Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Yes, it's achieved by using the right ship for the job, tanking it properly and not putting stupid amounts of cargo in it.

If 10 people are not hard to come by then gather a group of 10 miners and defend yourselves.

Your Mack had 41K EHP and mines 15.67 m3/s

This Skiff has 99K EHP and mines 18.62 m3/s, sure you'll have to shuttle ore more often but if you have a problem with gankers, there is already a solution. Not only is it much stronger, it is much faster, blasters are effective for about 5km, you can easily get out of range and then release your drones to get your revenge.

[Skiff, Don't gank me!]
Damage Control II
Mining Laser Upgrade II
Mining Laser Upgrade II

Medium Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Survey Scanner II

Modulated Strip Miner II, Hedbergite Mining Crystal I

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


Hammerhead II x5

This low slot module is commonly eschewed by pilots in favor of fitting a 'cargo extender' or 'mining laser upgrade'.

He had one fit

I admire the brazen way the OP asked for Concord protection to be extended to lowsec, though.

Dammit, Jim, I'm a newbie-protector, not a rational forum poster!

-1 not liking a lot of the OP, but I do understand the reasons why these topics keep coming up.

Gankers are what they are.

Some are nice people that choose to show their less controlled side in a game and this is definitely not a bad thing.

Others are, well we will not go down that path as I think most of us have had an experience with that type of player, the ones that virtually all of us would agree the game is better off without.

In my mind the current state of ganking needs to be looked at by CCP in a serious way, look at how it affects ALL of the players and the game as a whole and then change those things they think need to be changed.

NO I am not calling for a nerf.
NO I am not saying that a nerf is not needed.
All I am saying is that it is time for CCP to look at this and make changes as they see fit nothing more and nothing less.
And yes if CCP decides to make ganking easier then so be it, I will learn to deal with that as I have had to learn to deal with changes in the past.

Final thought. I am given cause to wonder as we often are about what they future holds for all of us.

For mining barges, I think it more a matter of where they are than how they are built. We need better belts, plain and simple. The ones we have aren't up to the task of contemporary engagement mechanics. It's all much too casual, and the logistics are too easy.

Industrials are a little different, since they are pretty much forced to go through chokepoints to do anything related to their roles. Maybe more of them should have specialized cyno capabilities. It's not any more game breaking than cloaky blops ships.

It would help to make the collision bubbles on ships a bit smaller. That would help in battles as well. I hate when I try to fly my frigate into a cluster of battleships or dreads and bounce all over the place like a pinball. That's where a frigate is supposed to be! It would also making aiming at a moving target much harder. Bumping has always demonstrated a poor representation of the principle of conservation of mass and conservation of kinetic energy. I have nothing to say about that which hasn't been said already more thoroughly by more learned persons elsewhere.

My DST is tanked to the gills with something ridiculous like 170k ehp and 500hp/s peak regen , however, it can still be burned down by a bumper and a couple of continually replaced gank ships, provided I don't have an escort of course, or perhaps even with if they are sufficiently numerous. I'm still trying to figure out how to phrase that request to any corp mate. Concord spawn in places like Niarja and Uedamage mainly seem to serve to decloak all those pesky industrials plaguing the region. In fact, I'd prefer it if my DST got nerfed. Or more specifically, that core defense field extender rigs or trimark rigs had appropriate stacking penalties. I'd actually think about using the active repper bonuses if that were the case. That would increase vulnerability to tornado fleets, but lessen it to solo actors.

I think I would like to see destroyer and battlecruiser sized industrial ships with similar EHP, build costs, and ship stats like mass and agility. Currently we have ships like the nereus or the wreathe which can be modestly tanked, although still only 1-3 catalysts worth of damage in 0.5 system. Then we have the iteron Vs and the mammoths which appear to have no other purpose other than to fool an inexperienced player into being a pinata for everyone else's amusement. I don't think there is any cargo cheap enough to justify not shooting one of these ships, whether fully loaded or fit with a tank that would be meagre by frigate standards. Perhaps NPC cargo mission loot.

Destroyer sized industrials could be nimble, moving quickly under cloak and carrying 1-2k m3 of loot. They could cost about what T1 indies cost today. Their ship model volumes could be somewhere between destroyer and cruiser sized. BC sized industrials could cost about what battlecruisers cost, could tank about as well as a battlecruiser, and have volumes similar to what we have on today's industrials, perhaps a smidge larger. Perhaps the ratios between them could be similar to those between jump freighters and freighters. This isn't too dissimilar from the current differentiation of blockade runners and deep space transports.

Just one more nerf and it will be balanced.

Oh and reported.

Closed.