EVE General Discussion

Right, CCP could do things like removing drone poo and... CCP has actually made mining more valuable in Inferno. Prices have already started to increase.

Hmm. Sure.

Have your Rorq as wing leader and your Vulture as squad leader or vice versa.

I have to agree. It's counter-intuitive to have a large, industrial purpose vessel that's flimsy. The structural requirement alone, to keep ships from bursting at the seams with a huge load of ore, seem to be overlooked here. Here's a case: Park an M1 Abrams on a train track and hit it with a diesel locomotive doing 60mph. Who do you think would win, the tank? Uh huh. Better yet, put a train of coal cars behind the loco. EVE's metrics on this just doesn't make sense.

Conversely, the ship of choice for suicide ganks, the destroyer, is by nature a light, maneuverable and fast ship. Destroyers, traditionally, were intended to take out submarines. Again. It's incongruous.

I'm not saying make mining and industrial vessels indestructable, but damn near to it just for them to do the job they're intended to perform, without regard to tanking an attacker. Sure, line up enough dessies and have that fabulous Alpha strike possible, but make it proportionate. Easy enough to calculate with a COMPUTER. Sum total of dessie loss, w/fittings (roughly) that can alpha a hulk would cost the price of a hulk to replace. If that's twenty, then that's twenty.

LOPSIDED - I think a two year old can tell if something is LOPSIDED. Aren't EVE devs supposed to be edjumicated?

Right.

I suppose my idea is aimed toward lower-skilled players, cheap ships, and directed defense (targeting the friendly). This mechanism would work external to fleet mechanics.

You know who would end up crying because of such a mechanic?

Not us.

…except that this isn't what's happening. Instead, take that train and shoot it with a T72 tank. Note how the train is now a pile of smouldering rubble. Now, shoot the M1 with the same tank, and note that the maintenance crew will be pretty angry about having to spend overtime to buff out that dent.

…and these days, they traditionally carry various forms of long-range missiles, which can quite easily take out mobile resource extraction vessels such as, say, an oil rig.

The problem is that it would immediately be co-opted by those higher-skilled (and larger-numbered) fleets and would have to be balanced with those in mind, making it about as effective as the current crop of command and logistics ships.

Relevant.

Your arguement is invalid given the prevalence of real-world non-military designs susceptible to attack and damage that have not "evolved". During WW2 the primary cargo transport ship, the Liberty linked above, barely changed from first design to the final hull ever built. Non-military ships like these depend on actual military forces to protect them. No oil tanker or cargo ship existing today could so easily strap on tons of extra armour and other defenses like the Hulk currently can by throwing on Invulns, Shield Extenders and defensive Rigs. They are 100% mining ships. Want a quasi-military, quasi-mining ship? Throw 8 mining lasers on a Tier3 Battleship and call it a day.

Agreed, which is why I have a few posts on how to counter and scale the effectiveness of such a ship or module. I'd much appreciate it if you can poke holes in the notion on that thread. It would help refine the idea if it really is worthwhile.

I do like stoicfaux's idea of deputation. *checks to see if character name Barney Fife is taken*

Huh, I had a better proposal.... alllow bounty hunters to track down their targets in a way that gave a meaning to "being wanted"

Sahmelessly plugging it:

My "EVE Retaliation" proposal

Exceprt: