These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Has suicide ganking become a problem? Empty freighters being ganked.

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#921 - 2014-06-25 23:10:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
I now there's PvPers out there and gankers who love killing targets who have no chance of fighting because they have no weapons.

I just think there should be some way a miner or hauler could arm itself.
There is, miners have the option to fit for tank, they also have drone bays, and more importantly 2 ships that can mine, and have scary defence statistics as well as drone damage bonuses. Haulers can be fitted in all sorts of interesting ways, Marlona Sky often takes on battleships, and wins, in haulers. Using your head and being inventive is just as much a part of arming yourself as using modules.

There's also the option of having friends, which is kind of the point of playing an MMO.

Quote:
Q-ships should be a fact of life in EvE. The ganker looking for a killmail should have to worry if that "easy kill" he is approaching is actually a disguised warship (with 'hell in space' DPS/alpha strike) that just looks like a juicy target.
Agreed Q ships should be a thing, luckily we have the Procurer, the Skiff, the Battle Badger and the Nereus (needs more drone bandwidth though) amongst others that can fulfil this role, even the lowly Venture is PvP capable, and surprisingly good at it.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#922 - 2014-06-25 23:10:31 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
In fact, New Order in Warouh (or was it Warhou?) lost about a dozen Catalysts and/or Coercers chasing my Venture (a earlier character than this one). Those players put enough bounty on my character I retired him and started this one.


In other words, you gave them exactly what they wanted.


No Remy, go back and re-read it.. he clearly won. Big smile

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Aalysia Valkeiper
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#923 - 2014-06-25 23:14:56 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
The new character is presently training and I am purposely refusing to exit the station until trained for the functions I desired (which do NOT include PvP).


Quote:
I tried PvP only with my first two characters and found I did not like it (it's too immature for my tastes).


Actually a really bad idea not to train some rudimentary PVP skills. I don't mean SP, I mean the experience. To call it immature is a hasty generalisation based on your very limited capacity for PVP, and ironically, as a result, an immature conclusion itself. To pretend that you can avoid PVP by not training for it is like pretending you can avoid death in real life by eating 'organic only' and 'going vegan' etc.

There are those that PVP with exceptional skill, and talent. I've fought against them, I've fought alongside them, and I've learned from them: names like Blade VII, Perpetuum Myrkur, Praethis Starloe - these stick with me because of their ability in combat. I've seen Praethis confiscate a Merlin that a rookie put some armour rigs on, because it was a :badfit:, and then finish the fit to create an active armour Merlin, and then use it to kill a Vindicator. While I haven't come anywhere near this ability level yet, I've achieved some things that left me gasping for breath by the end of it - of note was an engagement against multiple enemies in Danera, including a Merlin, one pilot who reshipped from a Thrasher I killed to a Coercer, and a Myrmidon, all of which I fought in the same fight with my trusty Ishkur.

But here's the thing, I'm gonna forget your name in about five minutes, but those that I've PVP'd with, against, and learned from, their names will leave a lasting impression. Some of them, I call friends. I can't remember the last time I made friends with the boring kid who segregated himself in a social environment, and make no mistake, EVE is a social environment.

You call EVE PVP immature - I submit that you're playing a video game, making every activity immature and a waste of time. Except the players achieving great exploits in PVP are the ones people are going to remember, write about, and matter. They're the ones getting a say in the direction of the game. If you want to run off on your own and hide amongst NPCs and stations, why should anyone give a **** about you, or what you think about EVE? When you insult EVE's entire subscriber base by calling PVP immature, because it's ALL PVP, what makes you think your say should matter at all?


I did not call PvP (fighting ships which can also fight) immature. I called ganking (the seeking and preying on unarmed ships) immature. To me, there is an extreme differance.

Yes, I am the boring person who separates himself from the crowd. I admit it. I also find Mining very fun. THAT goes against many people's feeling. I was an Over-the-road trucker for 19 years and it is very hard to get me bored, now. Also, any violent tendencies I may have had have been burned out by... other experiances.

By the time my newest character has skilled up, Kronos should have stabilized and I can start mining again. I plan to show that success is possible in Eve without PvP (though it would be much easier and faster with PvP).

I can accept others won't like my type of play. I can accept they play diffferent.
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#924 - 2014-06-25 23:17:48 UTC
Haedonism Bot wrote:

You have a strange definition of success. You seem to feel that acquiring more ships and a bigger pile of isk is how you win EVE.


Eve is a sandbox. The player sets the bar as to what winning is.

Profit favors the prepared
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#925 - 2014-06-25 23:18:50 UTC
Capt Starfox wrote:

Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:


I know other players have more isk/ships, but my success without PvP should show it is NOT required.


You don't have to PvP, however it is the core purpose of this game; regardless if you don't want to that's your option, just don't get all upset when someone decides they want to PvP you.


PvP is not the "core" purpose of the game. This is a sandbox the core purpose is what ever you want it to be. Want to gank and be an outlaw in faction space; go for it. Want to mine astroids and open your own galactic manufacturing company; go for it. Want to take over all of the unclaimed space then declare war on the 4 major factions; go for it. Eve appeals to all sorts of players for all sorts of different reasons, so stop this nonsense about "you're playing wrong".

This thread is about are the gank rules to loose and in need of a bit of tightening? not everyone should play my way and if you don't you're doing it wrong and not actually having fun.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#926 - 2014-06-25 23:23:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
The new character is presently training and I am purposely refusing to exit the station until trained for the functions I desired (which do NOT include PvP).


Quote:
I tried PvP only with my first two characters and found I did not like it (it's too immature for my tastes).


Actually a really bad idea not to train some rudimentary PVP skills. I don't mean SP, I mean the experience. To call it immature is a hasty generalisation based on your very limited capacity for PVP, and ironically, as a result, an immature conclusion itself. To pretend that you can avoid PVP by not training for it is like pretending you can avoid death in real life by eating 'organic only' and 'going vegan' etc.

There are those that PVP with exceptional skill, and talent. I've fought against them, I've fought alongside them, and I've learned from them: names like Blade VII, Perpetuum Myrkur, Praethis Starloe - these stick with me because of their ability in combat. I've seen Praethis confiscate a Merlin that a rookie put some armour rigs on, because it was a :badfit:, and then finish the fit to create an active armour Merlin, and then use it to kill a Vindicator. While I haven't come anywhere near this ability level yet, I've achieved some things that left me gasping for breath by the end of it - of note was an engagement against multiple enemies in Danera, including a Merlin, one pilot who reshipped from a Thrasher I killed to a Coercer, and a Myrmidon, all of which I fought in the same fight with my trusty Ishkur.

But here's the thing, I'm gonna forget your name in about five minutes, but those that I've PVP'd with, against, and learned from, their names will leave a lasting impression. Some of them, I call friends. I can't remember the last time I made friends with the boring kid who segregated himself in a social environment, and make no mistake, EVE is a social environment.

You call EVE PVP immature - I submit that you're playing a video game, making every activity immature and a waste of time. Except the players achieving great exploits in PVP are the ones people are going to remember, write about, and matter. They're the ones getting a say in the direction of the game. If you want to run off on your own and hide amongst NPCs and stations, why should anyone give a **** about you, or what you think about EVE? When you insult EVE's entire subscriber base by calling PVP immature, because it's ALL PVP, what makes you think your say should matter at all?


I did not call PvP (fighting ships which can also fight) immature. I called ganking (the seeking and preying on unarmed ships) immature. To me, there is an extreme differance.

Yes, I am the boring person who separates himself from the crowd. I admit it. I also find Mining very fun. THAT goes against many people's feeling. I was an Over-the-road trucker for 19 years and it is very hard to get me bored, now. Also, any violent tendencies I may have had have been burned out by... other experiances.

By the time my newest character has skilled up, Kronos should have stabilized and I can start mining again. I plan to show that success is possible in Eve without PvP (though it would be much easier and faster with PvP).

I can accept others won't like my type of play. I can accept they play diffferent.


For some players, ganking is their foot in the door, the barrier they cross, to 'real' PVP. For me, it was ganking that got me interested in looking for more. But I still gank here and there. What makes it different, to you, is that you think miners are 'defenceless' and therefore shooting them is wrong. I submit that miners are defenceless by their own choice, and they bring it on themselves, which is quite beside the point of the maturity levels of those doing the ganking.

At what point does one decide the ganking will stop if he or she calls it 'immature'? Need I remind you that your opinion is invalid by virtue of your lack of understanding of how EVE works to begin with, so to the gankers, you're like a 3 year old telling a 30 year old that they are immature. They get a giggle out of it. I don't think you understand how much they enjoy your reaction to it. By saying this, you are FEEDING them.

Which makes two things you are doing that are perpetuating the existence of high sec ganking at all; 1) refusing to have any ability to defend yourself by virtue of you think if you're defenceless, that makes you somehow 'good', but this is a video game - there is no good and bad, everyone is your enemy whether they're good or bad; 2) your own, ironically, immature reaction to PVP, because like it or not, ganking is part of the PVP environment - as with mining, trading, and everything else in the game, undocking is your implicit message to everyone that you've consented to PVP. If someone instapops you with a Tornado the moment you're out of station, that's why they did it, because you told them they could by undocking.

Whether or not that's 'mature' is entirely beside the point, because everyone, whether they are shooting at you or not, is a competitor in a PVP environment. One day, when you're mining away, all by yourself, you're going to have a fleet of 20-100 barges land on you, and mine out everything that you wanted. Suddenly, you'll have competition. But instead of doing something about it in-game, like a typical carebear who thinks EVE is a themepark ride, catering to your demands, you'll come on the forums and complain about isboxer when all you really needed to do was get some friends, learn to PVP, wardec your competitor, and chase them out of your system. That's why players like you are a problem with EVE, a problem that must be purged.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#927 - 2014-06-25 23:36:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Organic Lager wrote:
PvP is not the "core" purpose of the game. This is a sandbox the core purpose is what ever you want it to be.
…and being a sandbox means that PvP is at the core of the game — it's the only way for a multiplayer sandbox to actually work. It means that to do what you want to do, you first have to enforce that wish on other players who might (or more likely will) wish for the exact opposite to happen. Pretty much everything you do is done in competition with other players — PvP. The only way for this to not be true is to either instance the game so heavily that it almost disqualifies itself from being multiplayer (and definitely not an MMO) or to so heavily restrict player choices that it no longer qualifies as a proper sandbox.

More than that, though, the game is a war-economy simulator where the broken window fallacy isn't a fallacy but part of the engine that makes the game turn around. PvP Combat is a core purpose because it's what creates the demand that gives the supply-side a purpose, and without those, the real core of the game — the market — in turn loses its purpose.

e: …in fact, calling it “PvP” is thoroughly inaccurate. Combat is a core component in creating demand; the PvP is (once again) everywhere — on the demand side, on the supply side, and on the market side.

Quote:
Eve appeals to all sorts of players for all sorts of different reasons, so stop this nonsense about "you're playing wrong".
Just one problem with that: there is a very clear way of playing the game wrong, namely to try to ignore (or, worse, try to abolish) the PvP aspects that run through every last bit of the game. Capt Starfox has it exactly right: you don't have to PvP, but you simply have to accept that others will not particularly care about your wishes and PvP you anyway.

Thinking that you can be exempt from the PvP is indeed playing the game wrong for the simple reason that the game does not support that one particular choice. The sandbox concept itself inherently has limits to what it can support, and treating it as a not-sandbox is one of those. It can be “played wrong” just as much as any other design.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#928 - 2014-06-25 23:37:49 UTC
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
Unlike most people, I find it relaxxing.


I also used to find mining relaxing when I was on drugs.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Aalysia Valkeiper
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#929 - 2014-06-25 23:41:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Aalysia Valkeiper
Remiel Pollard wrote:

At what point does one decide the ganking will stop if he or she calls it 'immature'? Need I remind you that your opinion is invalid by virtue of your lack of understanding of how EVE works to begin with, so to the gankers, you're like a 3 year old telling a 30 year old that they are immature. They get a giggle out of it. I don't think you understand how much they enjoy your reaction to it. By saying this, you are FEEDING them.

Which makes two things you are doing that are perpetuating the existence of high sec ganking at all; 1) refusing to have any ability to defend yourself by virtue of you think if you're defenceless, that makes you somehow 'good', but this is a video game - there is no good and bad, everyone is your enemy whether they're good or bad; 2) your own, ironically, immature reaction to PVP, because like it or not, ganking is part of the PVP environment - as with mining, trading, and everything else in the game, undocking is your implicit message to everyone that you've consented to PVP. If someone instapops you with a Tornado the moment you're out of station, that's why they did it, because you told them they could by undocking.

Whether or not that's 'mature' is entirely beside the point, because everyone, whether they are shooting at you or not, is a competitor in a PVP environment. One day, when you're mining away, all by yourself, you're going to have a fleet of 20-100 barges land on you, and mine out everything that you wanted. Suddenly, you'll have competition. But instead of doing something about it in-game, like a typical carebear who thinks EVE is a themepark ride, catering to your demands, you'll come on the forums and complain about isboxer when all you really needed to do was get some friends, learn to PVP, wardec your competitor, and chase them out of your system. That's why players like you are a problem with EVE, a problem that must be purged.


Not participating in an activity is not the same as not understanding it, but your point is still valid. I have CHOSEN to not PvP, so my understanding of it is the same understanding a target gets when it is shot at (very skewed, indeed).

I have played quite a few MMOs and this is the only one in which ganking is termed 'acceptable' by the developers. That makes it very interesting even to me.

I have had the 'mining op' turn up and empty a belt I'm in many times. What did I do? I found another belt. It didn't bother me. I can understand why someone else would be bothered, tho.

My defense against ganking is making an effort to not be there when the ganker comes. Meanwhile, I am gaining more isk per minute than the uber-tanked miner who is caught by being inattentive (and dies dispite the tank).

If I am caught... I die. Time to get another ship. No problem.

Why is this a problem to others? I find the risks acceptable and live with them. Is that not what EvE is about? That it is not your playstyle should not matter.

Now, give me a manner I can arm my miners and industrials and turn the tables on the immature idiot ambushers who don't want a fight... let's just say I could definately change to a PvPer.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#930 - 2014-06-25 23:44:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:


Now, give me a manner I can arm my miners and industrials and turn the tables on the immature idiots who don't want a fight... let's just say I could definately change to a PvPer.


This already exists, the tools are already available to do exactly this. Learn to PVP, and you learn how to use those tools.

I've successfully defended against four suicide ganks on my alt, in a Covetor no less. Don't even try to tell me that you don't already have the tools you need.

I might also note that earlier, you stated explicitly that you refuse to train for PVP because it's immature. The when I pointed out that PVP is not immature, you backpedalled to some silly distinction about between PVP and ganking. Not only do I find this disingenuous, but it demonstrates poor understanding of PVP in general.

Well, you don't need to learn to gank to defend yourself from PVP as a miner, but it would certainly help you to understand how it works and what can be done to defend against it better. I don't call that immature, I call it understanding your enemies. Again, by refusing to learn to PVP, you cripple yourself, all for the sake of some misguided sense of moral superiority I imagine.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Paranoid Loyd
#931 - 2014-06-25 23:49:16 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:
Unlike most people, I find it relaxxing.


