These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rhea] Introducing the Bowhead

First post First post First post
Author
Bertucio
Chandra Labs
#961 - 2014-11-13 16:07:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertucio
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Bertucio wrote:

I've been flying through Uedama the last few months almost regularly every day - usually in a Viator, which by the way, is pretty impervious to the gankfest going on (so apparently Eve isn't all about just making every ship gankable).

It's been like a wreck junkyard in there (especially on the weekends) - of mostly destroyer hulls and single freighter hulls. You say it isn't hard "folks". Well tell that to the folks who've had their freighters ganked these last few months by a bunch of cheap dessies - that cost about 20% - 25% of what their freighter cost. You tell me who is taking the big risks here - in an area of the game that is SUPPOSE to be relatively safe for moving goods around.

If the intent of hi-sec is not suppose to be safe - then why is there a hi-sec at all? Why not make the game all nul-sec where as you claim everyone can fly in their freighters and be perfectly safe like you can?

My alt is a freighter pilot. A free lancer pilot in fact. I also fly through there all the time. I never get ganked. A few attempts only. The trick is to not be AFK.

Fitting tank to a freighter. now that you can, is great. If i have more than 1B i fit bulkheads, and go easy on anything that hurts my tank. Sure your not bullet proof, but you make it expensive for the gankers. They try easier, stupider targets instead.

As for this new ship... Well i can't really see that any tank will be enough to stop ganking. But lets not get stupid with tank....

Of course this whole discussion is moot if carriers are going to be allowed in highsec as has been suggested. Why move anything with anything less than a carrier? I mean really... gank that!


In my opinion, hi-sec should be a safer place than it is now - even for pilots that are not too careful with their fits. If people want PvP then there is an area of Eve where they can do it. Not every player in Eve should have PvP forced upon them whenever they log on. To me the Eve universe should be broad enough and a big enough sandbox where all kinds of activities in space can go on - not narrowed to a game where only the Big Alliances get to do whatever they want to whomever they want in Eve. I mean that's how I see hi-sec, a place that should be pretty safe from the griefers, gankers and PvP'rs - and in my opinion, that was the original intent of hi-sec - to make it a relatively safe place in Eve.

That being said - I also understand that my opinion in not in the majority right now. That apparently the game design focus is to allow ganking to continue in hi-sec as a regular activity (whereas if it were removed, then the PvP activity in my opinion would migrate elsewhere in the game). That being the case - I still think that the Risk vs. Reward needs to be re-evaluated. If ganking is going to go on, then sure, a few dessies being able to take down a cheap hauler should be acceptable. But a bunch of cheap dessies - say 20 at 10mil each (that is 200 mil) taking down a multi-billion ISK freighter? That to me is not equivalent - the freighter pilot ends up taking all the risk and losing a lot more here. What I am arguing for here - and I think most players who have suggested the Bowhead be buffed more are arguing - is that it needs to be harder for the gankers to gank something that is big and expensive like a freighter - the cost to gank should be at least equal to the hull being destroyed. That is not what is happening right now in Uedama and other hi-sec systems in Eve.

As for poor piloting and fitting - yes there is no remedy for that. Although, look - you're always going to have new players being introduced to an MMO - and almost every MMO I've played have certain regions that are considered "safe" - as I believe hi-sec was originally intended to be. And I think it serves the game a good purpose. It does the game good both economically and sandbox wise for there to be a designated area - that is protected under "civilized" behavior, where players are not FORCED to play a given way. I imagine also many players prefer to be able to choose on what days they want to play in a group, PvP or play solo. Many players I've known in Eve over the years have had alts that do their industry work in hi-sec - because it's SAFE. But they also PvP in faction warfare or nul-sec with alts. They want to enjoy the game both solo & group. Not necessarily have the game dominated by a bunch of bloated Alliances who have turned the game into a slow crawl of a few way too powerful players.
Valterra Craven
#962 - 2014-11-13 16:09:18 UTC
War Kitten wrote:


You're still being argumentative - the question was about using taloses, not why. Your nitpick about catalysts is obvious - of course you use the cheapest alternative if you have the manpower. If you don't, you scale up. No one has tried to hide that or played dumb about it, which is more or less what you need to be doing to be disingenuous.

Or to quote Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means."



Oh, if the answer was so obvious and he had all of the information at his disposal, why was he asking the question in the first place? Information is power and giving him a more complete picture is not being argumentative for the sake of it.
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#963 - 2014-11-13 16:13:28 UTC
Whilst it's not 100%-related to the information about the ship itself.....

Is it worth laying the 'gankiness' of it aside completely? For I believe I am right in saying that it is all but impossible to make a ship ungankable?

- Get gank fleet together
- bump ship off gate
- shoot ship, cause lots of damage
- continue to bump ship away
- wait out timer, get in new ship
- return to item 3 and continue loop until killed

Is that wrong?

However, curiously, given the Bowhead's attributes - if fitted with a Large (perhaps even Capital - also not yet confirmed by CCP) Hull Repairer - how much hull could be repaired in between gank-shoots? And/or, potentially, shield/armour equivalents.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Bertucio
Chandra Labs
#964 - 2014-11-13 16:16:50 UTC
Marcus Tedric wrote:
Whilst it's not 100%-related to the information about the ship itself.....

Is it worth laying the 'gankiness' of it aside completely? For I believe I am right in saying that it is all but impossible to make a ship ungankable?

- Get gank fleet together
- bump ship off gate
- shoot ship, cause lots of damage
- continue to bump ship away
- wait out timer, get in new ship
- return to item 3 and continue loop until killed

Is that wrong?

However, curiously, given the Bowhead's attributes - if fitted with a Large (perhaps even Capital - also not yet confirmed by CCP) Hull Repairer - how much hull could be repaired in between gank-shoots? And/or, potentially, shield/armour equivalents.


Perhaps a better question to ask is what is the intent of hi-sec? To allow the Risk vs Reward design concept in Eve to be abrogated by a group of cheap destroyers taking down a very expensive freighter hull?
Runiba Toll
Alfred E. Neuman Fan Club
#965 - 2014-11-13 16:24:59 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Bertucio wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:


said the carebears who've spent the whole thread saying "ccp we need more ehp!". yes, that's right, wanting more ehp on one of the tankiest ships in high sec. gg.


Yeah I'd like to see some gankers in Uedama take some real risk for a change - like spend a billion ISK to take down a billion ISK freighter.

Oh yeah - *crickets*. I thought so.


isk is not a balancing factor.

and nor will it ever be, because that's ********.

also if you don't want to get ganked, don't go through uedama, and don't auto pilot, and don't make basic errors like most people who get ganked in obvious choke point systems.


is not uedama a pipe? unavoidable if you are going from say jita to dodixie? how does one avoid uedama?

more on topic, is it not a more reasonable solution to use a jump clone and fly one bs to the destination incursion, and then jc back to the other bs and move that one? since a bs is about twice as fast as this white elephant thing (bow thingy) does it not make more sense to not put all your eggs in a single styrofoam eggbox? and for the third bs you can use a third jump clone, and by that time, it will likely be at the next incursion or very close to it. Personally i don't see any value in this new ship other than disposing of ships you are tired with and getting back nothing in return.
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#966 - 2014-11-13 16:35:09 UTC
Bertucio wrote:
[

Perhaps a better question to ask is what is the intent of hi-sec? To allow the Risk vs Reward design concept in Eve to be abrogated by a group of cheap destroyers taking down a very expensive freighter hull?


Speaking as someone who has spent most of his career in High Sec (where 'high' I have always understood to mean, firstly, 'higher' and 'safer' and not 'completely safe') - mainly due to time/committment, but also because I treat EVE as a PvP-business game, given that in EVE you cannot die it's just business, and Low/Null just wasn't good business.

