These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mining ships and EVE design philosophy.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Desimus Maximus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#141 - 2013-02-12 06:55:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Desimus Maximus
T_T wwaaaaaahhhhh!!!


Goon tears, best tears.

LOL!
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#142 - 2013-02-12 06:56:16 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:


My response was just fine


No. It was nonsensical. Just like you trying to tie freighters to mining barges.

Mr Epeen Cool
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#143 - 2013-02-12 07:11:54 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


My response was just fine


No. It was nonsensical.


Only if you intentionally deprived yourself of context by neglecting to read the thread.

Quote:
If ganking is not meant to be profitable, shouldn't you get more tank on your Freighter the more ISK value you pack into it?

If you shouldn't get more tank for filling it with more ISK (thus making it profitable to gank them when their owners are stupid), why should miners who fill their ships with ISK (T2 miners and MLUs without fitting any tanking modules) not be profitable to gank (again, only profitable when the owners are stupid)?


Explain why you think that stupid people who take active steps to make their ship profitable to gank (an unfit Hulk has never been profitable to gank) should not be profitable to gank.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#144 - 2013-02-12 07:32:46 UTC
Desimus Maximus wrote:
T_T wwaaaaaahhhhh!!!


Goon tears, best tears.

LOL!


Oh look, yet another who didn't read the thread.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#145 - 2013-02-12 07:35:04 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
handige harrie wrote:


It's also not possible to make a profit ganking unfitted abaddons or Rokhs or empty freighters. For most ships it just doesn't work that way.


All frigates, destroyers, cruisers, BC, T3 cruisers, recons, heavy assault ships, interdictors, haulers and even some of the battleships can be ganked for profit if they fit T2 mods with no tank.


Didn't read the thread.

Just wondering if you managed to find an excuse yet to post your 'don't carry 10B in the hold ' mantra yet. Sure, it has nothing to do with barges but that never stops you in every other thread.

Mr Epeen Cool


I will when a hulk is daft enough to do it.
Kate stark
#146 - 2013-02-12 07:42:06 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
handige harrie wrote:


It's also not possible to make a profit ganking unfitted abaddons or Rokhs or empty freighters. For most ships it just doesn't work that way.


All frigates, destroyers, cruisers, BC, T3 cruisers, recons, heavy assault ships, interdictors, haulers and even some of the battleships can be ganked for profit if they fit T2 mods with no tank.


Didn't read the thread.

Just wondering if you managed to find an excuse yet to post your 'don't carry 10B in the hold ' mantra yet. Sure, it has nothing to do with barges but that never stops you in every other thread.

Mr Epeen Cool


I will when a hulk is daft enough to do it.


you won't.
because when 8.5k m3 of veldspar is worth 10bn isk, you can be damn sure your gank destroyer will be a hell of a lot more.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#147 - 2013-02-12 07:44:41 UTC
Kate stark wrote:


you won't.
because when 8.5k m3 of veldspar is worth 10bn isk, you can be damn sure your gank destroyer will be a hell of a lot more.


This may shock you, but people have been known to use these things for hauling implants and plex about.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#148 - 2013-02-12 09:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
RubyPorto wrote:

Then by your reading, Exhumers were fine before the buff.


No, they aren't now and they weren't before.

You can keep creating thousands of posts about the same topic and just proving how narrow minded you are, yet an "unknown" poster's 2 lines of obvious considerations disproves all of them.

Having to fit all sorts of bandages and crutches just to make *1* ship (the others just could not) gank proof safer is not a good design.

Show me any mainstream (not a super-niche setup) PvP ship that forfeits 2-3-4 slots into CPU mods, PG mods, rigs and whatsnot just to be allowed to undock.


Of course CCP went all the opposite way now and also did it in a dumbs friend way but the issue indeed was there.

I told you several times I even tried your fail fits. They DID NOT WORK. The tank was never the advertised because your numbers came out of the ass, the ships handled like bricks (yes I even tried the bulkheads fits) and became *easier* to catch, the mods value *increased* the ship value and thus the enticement to gank it. At the same time the yield plummeted so much, to make it totally worthless to bother. Just switch to a disposable T1 equivalent super-maxed for yield and be done with it.

Therefore your suggestions were inept, unrealistic, just ineffective and not cost efficient.

You did the same mistake CCP did for WiS: sell something that in reality is just a proof of concept.

I am not condoning what CCP has done afterwards, you were there to post in my thread claiming how CCP's designers were clueless and Macks would rule supreme so you know I am totally not biased. I earn both if ships don't pop but I earn more when they do pop.

So I always, inevitably win in the ISK department, so I can have an opinion about both the "factions".

Unlike you, I don't have some specific target players group to "punish" for whatever ideologic reason either.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#149 - 2013-02-12 09:28:48 UTC
Another egregious mistake you do - in addition to having shared Battleclinic grade fail fits - is to keep crying about the past.

Tiericide is an HUGE, years spanning act, we are NOT going backwards.

Every new ship has this concept of not having "upgrade paths" but just similar options. So you can't "back-nerf" a specific ship back to pre-tiericide grade, you have to propose a new - and possibly not ******** - way to change them so they become potentially more vulnerable while still fitting within the new tiericide philosophy.

I had always been for removing "heavens made" innate tank and give mining ships slots and freedom to put inside whatever one thinks is good for him. Most would asininely go for some zero tank setup and then they'd die.

But this time it'd be different, this time they HAD the option to fit the tank without making their ship worthless so they can't cry to anyone.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#150 - 2013-02-12 09:39:23 UTC
Funfact:
Nearly every wh and 0.0 miner I met knows how to tank their barges and exhumers. A large oart of the High sec miners already tank their ships. I am pretty sure there are more failed gank attempts than successful ones because of this.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Kate stark
#151 - 2013-02-12 16:28:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kate stark wrote:


you won't.
because when 8.5k m3 of veldspar is worth 10bn isk, you can be damn sure your gank destroyer will be a hell of a lot more.


This may shock you, but people have been known to use these things for hauling implants and plex about.


but, that really is a whole different situation to "warp to belt, gank random miner, harvest tears".

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2013-02-12 20:41:47 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
GetSirrus wrote:
If a combat ship needed two power mods to fit a tank, plus had no remaining slots for any utilities? It would be regarded as a failfit. If as the OP posits that there is a general theme of compromise in Eve, this is not - it is a complete sacrifice.


So your justification for not fitting a tank was that the extra cargo & yield was worth the risk of losing a 200mil ship? In that case, you wilfully chose that path. The person fitting the tank decided it wasn't worth the risk & ultimately did better than those who were too greedy to fit a tank.

So then having a choice but needing that choice to be tank in every slot in order to be a deterrent represents a ship with proper fittings?


Wrong.

A brick tanked Hulk was unprofitable to gank in every reasonable situation (everything's profitable to gank in enough Civvy gun ibises but that's idiotic).

A 1 MLU Hulk was unprofitable to gank in most situations. (And on the bubble in most others, depending on market conditions.)

A 2 MLU Hulk could be unprofitable to gank in many situations.

All are far less profitable than a 2 MLU, No Tank, Cargo Optimized Hulk with a survey scanner and, as such, were ganked less often because it was invariably more profitable to gank the No tank Hulk next to it.

Ok, to help settle this a bit I think it a good qualifier to ask, what was a good EHP to be considered a deterrent. Preferably in a .5 and .7. I have a feeling we're looking at that threshold quite differently.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#153 - 2013-02-12 20:47:20 UTC
Eugene Kerner wrote:
Funfact:
Nearly every wh and 0.0 miner I met knows how to tank their barges and exhumers. A large oart of the High sec miners already tank their ships. I am pretty sure there are more failed gank attempts than successful ones because of this.


You're kind of right, there are highsec miners that fit a tank, unfortunately, for them, a good proportion of those tanks consist of civilian shield boosters and the like.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#154 - 2013-02-12 20:49:32 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Le Badass wrote:
*deleted post*


Yes lets just leave the barges in a state where the skiff is pointless and the hulk outclassed by the new king of miners the mack. Afterall the fact that teircide was ment to bring balance to the barge lineup and has failed miserably should be ignored because miners can now mine in near perfect safety without even needing to fit any tank or make any choice other than going for max yeild.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#155 - 2013-02-12 20:51:25 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Kate stark wrote:


you won't.
because when 8.5k m3 of veldspar is worth 10bn isk, you can be damn sure your gank destroyer will be a hell of a lot more.


This may shock you, but people have been known to use these things for hauling implants and plex about.


but, that really is a whole different situation to "warp to belt, gank random miner, harvest tears".


I didn't bring it up.
Le Badass
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2013-02-12 21:13:45 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
baltec1 wrote:

Yes lets just leave the barges in a state where the skiff is pointless and the hulk outclassed by the new king of miners the mack. Afterall the fact that teircide was ment to bring balance to the barge lineup and has failed miserably should be ignored because miners can now mine in near perfect safety without even needing to fit any tank or make any choice other than going for max yeild.


A precious little group of players give two ***** about the ship balance. I guess there's a very slim chance that you belong in that group.
The majority really just want to come home from work, sit down at their computers and blow up unarmed ships, fraps it and put it on youtube, so they can clutter up "My Eve" with their lack of imagination and their risk aversion.

EDIT: Spelling checked.

*please censor all profanity* - CCP Eterne
Hannibal Ord
Fer-De-Lance
#157 - 2013-02-12 21:16:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Hannibal Ord
To be fair Baltec1,

You are still able to kill them by ganking them.

Only the Skiff and somewhat the procurer is almost immune by design.

The mack and the retriever are both easily killed.

The question of whether it is profitable or not I don't think should be a factor in the slightest. Just my opinion.

Before the redesign, Exhumers and Barges had fallen behind dramatically in their designs since their initial release, because the population of EVE and ease of destruction had increased ten fold.

The redesign did a few things:

1. It allowed a more flexible option for miners, so they weren't basically just flying 1 ship for their purposes. Now all exhumers and barges have uses for both ICE and Rocks.

