These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

Buff Ganking--Nevermind, Nerfed Again

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#121 - 2012-10-03 12:47:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Xen Solarus
Tippia wrote:
Xen Solarus wrote:
Highsec should be for those not interested in PvP.
No, it really shouldn't, unless you mean that highsec should be removed from the game.


Yeah or that. Cool

But i imagine you'd simply kill off all the players not interested in PvP. Which so happens to be the majority.

Would be alot of fun though! Lol

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  
TharOkha
0asis Group
#122 - 2012-10-03 12:53:21 UTC  |  Edited by: TharOkha
Pipa Porto wrote:

It has the most base EHP of any T2 Cruiser (besides the Skiff). That's not "Standard," that's "Best in Class."


And i also mentioned that mack cannot fit large extenders (43 vs 1000-15000 PG) So it is logical that it has most base EHP. Also comparing 13k vs 14k EHP is not very wise

Quote:
It can fit a bigger tank (with 2 MLUs) than many T2 Cruiser's standard Fittings. That's also not "Standard."


Try to play with EFT more before you post something stupid like this.

Quote:
with 2 MLUs be fit to be absolutely unprofitable to gank


So as those shiny pirate ships with ordinary T2 fit, of freighters with sub 1B goods in their cargohold. Again, stop crying about easy targets and try to pick up targets with expensive fit, not just random miner.

And above all try to read my posts, because all i wrote here, i already mentioned in posts before.

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
Pipa Porto
#123 - 2012-10-03 12:53:43 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Xen Solarus wrote:
Highsec should be for those not interested in PvP.
No, it really shouldn't, unless you mean that highsec should be removed from the game.


Yeah or that. Cool

But i imagine you'd simply kill off all the players not interested in PvP. Which so happens to be the majority.

Would be alot of fun though! Lol


CCP has a Server set up for players who aren't interested in PvP. They call it SISI (well, now Buckingham).

PvP is not allowed there unless both parties agree to it.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#124 - 2012-10-03 13:04:49 UTC
TharOkha wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:

It has the most base EHP of any T2 Cruiser (besides the Skiff). That's not "Standard," that's "Best in Class."


And i also mentioned that mack cannot fit large extenders (43 vs 1000-15000 PG) So it is logical that it has most base EHP. Also comparing 13k vs 14k EHP is not very wise

Quote:
It can fit a bigger tank (with 2 MLUs) than many T2 Cruiser's standard Fittings. That's also not "Standard."


Try to play with EFT more before you post something stupid like this.


36k EHP is in fact more EHP than most T2 Cruiser's standard fits.

13k EHP is something only 2 other T2 cruisers have. The most common is around 10k EHP. Why should the Mackinaw have 50% more base EHP than most T2 cruisers? Before you say fitting, why should a Mining ship that's not designed to be the tanky one tank more than well enough to be unprofitable to suicide gank? What significant risk does the Skiff's EHP protect it from that the Mackinaw's doesn't?

Quote:
Quote:
with 2 MLUs be fit to be absolutely unprofitable to gank


So as those shiny pirate ships with ordinary T2 fit, of freighters with sub 1B goods in their cargohold. Again, stop crying about easy targets and try to pick up targets with expensive fit, not just random miner.

And above all try to read my posts, because all i wrote here, i already mentioned in posts before.


Those ships give up something for that safety. What does the Mackinaw give up for that safety compared to the Skiff (the one designed to be safe without active measures)?

If miners want to be safe without active measures, why shouldn't they have to use the Skiff (the mining ship designed to tank)?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#125 - 2012-10-03 14:05:01 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:


Those ships give up something for that safety. What does the Mackinaw give up for that safety compared to the Skiff (the one designed to be safe without active measures)?

If miners want to be safe without active measures, why shouldn't they have to use the Skiff (the mining ship designed to tank)?



Because CCP clearly meant the skiff to be the 'non-highsec" tanky exhumer. If you're going to talk about what they were "designed" to do, then talk about their designs in the way in which those designs were...designed.

You're confusing the issue. The skiff is basically useless. This isn't because the mack is too tanky. This is because high-sec mining as a whole needs to be nerfed, comparative to lowsec/nullsec mining. Simply claiming that the skiff's role has been stolen by the mack being ' too tanky' is a bizarre misinterpretation of what CCP intended, that you're apparently trying to make become true simply by repeating it 50,000 times. It's not working.
Pipa Porto
#126 - 2012-10-03 14:16:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:


Those ships give up something for that safety. What does the Mackinaw give up for that safety compared to the Skiff (the one designed to be safe without active measures)?

