouldn't mean 'dumbing down'.

Also, I the 'special rigs' for Ice or Merx concept was a slapped on, rushed fail-job. Goes a long way to illustrate how little thought or effort they put into the Aug. 8 Patch. It was simply a reactive lurch to get it done ASAP, rather than doing it properly in the winter expansion.

At minimum there should have been a 3rd rig for 'standard Ore'. Why should miners be punished for mining Ice or Merx?
Why not just get rid of them entirely?


Can't believe it but, I am agreeing with you more and more...lol :p
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3396 - 2012-09-07 17:47:39 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.


Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp.

I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.


But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.


And a Navy Apoc can't fit all Tachyon Beams without a powergrid upgrade. So?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3397 - 2012-09-07 18:00:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Yokai Mitsuhide
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.


Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp.

I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.


But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.


And a Navy Apoc can't fit all Tachyon Beams without a powergrid upgrade. So?


Oh so you're totally fine with nerfing our ship...but if we want a tiny increase in cpu so we have better options when fitting it..thats just out of the question. If you want more use out of these ships or more options for miners...we need the ability to be able to fit the entire 6 ship lineup we have.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3398 - 2012-09-07 18:39:22 UTC
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu.


Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp.

I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.


But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.


And a Navy Apoc can't fit all Tachyon Beams without a powergrid upgrade. So?


Oh so you're totally fine with nerfing our ship...but if we want a tiny increase in cpu so we have better options when fitting it..thats just out of the question. If you want more use out of these ships or more options for miners...we need the ability to be able to fit the entire 6 ship lineup we have.

You already do.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#3399 - 2012-09-07 18:49:40 UTC
I did find my CPU lacking for my Mack (2 IMU2s a DC and some meta 4 invultns with T2 icers) and had to use CPU rigs. But my shields skills, including the one that reduces CPU cost, are crap. So I may be able to get it down to one CPU rig later.

Strangely, the hulk was much easier to fit, though got a little less EHP since I expect bonuses and support from an Orca.
Yokai Mitsuhide
Doomheim
#3400 - 2012-09-07 19:20:01 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
I did find my CPU lacking for my Mack (2 IMU2s a DC and some meta 4 invultns with T2 icers) and had to use CPU rigs. But my shields skills, including the one that reduces CPU cost, are crap. So I may be able to get it down to one CPU rig later.

Strangely, the hulk was much easier to fit, though got a little less EHP since I expect bonuses and support from an Orca.


With all 5's related to fitting, you can get it down to 1 cpu rig but id really like to be able to not need even that. I think the fact that miners only have such a small handful of ships...the 3 exhumers should get a little extra cpu/pg