Then I remember the time before freighters and why they were introduced - to carry station eggs.

No new pilot in EVE should be piloting freighters, because they are relatively expensive. By the time they can fly them and, effectively, 'exploit' (in the sense of use) all that space, then will have lots of money. Why? Because they need to be able to afford to lose it.

Why has CODE come into being? Because people in NPC corps can remain almost completely safe, no matter how they behave (many of them badly enough that I would like some method of blowing them up myself and I'm such a peaceable chap!Shocked).

CODE probably also build freighters.Big smile It's just good business.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Julie Oppenheimer
COX INDUSTRIES
#967 - 2014-11-13 16:41:46 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
Julie Oppenheimer wrote:
Just throwing this out there: allow it to fit the Target Spectrum Breaker (and maybe remove a little tank).


The problem with that as a strategy is that the ship is designed for high sec. In high sec, You're either stuck not using it due to your safety being on, or you instantly destroy your sec status AND get concorded after firing it off on a crowded gate.


As far as I am aware, the Target Spectrum Breaker doesn't cause any sort of suspect or criminal flags. If this was changed with the new Crimewatch mechanics, I'd like to know.
Bertucio
Chandra Labs
#968 - 2014-11-13 16:44:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertucio
Marcus Tedric wrote:
Bertucio wrote:
[

Perhaps a better question to ask is what is the intent of hi-sec? To allow the Risk vs Reward design concept in Eve to be abrogated by a group of cheap destroyers taking down a very expensive freighter hull?


Speaking as someone who has spent most of his career in High Sec (where 'high' I have always understood to mean, firstly, 'higher' and 'safer' and not 'completely safe') - mainly due to time/committment, but also because I treat EVE as a PvP-business game, given that in EVE you cannot die it's just business, and Low/Null just wasn't good business.

Then I remember the time before freighters and why they were introduced - to carry station eggs.

No new pilot in EVE should be piloting freighters, because they are relatively expensive. By the time they can fly them and, effectively, 'exploit' (in the sense of use) all that space, then will have lots of money. Why? Because they need to be able to afford to lose it.

Why has CODE come into being? Because people in NPC corps can remain almost completely safe, no matter how they behave (many of them badly enough that I would like some method of blowing them up myself and I'm such a peaceable chap!Shocked).

CODE probably also build freighters.Big smile It's just good business.


tbh I have no idea what CODE is - but I've been away from the game for a year. But apparently it appears it's a group of players in EVE that is on a mission to make hi-sec a less safe place. Which honestly, is really nothing new in Eve. We used to have the yearly "Hulkageddons" etc. that cost the denigrated "carebears" quite a bit of time and ISK.

But you're right - a new player in a freighter is almost an oxymoron. If you're going to fly something that big and expensive, you ought to google a bit and find out what is a good fit etc. On the other hand, it still doesn't seem to equate to me that 250mil in destroyers can take down a 1.4bil freighter in hi-sec. And the Bowhead, which is going to be relatively expensive as well - will also be susceptible to an unfair Risk vs. Reward equation.

The Bowhead is going to be a big target for the current set of gankers and "CODE" - whoever these guys are. It also is going to be playing a specific hauling role in the game - that has been much requested by Eve players for many years. It just seems a bit ridiculous to me to release it and have it so easily susceptible to being ganked by cheap dessies. And look - that's what is going on - I see it nearly every day in Uedama which IS a choke point between Dodixie and Jita.
Pokket Sez
Danneskjold Repossessions.
#969 - 2014-11-13 16:57:30 UTC
FYI - So last night I witness a freighter gang bang and the poor fella lost 1b+freighter by 8 Battlecruisers and 1 destroyer (WTF1). I had to pickup something 5 systems away and on the way back some 15 minutes later the wreck was still there, untouched (WTF2), guarded by a single harpy (WTF3).

