These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

So, Barge Info?

Author
Solecist Project
#121 - 2016-08-18 09:29:14 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
So why do you oppose giving miners more options?
Why do you oppose a potential shift away from miners being merely victims?


Ignoring your later rant and projection on to me.

It is a mining ship not a flexible combat ship that can be adjusted to fight with different abilities be it a focus on speed, tank or greater damage. The mining ship is mining that is its job, the biggest risk it has is being blown up by people in Destroyers in a DPS race against CONCORD, so that is what is needed for this ship class. Simply put you can fit a Skiff for yield and usability in terms of mining, but it can then be ganked.

But the bigger pictures is taht the three types of mining ships ahve different roles which is fine, many people who mine believe taht the other two mining classes are too weak in terms of tank.

Gankers because they want easy kills want to nerf the Skiff class.

okay, but what are the reasons you oppose a change towards more flexibility?
"The way it is now" is no reason against change and makes you look like you have an agenda you aren't willing to expose.
That's an impression you always leave behind, btw, but that's irrelevant now anyway.

Maybe i should rephrase the question:

What negative long term consequences do you foresee with the changes baltec1 proposes?
And a simple "more ganking" isn't a proper response to such a question.

Thanks!

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#122 - 2016-08-18 09:40:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Elmund Egivand wrote:

Throw enough Catalysts at them and the Skiff/Procurer will still die. Seriously, if you can gank a freighter, ganking a Procurer/Skiff should be easier, though I question the financial sense of ganking these ships. They have the tank of battlecruisers (Procurer) and battleships (Skiff), meaning that ganking them is still very much doable especially for those guys who gank Freighters daily at Jita 4-4. hose drones are great at killing a destroyer or two but that's just about it.

I don't see what the problem is.


These ships don't just get used in highsec.

You are in null, you have a mining fleet of say, hulks macks and skiffs. A small gang hit you and bubbles your fleet. What happens? You die. The hulks and macks first with the skiffs last only because they have a monster base tank. Big tank means nothing outside of highsec.

Now under my plan you have a mixed fleet, the hulks are the dedicated miners, the macks are providing logi support and the skiffs are offering offensive support to fight off the attackers. Suddenly the mining fleet is not defenseless vs a small gang.

Every time you tell miners to have a a few combat ships guard them they say nobody is going to be willing to sit around all day staring at space. Every time you tell them to have logi with them they say nobody is willing to do that with no reward. Under the plan I gave you have those things in the very ships are are mining with. You have options, all the barges have a useful role to play in a mining fleet, there is no single "best" ship like today as they are all on an even playing field in terms of tank and they are balanced against the other ships out there.

One of the biggest complains from everyone is that mining is boring. Well, here is a plan to make mining less boring by giving you the ability to fight back. Or would you rather just dock up and not play because barges are useless at defending themselves?


Doesn't that mean that the Hulk and Coveter need beefing up a bit which is what we keep saying. Roll

And doing that in hisec is a non-starter for damn obvious reasons, but perhaps not for you.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#123 - 2016-08-18 09:45:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Solecist Project wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
So why do you oppose giving miners more options?
Why do you oppose a potential shift away from miners being merely victims?


Ignoring your later rant and projection on to me.

It is a mining ship not a flexible combat ship that can be adjusted to fight with different abilities be it a focus on speed, tank or greater damage. The mining ship is mining that is its job, the biggest risk it has is being blown up by people in Destroyers in a DPS race against CONCORD, so that is what is needed for this ship class. Simply put you can fit a Skiff for yield and usability in terms of mining, but it can then be ganked.

But the bigger pictures is taht the three types of mining ships ahve different roles which is fine, many people who mine believe taht the other two mining classes are too weak in terms of tank.

Gankers because they want easy kills want to nerf the Skiff class.

okay, but what are the reasons you oppose a change towards more flexibility?
"The way it is now" is no reason against change and makes you look like you have an agenda you aren't willing to expose.
That's an impression you always leave behind, btw, but that's irrelevant now anyway.

Maybe i should rephrase the question:

What negative long term consequences do you foresee with the changes baltec1 proposes?
And a simple "more ganking" isn't a proper response to such a question.

Thanks!


That flexibility should be applied to the Hulk and Coveter which are the mining ships which are supposed to be used in big mining fleets in 0.0 in protected 0.0 space. CCP have done something to the Rorqual that is interesting but those mining ships need more options, they started by giving another low slot to the Hulk, perhaps that needs a drone offensive bonus now.

It is fine to give a proper balance to the Hulk and coveter based on baltec1's suggestion.

The Skiff and Procurer are fine while the added yield for the Restriever and Mackinaw are worthwhile choices even if their tank is too light.

So if those changes are made to the Hulk and Coveter which are 0.0 mining fleet ships fine, no issue from me and if people want to try that in hisecwith the Hulk and Coveter then fine too.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#124 - 2016-08-18 09:50:30 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


Doesn't that mean that the Hulk and Coveter need beefing up a bit which is what we keep saying. Roll


They would be beefed up via the better fitting options you get by adding more slots, cpu and powergrid.
Dracvlad wrote:

And doing that in hisec is a non-starter for damn obvious reasons, but perhaps not for you.


Do tell.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#125 - 2016-08-18 09:59:19 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


Doesn't that mean that the Hulk and Coveter need beefing up a bit which is what we keep saying. Roll


They would be beefed up via the better fitting options you get by adding more slots, cpu and powergrid.
Dracvlad wrote:

And doing that in hisec is a non-starter for damn obvious reasons, but perhaps not for you.


Do tell.


Well I would support that change for the Hulk and Coveter.

You know the reasons..., you of all people should know why...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Elmund Egivand
Sebestacny Circle
#126 - 2016-08-18 09:59:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Elmund Egivand
baltec1 wrote:
Elmund Egivand wrote:

Throw enough Catalysts at them and the Skiff/Procurer will still die. Seriously, if you can gank a freighter, ganking a Procurer/Skiff should be easier, though I question the financial sense of ganking these ships. They have the tank of battlecruisers (Procurer) and battleships (Skiff), meaning that ganking them is still very much doable especially for those guys who gank Freighters daily at Jita 4-4. hose drones are great at killing a destroyer or two but that's just about it.

I don't see what the problem is.


These ships don't just get used in highsec.

You are in null, you have a mining fleet of say, hulks macks and skiffs. A small gang hit you and bubbles your fleet. What happens? You die. The hulks and macks first with the skiffs last only because they have a monster base tank. Big tank means nothing outside of highsec.

Now under my plan you have a mixed fleet, the hulks are the dedicated miners, the macks are providing logi support and the skiffs are offering offensive support to fight off the attackers. Suddenly the mining fleet is not defenseless vs a small gang.

Every time you tell miners to have a a few combat ships guard them they say nobody is going to be willing to sit around all day staring at space. Every time you tell them to have logi with them they say nobody is willing to do that with no reward. Under the plan I gave you have those things in the very ships are are mining with. You have options, all the barges have a useful role to play in a mining fleet, there is no single "best" ship like today as they are all on an even playing field in terms of tank and they are balanced against the other ships out there.

One of the biggest complains from everyone is that mining is boring. Well, here is a plan to make mining less boring by giving you the ability to fight back. Or would you rather just dock up and not play because barges are useless at defending themselves?


Mate, if you are mining in nullsec WITHOUT a Rorqual with a hangar bay full of combat ships and combat boosters along with mining boosters for support (plus backup no further than one jump away), I am going to seriously question your intelligence. In fact, why are you even in nullsec without combat skills of some description to make good use of the ships you will be reshipping into from the Rorqual to take on attackers?

A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#127 - 2016-08-18 10:01:23 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


You know the reasons..., you of all people should know why...


Nope I want to know what you mean by this.
Solecist Project
#128 - 2016-08-18 10:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Dracvlad wrote:


That flexibility should be applied to the Hulk and Coveter which are the mining ships which are supposed to be used in big mining fleets in 0.0 in protected 0.0 space. CCP have done something to the Rorqual that is interesting but those mining ships need more options, they started by giving another low slot to the Hulk, perhaps that needs a drone offensive bonus now.

It is fine to give a proper balance to the Hulk and coveter based on baltec1's suggestion.

The Skiff and Procurer are fine while the added yield for the Restriever and Mackinaw are worthwhile choices even if their tank is too light.

So if those changes are made to the Hulk and Coveter which are 0.0 mining fleet ships fine, no issue from me and if people want to try that in hisecwith the Hulk and Coveter then fine too.

i asked for possible negative long term consequences and get this non-answer as response.

And there no "supposed space" for ships, unless mechanically restricted.
Your "supposed to be used in ... 0.0" isn't accurate and has nothing to do with reality.

Do you understand that you expose a narrow minded view of how things work?

Anyhow: negative long term consequences, please.
I can write down both sides of the medal, so why can't you write down even one side?

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#129 - 2016-08-18 10:04:42 UTC
Elmund Egivand wrote:


Mate, if you are mining in nullsec WITHOUT a Rorqual with a hangar bay full of combat ships and combat boosters along with mining boosters for support (plus backup no further than one jump away), I am going to seriously question your intelligence. In fact, why are you even in nullsec without combat skills of some description to make good use of the ships you will be reshipping into from the Rorqual to take on attackers?


What use are those ship in the hold if you are already under attack? Why should barges be completely helpless? Miners want more engaging gameplay, they want to be seen as more than prey. Lets give them that gameplay and ability to protect themselves. Lets make mining a bit more interesting.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#130 - 2016-08-18 10:14:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Solecist Project wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


That flexibility should be applied to the Hulk and Coveter which are the mining ships which are supposed to be used in big mining fleets in 0.0 in protected 0.0 space. CCP have done something to the Rorqual that is interesting but those mining ships need more options, they started by giving another low slot to the Hulk, perhaps that needs a drone offensive bonus now.

It is fine to give a proper balance to the Hulk and coveter based on baltec1's suggestion.

The Skiff and Procurer are fine while the added yield for the Restriever and Mackinaw are worthwhile choices even if their tank is too light.

So if those changes are made to the Hulk and Coveter which are 0.0 mining fleet ships fine, no issue from me and if people want to try that in hisecwith the Hulk and Coveter then fine too.

i asked for possible negative long term consequences and get this non-answer as response.

And there no "supposed space" for ships, unless mechanically restricted.
Your "supposed to be used in ... 0.0" isn't accurate and has nothing to do with reality.

Do you understand that you expose a narrow minded view of how things work?

Anyhow: negative long term consequences, please.
I can write down both sides of the medal, so why can't you write down even one side?


Well the Hulk and Coveter were defined as CCP as fleet mining ships, while the skiff and procurer are solo mining ships with less yield and greater tank while the Mac and Retreiver are solo mining ships with more yield and greater capacity. So its pretty basic stuff.

Negative long term consequence, what? That is an odd statement / question.

The ships are balanced for their roles, simple stuff really.

If a 0.0 player is asking for more flexible fleet ships then why not, the Hulk and Coveter could be adjusted for that.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#131 - 2016-08-18 10:16:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


You know the reasons..., you of all people should know why...


Nope I want to know what you mean by this.


Obvious is still obvious...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#132 - 2016-08-18 10:18:03 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


Obvious is still obvious...


Clearly you have nothing.
Solecist Project
#133 - 2016-08-18 10:20:14 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Well the Hulk and Coveter were defined as CCP as fleet mining ships, while the skiff and procurer are solo mining ships with less yield and greater tank while the Mac and Retreiver are solo mining ships with more yield and greater capacity. So its pretty basic stuff.

Negative long term consequence, what? That is an odd statement / question.

The ships are balanced for their roles, simple stuff really.

If a 0.0 player is asking for more flexible fleet ships then why not, the Hulk and Coveter could be adjusted for that.

Fleet mining, yes. Not meant purely for 0.0, as you wrongly "supposed".

Negative long term consequences for miners if baltec1's idea came to life.

And now it looks like you're struggling... but anyway, now you know, so please provide.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#134 - 2016-08-18 10:27:09 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Well the Hulk and Coveter were defined as CCP as fleet mining ships, while the skiff and procurer are solo mining ships with less yield and greater tank while the Mac and Retreiver are solo mining ships with more yield and greater capacity. So its pretty basic stuff.

Negative long term consequence, what? That is an odd statement / question.

The ships are balanced for their roles, simple stuff really.

If a 0.0 player is asking for more flexible fleet ships then why not, the Hulk and Coveter could be adjusted for that.

Fleet mining, yes. Not meant purely for 0.0, as you wrongly "supposed".

Negative long term consequences for miners if baltec1's idea came to life.

And now it looks like you're struggling... but anyway, now you know, so please provide.


There is nothing negative in changing the Hulk and Coveter to better meet their role as fleet mining ships, there is no struggle there, their intended role is fleet mining in 0.0, its not my fault that they both have the tank of a wet paper bag.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#135 - 2016-08-18 10:33:33 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Elmund Egivand wrote:


Mate, if you are mining in nullsec WITHOUT a Rorqual with a hangar bay full of combat ships and combat boosters along with mining boosters for support (plus backup no further than one jump away), I am going to seriously question your intelligence. In fact, why are you even in nullsec without combat skills of some description to make good use of the ships you will be reshipping into from the Rorqual to take on attackers?


What use are those ship in the hold if you are already under attack? Why should barges be completely helpless? Miners want more engaging gameplay, they want to be seen as more than prey. Lets give them that gameplay and ability to protect themselves. Lets make mining a bit more interesting.


Let mining lasers do dmg to ships.... TADA things just got more interesting Lol

No Worries

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#136 - 2016-08-18 10:41:01 UTC
I unveil the combat mining ship, called the Grinder, based on the hull of the Noctis it is configured to be able to use the Medium MJD and has significant drone capabilities with superior stand off abilities and ability to run heavy neuts. Sounds good....

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
Transgress
#137 - 2016-08-18 10:55:51 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
I unveil the combat mining ship, called the Grinder, based on the hull of the Noctis it is configured to be able to use the Medium MJD and has significant drone capabilities with superior stand off abilities and ability to run heavy neuts. Sounds good....

something like this?
[Eos, err, ima barge i swear]
Armor Explosive Hardener II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Medium Armor Repairer II
Medium Ancillary Armor Repairer,Nanite Repair Paste

50MN Microwarpdrive II
Medium Capacitor Booster II,Navy Cap Booster 400
Medium Capacitor Booster II,Navy Cap Booster 400
Medium Micro Jump Drive

Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II

Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II

Ogre II x10
Hammerhead II x5
Vespa EC-600 x5
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#138 - 2016-08-18 11:02:27 UTC
ChromeStriker wrote:


Let mining lasers do dmg to ships.... TADA things just got more interesting Lol


Someone said the other night that mining lasers should do something like 10 damage. Not enough to be useful but just enough to get a fantastic killmail on something AFK for a whileTwisted
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#139 - 2016-08-18 11:10:27 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I unveil the combat mining ship, called the Grinder, based on the hull of the Noctis it is configured to be able to use the Medium MJD and has significant drone capabilities with superior stand off abilities and ability to run heavy neuts. Sounds good....

something like this?
[Eos, err, ima barge i swear]
Armor Explosive Hardener II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Medium Armor Repairer II
Medium Ancillary Armor Repairer,Nanite Repair Paste

50MN Microwarpdrive II
Medium Capacitor Booster II,Navy Cap Booster 400
Medium Capacitor Booster II,Navy Cap Booster 400
Medium Micro Jump Drive

Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Modulated Strip Miner II,Veldspar Mining Crystal II

Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II

Ogre II x10
Hammerhead II x5
Vespa EC-600 x5


I came over all light headed just looking at that beauty... Big smile

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#140 - 2016-08-18 11:11:35 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
ChromeStriker wrote:


Let mining lasers do dmg to ships.... TADA things just got more interesting Lol


Someone said the other night that mining lasers should do something like 10 damage. Not enough to be useful but just enough to get a fantastic killmail on something AFK for a whileTwisted


... those lasers have a really long cycle time and are fireing constantly... could be an iteresting mechanic of effectivly zero cycle time weapon... i mean it still wouldnt do much dmg but 10 barges could push off an interloper quite well Roll

No Worries