I also used to find mining relaxing when I was on drugs.


Heh, I am still on drugs and dont find it relaxing

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#932 - 2014-06-25 23:55:53 UTC
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:


Now, give me a manner I can arm my miners and industrials and turn the tables on the immature idiot ambushers who don't want a fight... let's just say I could definately change to a PvPer.


[Skiff, Brick]

Damage Control II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II

Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Caldari Navy EM Ward Field
Thermic Dissipation Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Modulated Strip Miner II

Medium Core Defense Field Extender II
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II


Vespa EC-600 x5

117k EHP.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#933 - 2014-06-25 23:58:18 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:

This thread is about are the gank rules to loose and in need of a bit of tightening? not everyone should play my way and if you don't you're doing it wrong and not actually having fun.


Oh, my God the irony.

Carebears saying the first quoted sentence is the same thing as them saying the second. This thread is exactly about one group trying to force the other to play their way.

The funny part is that shoe is precisely on the other foot of what you lot would like to claim.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#934 - 2014-06-26 00:04:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
baltec1 wrote:
[Skiff, Brick]

[…]

117k EHP.

To put that into perspective…

[Charon, Charon fit]

Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II

164k EHP.

A ship that, contrary to the core claim of this thread, is very rarely ganked and is only really targeted if it carries billions worth of cargo (which a mining ship never will) because of the considerable co-ordination and pre-planning required to do so, has just 40% more hitpoints than the brick miner does.

Any claim that there are no tools available for the self-imposed victims is nothing but sheer and wilful ignorance, bordering on outright stupidity.
Aalysia Valkeiper
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#935 - 2014-06-26 00:12:06 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:

This already exists, the tools are already available to do exactly this. Learn to PVP, and you learn how to use those tools.

I've successfully defended against four suicide ganks on my alt, in a Covetor no less. Don't even try to tell me that you don't already have the tools you need.

I might also note that earlier, you stated explicitly that you refuse to train for PVP because it's immature. The when I pointed out that PVP is not immature, you backpedalled to some silly distinction about between PVP and ganking. Not only do I find this disingenuous, but it demonstrates poor understanding of PVP in general.

Well, you don't need to learn to gank to defend yourself from PVP as a miner, but it would certainly help you to understand how it works and what can be done to defend against it better. I don't call that immature, I call it understanding your enemies. Again, by refusing to learn to PVP, you cripple yourself, all for the sake of some misguided sense of moral superiority I imagine.


Other than drones, what weapons do miners have to damage a ganker? I'm really interested in that answer.

I don't start mining until my drone skills are over 3 million skill points and still find my vessels have no chance to escape even if they are maxxed tank.

Maybe that has changed with Kronos, but I will find out in a couple months (when my newest character starts mining).

If I EVER said PvP (fighting combat vessels) was immature, it was not my intent and I am sorry for the mis-communication. Though I no longer consider combat glorious or wonderful, I know it is often nessessary.

As for ganking (attacking the helpless and unarmed), I do consider that immature.

It is like the differance between the Germans and the royal navy in both world wars. The royal navy was considered honerable because they would fight ships designed to fight. Unfortunately, the german did not have the resources for that and resorted to the 'dishonorable' effect of attacking unarmed merchants. Eventually, (both times) the 'dishonorable' ganking was countered not only by escorting, but by Q-ships.

But escorting is not as feasible in EvE and Q-ships are not possible.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#936 - 2014-06-26 00:12:08 UTC
Tippia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
[Skiff, Brick]

[…]

117k EHP.

To put that into perspective…

[Charon, Charon fit]

Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II
Expanded Cargohold II

164k EHP.

A ship that, contrary to the core claim of this thread, is very rarely ganked and is only really targeted unless it carries billions worth of cargo (which a mining ship never will) because of the considerable co-ordination and pre-planning required to do so, has just 40% more hitpoints than the brick miner does.

Any claim that there are no tools available for the self-imposed victims is nothing but sheer and wilful ignorance, bordering on outright stupidity.


It also has a little over twice as much tank as my Harpy fleet Megathron.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#937 - 2014-06-26 00:13:48 UTC
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:


But escorting is not as feasible in EvE and Q-ships are not possible.


Watch and learn
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#938 - 2014-06-26 00:14:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:
PvP is not the "core" purpose of the game. This is a sandbox the core purpose is what ever you want it to be.
…and being a sandbox means that PvP is at the core of the game — it's the only way for a multiplayer sandbox to actually work. It means that to do what you want to do, you first have to enforce that wish on other players who might (or more likely will) wish for the exact opposite to happen. Pretty much everything you do is done in competition with other players — PvP. The only way for this to not be true is to either instance the game so heavily that it almost disqualifies itself from being multiplayer (and definitely not an MMO) or to so heavily restrict player choices that it no longer qualifies as a proper sandbox.

More than that, though, the game is a war-economy simulator where the broken window fallacy isn't a fallacy but part of the engine that makes the game turn around. PvP Combat is a core purpose because it's what creates the demand that gives the supply-side a purpose, and without those, the real core of the game — the market — in turn loses its purpose.

e: …in fact, calling it “PvP” is thoroughly inaccurate. Combat is a core component in creating demand; the PvP is (once again) everywhere — on the demand side, on the supply side, and on the market side.

Quote:
Eve appeals to all sorts of players for all sorts of different reasons, so stop this nonsense about "you're playing wrong".
Just one problem with that: there is a very clear way of playing the game wrong, namely to try to ignore (or, worse, try to abolish) the PvP aspects that run through every last bit of the game. Capt Starfox has it exactly right: you don't have to PvP, but you simply have to accept that others will not particularly care about your wishes and PvP you anyway.

Thinking that you can be exempt from the PvP is indeed playing the game wrong for the simple reason that the game does not support that one particular choice. The sandbox concept itself inherently has limits to what it can support, and treating it as a not-sandbox is one of those. It can be “played wrong” just as much as any other design.


In order to pvp someone has to make the ships, which could depending on how you look at it be an entirely pve activity. If you remove the pvp entirely players could still go out, mine and manufacture, bigger and bigger ships, mind you the game would be shallow and hugely unsuccessful. Now if you remove the pve, mining and manufacturing, from the game, well the entire system ceases to exist. Which one is core? which is dependent on the other? In order to kick over a sand castle someone must first construct them, but in order to continue to construct someone must destroy what you have created. Both must exist in order for the game to work and just because one player would rather not take part in one half of the game does not mean he's doing it wrong, especially when he's admittedly tried the other side and doesn't enjoy it.

Now the topic is about tightening restrictions on freighter ganking, something i personally know nothing about since i don't fly them or gank them. It's honestly a very small portion of the destruction of sand castles and no one (that i've seen) has said remove it, just to make it more cost restrictive to gank empty or unprofitable targets.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#939 - 2014-06-26 00:14:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
It also has a little over twice as much tank as my Harpy fleet Megathron.

To be fair, I think that says more about your Megathron obsession than about the Skiff… P
Aalysia Valkeiper
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#940 - 2014-06-26 00:15:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Aalysia Valkeiper wrote:


Now, give me a manner I can arm my miners and industrials and turn the tables on the immature idiot ambushers who don't want a fight... let's just say I could definately change to a PvPer.


[Skiff, Brick]

Damage Control II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II

Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Caldari Navy EM Ward Field
Thermic Dissipation Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Modulated Strip Miner II

Medium Core Defense Field Extender II
Medium Core Defense Field Extender II


Vespa EC-600 x5

117k EHP.


Where is the weapon to damage the opponent?