Some things just don't make sense ... Why leave it there? **** & Giggles? Yes, ****&Giggles 1:Freighter 0 (not that he can done anything different or prevent it)

Same night 1j away from that system I spotted a Machariel sitting on the gate at 0 - yes that is right, he proceed bumping the first freighter he saw, another poor fella pilot away from the gate and I stood there watching them ... (and I was like "Thank God, I fly a cheapy hauler)

Why doing it? **** & Giggles? Yes, Yes, ****&Giggles 2:Freighter 0 (not that he can done anything different or prevent it)

Moral of the story: Don't buy or fly Freighters or Orca, Bowhead or Whales of any kind.
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#970 - 2014-11-13 16:58:33 UTC
Bertucio wrote:
................... - but I've been away from the game for a year. ................. an unfair Risk vs. Reward equation. ........................ It just seems a bit ridiculous to me to release it and have it so easily susceptible to being ganked by cheap dessies. And look - that's what is going on - I see it nearly every day in Uedama which IS a choke point between Dodixie and Jita.


I've been away for 2.5 years - and yes, I remember the 'Hulkageddons'.

I too still want to travel to Jita on occasion. Nothing has changed for the gankers actually, but Freighters got Low Slots and Orca's got TB rigs and DSTs got large Fleet Hangers, and mining ships got tanks - so I would argue that EVE has actually gotten harder for gankers.

So I will simply note that, if you don't want to take the risk of using a freighter, then don't.

But I will also note that for there to actually be any reward worth having then there must have been loss/risk somewhere. It's only fair that if you want to take advantage of the potential reward then you have to take some risk too.

It is, indeed, completely possible to wish to still enjoy EVE without, almost, engaging in any form of PvP - just fly missions (like so many other MMOs, that's all 'going after mobs' is). But then you won't really be playing EVE.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Bertucio
Chandra Labs
#971 - 2014-11-13 17:12:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertucio
Marcus Tedric wrote:
Bertucio wrote:
................... - but I've been away from the game for a year. ................. an unfair Risk vs. Reward equation. ........................ It just seems a bit ridiculous to me to release it and have it so easily susceptible to being ganked by cheap dessies. And look - that's what is going on - I see it nearly every day in Uedama which IS a choke point between Dodixie and Jita.


I've been away for 2.5 years - and yes, I remember the 'Hulkageddons'.

I too still want to travel to Jita on occasion. Nothing has changed for the gankers actually, but Freighters got Low Slots and Orca's got TB rigs and DSTs got large Fleet Hangers, and mining ships got tanks - so I would argue that EVE has actually gotten harder for gankers.

So I will simply note that, if you don't want to take the risk of using a freighter, then don't.

But I will also note that for there to actually be any reward worth having then there must have been loss/risk somewhere. It's only fair that if you want to take advantage of the potential reward then you have to take some risk too.

It is, indeed, completely possible to wish to still enjoy EVE without, almost, engaging in any form of PvP - just fly missions (like so many other MMOs, that's all 'going after mobs' is). But then you won't really be playing EVE.


The destroyers have also been "beefed" up. And there has never been a tugboat. Although many things in Eve have remained the same, many things have changed. And that IMO is a good thing.

I think the tugboat will be very popular - as long as it isn't easily gankable in hi-sec. And that is a good thing too. And flying missions - lots of Eve players do it for many reasons, maybe as a way to make an income to pay for their PvP alt activity in faction warfare. Maybe to get the unique Blueprints offered in the loyalty stores. Maybe to brush up on your Eve playing activity if you've been away for a few years. heh. But in any case, I think missioning is a part of EVE and I wouldn't discount it altogether. I agree PvP is more interesting and exciting (if it's balanced ... I flew through Minnie/Amarr faction space a few days ago and boy have the Amarr taken over there) and what makes Eve a grand MMO is the PvP play. But I think it is also a mistake to restrict EVE and force everyone to live in virtual space as a PvP'r - especially for players new to the game who might want to enjoy the safety of hi-sec and be able to move their ships around in a tugboat that isn't easily susceptible to a large alliance that has nothing better to do (apparently) then to gank defenseless ships in hi-sec.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#972 - 2014-11-13 17:20:11 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
War Kitten wrote:


You're still being argumentative - the question was about using taloses, not why. Your nitpick about catalysts is obvious - of course you use the cheapest alternative if you have the manpower. If you don't, you scale up. No one has tried to hide that or played dumb about it, which is more or less what you need to be doing to be disingenuous.

Or to quote Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means."



Oh, if the answer was so obvious and he had all of the information at his disposal, why was he asking the question in the first place? Information is power and giving him a more complete picture is not being argumentative for the sake of it.


Fair enough - maybe he didn't know that Catalysts were cheaper and less dps than a Talos. I hope CSM representatives have at least that much knowledge of the game though.

But I wasn't referring to that argument; you were still being argumentative about whether or not you were correct in calling Baltec disingenuous and not backing down from that stance, despite the pettiness of it.

And for whatever its worth, and to get the discussion back on track - I like your idea of 100% drop from the SMB.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#973 - 2014-11-13 17:20:22 UTC
Bertucio wrote:
.......................- especially for players new to the game who might want to enjoy the safety of hi-sec and be able to move their ships around in a tugboat that isn't easily susceptible to a large alliance that has nothing better to do (apparently) then to gank defenseless ships in hi-sec.


The underlining is mine.

New(er) players will not be flying Bowheads.


Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Bertucio
Chandra Labs
#974 - 2014-11-13 17:28:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertucio
Marcus Tedric wrote:
Bertucio wrote:
.......................- especially for players new to the game who might want to enjoy the safety of hi-sec and be able to move their ships around in a tugboat that isn't easily susceptible to a large alliance that has nothing better to do (apparently) then to gank defenseless ships in hi-sec.


The underlining is mine.

New(er) players will not be flying Bowheads.




You seem quite sure of yourself. Actually any new player joining a missioning / incursion corp, probably will be.

But again - you're sort of implying indirectly here that it's the "victims" fault that they are getting ganked in hi-sec. That I also disagree with. To make the assumption that all ships and freighters that have been ganked in Uedama have been only players who don't know how to fly a freighter correctly etc. is a weak argument at best IMO.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#975 - 2014-11-13 17:39:16 UTC
For those of you that think hisec should be safe, ponder this...

CCP recently revamped how the crimewatch criminal flagging system works. Can flipping disappeared, and hisec combat in general took a pretty big nerf with the new suspect flag making criminals vulnerable to all. If you commit a crime in hisec, everyone can shoot at you now - not just the person you stole from.

If, as you say, hisec was intended to be safe, why would CCP have gone to the trouble to specifically leave in the possibility of criminal flagging and criminal activity in hisec? Crimewatch is a huge drain on CPU resources - it would be much more efficient to just make hisec safe and pvp-free and remove all that extra code (I'm not digging up the source for that, but it's been mentioned in a few dev replies that hardware performs better in large nullsec battles than in lowsec simply because crimewatch doesn't have to run in nullsec).

So with all that understanding, why would you think hisec was intended to be pvp-free?

Eve is not like other MMOs where you have happy sunshine pve land, safe from all aggression. That's not ever been the intention or inspiration of Eve Online. Ultima Online was was one of the inspirations - a game where criminal activity and pvp is possible pretty much anywhere in the game.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#976 - 2014-11-13 17:42:45 UTC
Bertucio wrote:


But again - you're sort of implying indirectly here that it's the "victims" fault that they are getting ganked in hi-sec. That I also disagree with. To make the assumption that all ships and freighters that have been ganked in Uedama have been only players who don't know how to fly a freighter correctly etc. is a weak argument at best IMO.