If miners want to be safe without active measures, why shouldn't they have to use the Skiff (the mining ship designed to tank)?



Because CCP clearly meant the skiff to be the 'non-highsec" tanky exhumer. If you're going to talk about what they were "designed" to do, then talk about their designs in the way in which those designs were...designed.

You're confusing the issue. The skiff is basically useless. This isn't because the mack is too tanky. This is because high-sec mining as a whole needs to be nerfed, comparative to lowsec/nullsec mining. Simply claiming that the skiff's role has been stolen by the mack being ' too tanky' is a bizarre misinterpretation of what CCP intended, that you're apparently trying to make become true simply by repeating it 50,000 times. It's not working.


Ok, show me where CCP said that the Skiff
Devblog wrote:
The Procurer and Skiff are made for protection against suicide gank

wasn't designed to be used as a tanky ship to survive Suicide Ganks in HS?

The Skiff is useless in its intended role because the Mack is tanky enough to be unprofitable to gank. In LS and Null, a pointed mining ship is a dead mining ship, so their ability to tank is irrelevant, so the Skiff is useless again.


http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73098

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#127 - 2012-10-03 14:25:50 UTC
You obviously weren't here for all the screaming about the new BCs and the destroyer buffs.
Pipa Porto
#128 - 2012-10-03 14:32:41 UTC
Karrl Tian wrote:
You obviously weren't here for all the screaming about the new BCs and the destroyer buffs.


You mean the screaming that conveniently ignored the fact that Crucible made ganking more expensive?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
flakeys
Doomheim
#129 - 2012-10-03 14:36:43 UTC  |  Edited by: flakeys
Pipa Porto wrote:
flakeys wrote:
captain foivos wrote:
Retribution is all about balancing ships and what not, so why not balance out ganking a bit while you're at it? Over the last eight years, ganking has been nerfed nearly into the ground, with only a few select groups of highly skilled, well funded individuals continuing to separate stupid highsec mongoloids from their precious shiny things.



Lol , yeah takes a LONG time to train an alt for tornado/talos for sure.Instead of ganking retrievers they're ganking freighters now ... yup ganking need s abuff Roll


SP != Skill

What significant risk are HS miners exposed to now?



OW yeah takes loads of skills to suicide gank your right ... i'd grade it a tad above mining. And as to the risk that high sec miners have or people in high sec in general ... in my view the carebears mostly are the gankers not the miners/pve types.

Scared to go into low-sec or null ?

Pipa Porto wrote:
Karrl Tian wrote:
You obviously weren't here for all the screaming about the new BCs and the destroyer buffs.


You mean the screaming that conveniently ignored the fact that Crucible made ganking more expensive?


Can't have actuall losses when pvpíng noooo , no losses and no risks should be had.Think you should get labeled the ''grand admiral carebear''

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Pipa Porto
#130 - 2012-10-03 15:01:53 UTC
flakeys wrote:
OW yeah takes loads of skills to suicide gank your right ... i'd grade it a tad above mining. And as to the risk that high sec miners have or people in high sec in general ... in my view the carebears mostly are the gankers not the miners/pve types.

Scared to go into low-sec or null ?


So what significant risk do miners take when mining*? You didn't actually answer the question.

*FYI, without profitable ganking, there is no industrial scale ganking, and therefor no significant risk from ganking.

Quote:
Can't have actuall losses when pvpíng noooo , no losses and no risks should be had.Think you should get labeled the ''grand admiral carebear''


That is, in fact, what the miners cried about. Losing their ship in PvP.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#131 - 2012-10-03 15:31:35 UTC
captain foivos wrote:
Retribution is all about balancing ships and what not, so why not balance out ganking a bit while you're at it? Over the last eight years, ganking has been nerfed nearly into the ground, with only a few select groups of highly skilled, well funded individuals continuing to separate stupid highsec mongoloids from their precious shiny things. Why not buff immoral activity for a change? Reward smart people for taking basic precautions against dying and loss, like not traveling around with billions in their hold, not clicking on the contracts in Jita local, and not traveling the Rancer Pipe with hundreds of PLEX in the cargo bay.

Ganking keeps getting hit with more and more nerfs: pretty soon there won't be that "cold harsh universe" left that CCP keeps going on about in their promos. EVE belongs to the violent, the venal, and the brilliant. Buff ganking. Nerf dumb people.


You are a piece of [voluntary filter] to insult mongoloids. It´s "people with special needs".

I agree with the rest.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
TharOkha
0asis Group
#132 - 2012-10-03 16:09:50 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

So what significant risk do miners take when mining*? You didn't actually answer the question.
.

They can be suicide ganked (i answered this question to you gazzilion times).

Quote:
*FYI, without profitable ganking, there is no industrial scale ganking, and therefor no significant risk from ganking.


Well they can be suicide ganked if they fit expensive fit.... as well as l4 mission runers.....as well as freighter pilots with billions in their cargo (also answered gazzilion times).

Miners are no more "lets shoot random miner and profit" Now you have to search for good gank ( as well as l4 mission runers.....as well as freighter pilots with billions in their .......ahhh ....screw it.. we all know that pipa will overlook those answers again Roll )

Pipa, you have won... you wearied me. Straight




CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#133 - 2012-10-03 16:11:44 UTC
TharOkha wrote:
Quote:
Its job is the tanky ship, a job taken by the Mack

Mack is not tanky ship. It has standard HP as any other ship in his class in this game now. ( I know, i know... you miss cheap catalyst killmails).


Please read what I am saying, you look stupid when I have to constantly remind you that I did not kill miners for easy killmails. It was only possible to turn a profit on hulk ganking in a destroyer which was, incidently, very easy to tank against.

The Macks base tank makes it unprofitable to kill so people will not kill it. Hence why they are the new king of mining and why ice prices have nose dived. So not only has this change hurt gankers but miners are also being hurt by it and CCP have failed in their goal of making all of the barges worth flying. Why are you defending something that hurts everyone?
flakeys
Doomheim
#134 - 2012-10-03 16:13:34 UTC  |  Edited by: flakeys
Pipa Porto wrote:
flakeys wrote:
OW yeah takes loads of skills to suicide gank your right ... i'd grade it a tad above mining. And as to the risk that high sec miners have or people in high sec in general ... in my view the carebears mostly are the gankers not the miners/pve types.

Scared to go into low-sec or null ?


So what significant risk do miners take when mining*? You didn't actually answer the question.

*FYI, without profitable ganking, there is no industrial scale ganking, and therefor no significant risk from ganking.

Quote:
Can't have actuall losses when pvpíng noooo , no losses and no risks should be had.Think you should get labeled the ''grand admiral carebear''


That is, in fact, what the miners cried about. Losing their ship in PvP.


Loosing their PVE ship in PVP yes i can see why they would moan and btw they are running as much risk as before as they still ARE gankable but boohooo that takes effort and isk.

Now we got types like you that PVP in a PVP ship and moan about loosing some value in the process of pvping.It's your type who wants riskfree pvp and on top of that also no iskloss with it , aka carebears.Your like mittani moaning about empire being too dulll/riskfree/boring and in the process bleuball half of eve and blobfest the **** out of everyone making null one boring craphole.

But i'll let you live your dream of being the toughy risktaker and die hard pvper instead of the true carebear your type actually is.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#135 - 2012-10-03 16:20:50 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
flakeys wrote:


Loosing their PVE ship in PVP yes i can see why they would moan and btw they are running as much risk as before as they still ARE gankable but boohooo that takes effort and isk.


Its not a question of a bit more risk, its that its impossible to make any profit.
Theresa Lamont
Rogue Fleet
#136 - 2012-10-03 16:22:40 UTC
This thread really looks like a clash or realities
flakeys
Doomheim
#137 - 2012-10-03 16:35:01 UTC  |  Edited by: flakeys
baltec1 wrote:
flakeys wrote:


Loosing their PVE ship in PVP yes i can see why they would moan and btw they are running as much risk as before as they still ARE gankable but boohooo that takes effort and isk.


Its not a question of a bit more risk, its that its impossible to make any profit.


You serious?You actually seriously moaning about ganking not being profitable?What has eve come to , used to be days you lost 3 months worth in one go with pvp and smiled about it.Ganks where about ******* others day and you didn't care what it costed.

You can tell eve is dead when even ''bad boys'' complain about risk and iskloss.


You're goonfriends are ganking freighters and looking at the drops it is profitable right?


That i am actually replying to this crap is beyond me.The more i read the more i see eve actually IS going downhill but i for one don't blame the high-sec pve/mining types for it , they did not change over the years.Quite the opposite i'd say.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#138 - 2012-10-03 16:50:14 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
flakeys wrote:



You serious?You actually seriously moaning about ganking not being profitable?What has eve come to , used to be days you lost 3 months worth in one go with pvp and smiled about it.Ganks where about ******* others day and you didn't care what it costed.

You can tell eve is dead when even ''bad boys'' complain about risk and iskloss.


You're goonfriends are ganking freighters and looking at the drops it is profitable right?


Yaawwwn


Welcome to the reality of ganking and that little world of ganking you thought existed doesn't and never has.

Remember the ice interdictions? It was done for profit.

Every Hulkageddon? Done for the prizes, aka profit.

You honestly never noticed the fact that 99% of barges killed were very poorly tanked or wondered why it was always destroyers doing the killing? We dont give a damn about killmails and tears are simply a bonus.

As for those freighters we are now killing, Yes, its all done for profit. Miners were never any different. Afterall, who do you think benefitted from higher ice and mineral prices? You honestly think we want to see our profits from minerals, ice and all the products that use this stuff go down?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#139 - 2012-10-03 16:53:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
flakeys wrote:


Loosing their PVE ship in PVP yes i can see why they would moan and btw they are running as much risk as before as they still ARE gankable but boohooo that takes effort and isk.


Its not a question of a bit more risk, its that its impossible to make any profit.


Bring back the profitable as long as you also bring in a direct way of teaching miners how to fit prepare for such things. The EvE board is not the good palce to teach this. It should be in the game. Then the player can ignore the info but everybody gets warned about the risk. I am pretty sure many people learn of the risk associated with mining by seeing the ship go boom. Of course right now it happens less but it was still like that before the barge patch. I am all for risk of ganking for miners. It's allright. But please make all the required info available in game to protech from such intended risk.

For example change the basic mining training to give a missing where the miner will get blow-up no matter what and then a second one where the agent give him one of the basic skill book to train and tell him to put "tank module X" so when he do the same action, his ship live through the rat dps till concord or whatever kill the rat. It's super basic but after that, people ahve no reason to not know **** can happen and mining is no safe heaven.

The idiots will still run tankless. Those will be your gank target and they will ahve no excuse beside thier own stupidity. The one who did learn will be the tanked miner. Not profitable to gank because of their fit.

If CCP was to put in a change like that, I would gladly support it. If they only change the ship EHP, they only change one problem (unprofitable to gank miner even with terribad fit) into (clueless miner who does not even know what's waiting for him).
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#140 - 2012-10-03 17:01:31 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Bring back the profitable as long as you also bring in a direct way of teaching miners how to fit prepare for such things. The EvE board is not the good palce to teach this. It should be in the game. Then the player can ignore the info but everybody gets warned about the risk. I am pretty sure many people learn of the risk associated with mining by seeing the ship go boom. Of course right now it happens less but it was still like that before the barge patch. I am all for risk of ganking for miners. It's allright. But please make all the required info available in game to protech from such intended risk.

For example change the basic mining training to give a missing where the miner will get blow-up no matter what and then a second one where the agent give him one of the basic skill book to train and tell him to put "tank module X" so when he do the same action, his ship live through the rat dps till concord or whatever kill the rat. It's super basic but after that, people ahve no reason to not know **** can happen and mining is no safe heaven.

The idiots will still run tankless. Those will be your gank target and they will ahve no excuse beside thier own stupidity. The one who did learn will be the tanked miner. Not profitable to gank because of their fit.

If CCP was to put in a change like that, I would gladly support it. If they only change the ship EHP, they only change one problem (unprofitable to gank miner even with terribad fit) into (clueless miner who does not even know what's waiting for him).


You cant force people to tank their ships, I spent 8 months trying.

The tutorial tells you to tank your ships, the rats force you to tank your ship early on, the forums are awash with help, the help channels and corp channels are there, local is there for asking other miners, the guy exploding near you is a biut of a giveaway, you exploding is a massive hint. Mission bears spend the time to look up fits on battleclinic and asking questions so it cant be all that hard for miners to adapt. Its just that they chose not to and go out of their way to ignore any help given.

Thats not to say all miners are as useless. A great number did adapt and they took advantage of higher prices and mining bots getting all but wiped out. Hell there are some miners who enjoyed the challange and had fun mining.

Granted when the Mack does get its nerf I will be there posting fits and tactics to not get ganked for miners to use. Its up to them to use that info or ignore it and continue to explode.