2. It solved the retardedly tedious issue of Jetcan mining, which CCP admitted they never wished existed. It was completely ridiculous, especially as mining is a mostly solo activity despite massive increases in efficiency as done in a group. It is solo, because it's so massively boring and static. Using a workaround mechanic to increase efficiency without having to resort to an alt or an unfortunate corp mate wasn't a good design.

3. It allowed for more balanced tanking abilities of the ships. Actually, to be brutally honest it made two ships (procurer and Skiff) excellent, whilst the Coveter and Hulk are weak, the retriever is weak and the Mack only reasonable.

So honestly, I think CCP did a good job balancing them and bringing them up to date with current game mechanics and environment.

If it is only the Mack that you have a problem with in that it's just a little bit harder to blast to dust now with a throwaway destroyer, I don't think it is honestly a very solid argument. You can still kill it easily, it just requires a bit more than a catalyst.

And that's only if someone decides to tank it....

But that's just coming from the opinion that it doesn't matter if the gank is profitable or not, it's about can you or can you not gank it....which you can, pretty easily. It just isn't as stupidly easy as before.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#158 - 2013-02-12 21:18:27 UTC
Le Badass wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Yes lets just leave the barges in a state where the skiff is pointless and the hulk outclassed by the new king of miners the mack. Afterall the fact that teircide was ment to bring balance to the barge lineup and has failed miserably should be ignored because miners can now mine in near perfect safety without even needing to fit any tank or make any choice other than going for max yeild.


A precious little group of players give two sh*ts about the ship balance. I guess there's a very slim chance that you belong in that group.
The majority really just want to come home from work, sit down at their computers and blow up unarmed ships, fraps it and put it on youtube, so they can clutter up "My Eve" with their lack of imagination and their risk aversion.

EDIT: Spelling checked.


I do care about ship balance and ganking miners is much like running missions to me. I get my kicks out of getting megathrons to do things most would think impossible.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#159 - 2013-02-12 21:26:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Le Badass wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Yes lets just leave the barges in a state where the skiff is pointless and the hulk outclassed by the new king of miners the mack. Afterall the fact that teircide was ment to bring balance to the barge lineup and has failed miserably should be ignored because miners can now mine in near perfect safety without even needing to fit any tank or make any choice other than going for max yeild.


A precious little group of players give two sh*ts about the ship balance. I guess there's a very slim chance that you belong in that group.
The majority really just want to come home from work, sit down at their computers and blow up unarmed ships, fraps it and put it on youtube, so they can clutter up "My Eve" with their lack of imagination and their risk aversion.

EDIT: Spelling checked.


I do care about ship balance and ganking miners is much like running missions to me. I get my kicks out of getting megathrons to do things most would think impossible.


Cool, then start ganking Macks with a Mega in ways that most would think impossible Twisted

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#160 - 2013-02-12 21:29:11 UTC
Hannibal Ord wrote:
To be fair Baltec1,

You are still able to kill them by ganking them.

Only the Skiff and somewhat the procurer is almost immune by design.

The mack and the retriever are both easily killed.

The question of whether it is profitable or not I don't think should be a factor in the slightest. Just my opinion.

Before the redesign, Exhumers and Barges had fallen behind dramatically in their designs since their initial release, because the population of EVE and ease of destruction had increased ten fold.

The redesign did a few things:

1. It allowed a more flexible option for miners, so they weren't basically just flying 1 ship for their purposes. Now all exhumers and barges have uses for both ICE and Rocks.

2. It solved the retardedly tedious issue of Jetcan mining, which CCP admitted they never wished existed. It was completely ridiculous, especially as mining is a mostly solo activity despite massive increases in efficiency as done in a group. It is solo, because it's so massively boring and static. Using a workaround mechanic to increase efficiency without having to resort to an alt or an unfortunate corp mate wasn't a good design.

3. It allowed for more balanced tanking abilities of the ships. Actually, to be brutally honest it made two ships (procurer and Skiff) excellent, whilst the Coveter and Hulk are weak, the retriever is weak and the Mack only reasonable.

So honestly, I think CCP did a good job balancing them and bringing them up to date with current game mechanics and environment.

If it is only the Mack that you have a problem with in that it's just a little bit harder to blast to dust now with a throwaway destroyer, I don't think it is honestly a very solid argument. You can still kill it easily, it just requires a bit more than a catalyst.

And that's only if someone decides to tank it....

But that's just coming from the opinion that it doesn't matter if the gank is profitable or not, it's about can you or can you not gank it....which you can, pretty easily. It just isn't as stupidly easy as before.

To be honest, if it wasn't


The only risk a highsec miner will face are gankers. The skiff is ment to be the ship to best deal with this threat however the mack is currently unprofitable to gank with no tank fitted so the skiff is unessessary and thus, unused. The hulk meanwhile is profitable to gank and when coupled with the small advantage in yeild that vanished when you have to factor in the tank and the time spend docking to unload it just cannot compete with the mack.

Reducing the tank on the mack to the same level as the hulk fixes these issues.