That is a morality question between players. Eve is a game of interaction between players.

The rules of the game don't dictate morality - that is up to the players. The rules of the game just need to give everyone enough tools to try and accomplish what they want to do.

It *is* up to the player to use the tools at his disposal.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Warr Akini
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#977 - 2014-11-13 17:53:51 UTC
Marcus Tedric wrote:
Whilst it's not 100%-related to the information about the ship itself.....

Is it worth laying the 'gankiness' of it aside completely? For I believe I am right in saying that it is all but impossible to make a ship ungankable?

- Get gank fleet together
- bump ship off gate
- shoot ship, cause lots of damage
- continue to bump ship away
- wait out timer, get in new ship
- return to item 3 and continue loop until killed

Is that wrong?

However, curiously, given the Bowhead's attributes - if fitted with a Large (perhaps even Capital - also not yet confirmed by CCP) Hull Repairer - how much hull could be repaired in between gank-shoots? And/or, potentially, shield/armour equivalents.


There are oh so very many things that can go wrong when you have 15 minutes + travel time of not being able to gank a guy between waves, much less more than two waves. Mainly logistics tend to show up to ruin your fun. It's also very stressful and usually not worth your time/effort.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#978 - 2014-11-13 17:55:18 UTC
What gets lost in the "should high sec be safe or not" side discussion is that the question is what, exactly, this ship is for, and who it's aimed at. Given the huge price spread between, say, an EVE Uni fit vanilla Dominix and a T2-rigged Nightmare, the spread of viable[1] tanking numbers for the ship is quite large. If the design goal is to carry fully-fitted incursion ships as they currently exist, that pushes the tank number up; if the design goal is to carry 3 T1 hulls and the assumption is that of course you'll take any shiny fittings separately in a fast cloaky ship, then the tanking number goes down--but so does the difference between the Bowhead and an ordinary freighter.

My #1 complaint with the ship so far is that it preserves the miserable ratio between ORE ships and their skills. Do we really need another one-ship skill?

[1] by which I mean, between "useless tin can" and "ungankable brick."

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#979 - 2014-11-13 18:08:12 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
This is basically what bulk heads do for freighters, they give you more tank at a penalty of your primary stat: cargo hold.


It's not their use on freighters that concerns me, it's ships whose primary cargo hold is of little importance such as combat ships (affects how many cap charges you can carry, that's all), deep space transports (fleet bay is unaffected), orcas (fleet bay, smb, ore bay) and now the bowhead. There is no tradeoff there at all, it's just free tank.
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#980 - 2014-11-13 18:23:52 UTC
Bertucio wrote:
................
You seem quite sure of yourself. Actually any new player joining a missioning / incursion corp, probably will be.


Well, reasonably confident - a player who starts in a frigate and takes the time to learn a bit about EVE (which is only sensible) will have spent some considerable time doing that missioning (whether or not he joins with others straightaway) and saving up for ships. By the time he might need/want a Bowhead that means he should have earned at least 3b. That, I believe, takes him beyond the definition of 'new'.

Bertucio wrote:
................But again - you're sort of implying indirectly here that it's the "victims" fault that they are getting ganked in hi-sec. That I also disagree with. To make the assumption that all ships and freighters that have been ganked in Uedama have been only players who don't know how to fly a freighter correctly etc. is a weak argument at best IMO.


Hmmm, 'fault' - perhaps, but not exactly. Nor any comment on whether they 'know' how to fly a freighter. But by choosing to fly a freighter (unless they themselves are doing it for 'fun') they, I am assuming, have done it to 'profit' by it. By choosing to enter EVE's wider market, they are choosing to engage with other players - in other words, PvP.

PvP is not a narrow 'shooting stuff' definition/phrase. It is about engaging with other players in an MMO and competing with them.

They are flying a freighter for a reason (caveat as noted) - that reason is choosing PvP.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium