These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

A little detail that bothers me about Pirate ships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy
Caldari State
#21 - 2014-06-18 17:23:54 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:


Are 90% strength webs any more useful in PvE than 60% webs? Not really, rats are slow in general.


Incorrect, it makes a huge difference to incursioners and to your DPS.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#22 - 2014-06-18 17:25:46 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
ShahFluffers wrote:
I do not see any mechanical or gameplay reason to ban penalize pirate ships from high-sec (lore or "personal aesthetic" is not reason enough).


It doesn't even really make sense in the lore. They're not "Pirate ships" in the sense that they're ships crewed by pirates, they're simply factionally customized ships that we refer to as "pirate" because the factions they are customized for are the pirate factions. This has nothing to do with the nature of use for any individual vessel.

Somali pirates use small fishing vessels for piracy. The coast guard doesn't **** a brick if you're spotted in the Gulf of Mexico in a small fishing boat.

I also don't become a conscript in the Amarrian Navy when I undock in a navy issue apocalypse.

It turns out that simply being called something doesn't magically confer any substantive meaning to an object.

The whole "idea" relies on a deliberately obtuse exploitation of a wholly imagined semantic ambiguity, coupled with a convenient and arbitrary redefinition of the lore in a laughably transparent attempt to cover up the reality of the situation, which is, "Grr, I don't like it."

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#23 - 2014-06-18 17:48:31 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Neuts are mentionned in my previous' post edit. I'm not 100% sure but I think you can use NOS on rats to regenerate some cap so it's a nich use.

90% webs are really usefull in Incursion for example. Guess in what PvE Vindi are mostly used?

Fewer drones is less management for everybody, no matter what content you deal with. The higher HP is useful in PvE to help against aggro switch too. The people bitching about the Guristas ship are only people who can't adapt to the new way the ship is to be used. They wanted to keep their long range sentry boat and it's not the most effective way to use it anymore.

The fact that EVE is a PvP game does not mean ships should be only used for PvP.

What is funny is you probably want to see them more in PvP because of the nice KM they generate. What you don't seem to understand is they will not be used for PvP too much as long as they provide KM like that because for every million ISK that goes poof in a KM, the victim has to get 1 million ISK back in some way to buy a new ship. If you don't have the mean to pay for it now, it won't change unless the price drop to a much lower level. It's the same for everybody. I mostly lose frigs, (logi one at that) because that's what I can roll with. Others people can welp caps. Different makes for different ship usage.



Exact opposite. I don't care about the killmail, and I'm usually the one who gets killed in a shiny faction ship anyways. Check the killboard if you find that hard to believe. It's not about affording more either. I have no problem affording the ships I want to fight in. Which, incidentally, aren't the pirate ships because my SP isn't oriented for them.

Most incursions happen in low and null. Vindi's still get used out there for incursions, but they're fit to deal with hostiles also. By this logic we should also ignore that Guardians function best in a PvP environment, because they're the armor logi of choice for high sec incursions.


No one said the game was strictly PvP. Income doesn't primarily come from PvP for most people, including me. However, the trend is clear with the exception of the SOE ships (and I see more stratios' used in PvP than most other pirate cruisers, to be honest, this is just a statement of most people's opinion) the pirate faction ships make some pretty bad-ass PvP ships and that's where they shine. The PvE side of them is kind of like an unintended consequence. You can't make every pirate ship great for PvP and useless for PvE for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean that we have to ignore their intended use simply out of preference. If that were the case I'd be petitioning that all pirate ships be changed to fit my gameplay preferences when this has absolutely nothing to do with my style of gameplay.

From my standpoint, this will change nothing but the scenery as I go about my business. From everyone else's standpoint, I think it'd improve the game, even for the high sec PvE players. If some way were found to mitigate the initial cost of flying a pirate ship for security missions they could increase their income enough to warrant the purchase of a pirate ship much earlier in their gameplay. They would only be impacted by long-term costs, which would be minimal in comparison to their income advantage over T1's and also act as a small motivation to move them into other ships and other styles of gameplay.

The crux of the problem is that for PvP players the cost to benefit ratio of pirate ships is pretty poor, whereas for PvE players the cost to benefit ratio is insanely good and there needs to be a change that brings those two considerations back into balance.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#24 - 2014-06-18 18:24:15 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
I do not see any mechanical or gameplay reason to ban penalize pirate ships from high-sec (lore or "personal aesthetic" is not reason enough).


It doesn't even really make sense in the lore. They're not "Pirate ships" in the sense that they're ships crewed by pirates, they're simply factionally customized ships that we refer to as "pirate" because the factions they are customized for are the pirate factions. This has nothing to do with the nature of use for any individual vessel.

Somali pirates use small fishing vessels for piracy. The coast guard doesn't **** a brick if you're spotted in the Gulf of Mexico in a small fishing boat.

I also don't become a conscript in the Amarrian Navy when I undock in a navy issue apocalypse.

It turns out that simply being called something doesn't magically confer any substantive meaning to an object.

The whole "idea" relies on a deliberately obtuse exploitation of a wholly imagined semantic ambiguity, coupled with a convenient and arbitrary redefinition of the lore in a laughably transparent attempt to cover up the reality of the situation, which is, "Grr, I don't like it."


Pretty sure this isn't a standard hull.

Some paint, a hammer, a drill and a little bit of good lighting and your Arbitrator could look like this too.

Obvious Rokh Re-skin.

Somali pirates stay off the coast of Somalia, where they maintain control. If they showed up in the gulf of Mexico you bet your ass there would be some extra debris floating up on the beaches down by Daytona. But aside from that, your analogy is entirely off. A better comparison is people doing PvP in a Nereus. Pirates will use any means to achieve the upper hand. Capsuleers are above the law in the same way diplomats enjoy immunity in other nations, but that doesn't mean the diplomats don't get screwed with if they get too cocky, or that they aren't subject to punishment from their government of origin.

Could you show up off the shores of New Jersey in a Russian Submarine and not get sunk just out of general purposes? Sure, if you went through a metric ****-ton of bureaucratic paperwork to obtain licensing for the thing (the procedures exist, bureaucrats have nothing better to do than dream this crap up). And you'd be subjected to a hell of a lot of scrutiny from thereon, and likely targeted to be used as a pawn for personal gain in some local political debate or another.

Most pirate ships have little in common with their empire counterparts, whether in function or form. A vindicator is not used in the same way a Megathron is for pretty obvious reasons, and if you're claiming commonality through appearance there are plenty of exceptions to that rule as presented.

Navy ships were never mentioned. Great job on muddying the waters.

Semantics matter too, or else Eve wouldn't have evolved in the direction it has for the past decade nor be going in the direction that it currently is, it would instead have degenerated into an incredibly complex spreadsheet simulation with the removal of all contexts such as "The Minmatar tend to not agree with members of the Amarr empire due to a little incident involving centuries of slavery and genocide".

No attempt was made to cover up anything. I stated blatantly what this whole topic was from the first post, and no reasonable debate has been made for not adjusting the cost to reward ratio for both PvE and PvP players to bring things into an acceptable balance. Stop looking for the conspiracy in this topic simply because I provided a means of explaining the proposed change from a perspective of human behavior first, and gave the mechanic secondly, which has been redacted after realizing that it would not have the intended consequences on the market.

We really don't want to hear any more bad analogies, so please provide something productive to the topic instead of "Grr, I don't like it."

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2014-06-18 18:25:41 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Neuts are mentionned in my previous' post edit. I'm not 100% sure but I think you can use NOS on rats to regenerate some cap so it's a nich use.

90% webs are really usefull in Incursion for example. Guess in what PvE Vindi are mostly used?

Fewer drones is less management for everybody, no matter what content you deal with. The higher HP is useful in PvE to help against aggro switch too. The people bitching about the Guristas ship are only people who can't adapt to the new way the ship is to be used. They wanted to keep their long range sentry boat and it's not the most effective way to use it anymore.

The fact that EVE is a PvP game does not mean ships should be only used for PvP.

What is funny is you probably want to see them more in PvP because of the nice KM they generate. What you don't seem to understand is they will not be used for PvP too much as long as they provide KM like that because for every million ISK that goes poof in a KM, the victim has to get 1 million ISK back in some way to buy a new ship. If you don't have the mean to pay for it now, it won't change unless the price drop to a much lower level. It's the same for everybody. I mostly lose frigs, (logi one at that) because that's what I can roll with. Others people can welp caps. Different makes for different ship usage.



Exact opposite. I don't care about the killmail, and I'm usually the one who gets killed in a shiny faction ship anyways. Check the killboard if you find that hard to believe. It's not about affording more either. I have no problem affording the ships I want to fight in. Which, incidentally, aren't the pirate ships because my SP isn't oriented for them.

Most incursions happen in low and null. Vindi's still get used out there for incursions, but they're fit to deal with hostiles also. By this logic we should also ignore that Guardians function best in a PvP environment, because they're the armor logi of choice for high sec incursions.


No one said the game was strictly PvP. Income doesn't primarily come from PvP for most people, including me. However, the trend is clear with the exception of the SOE ships (and I see more stratios' used in PvP than most other pirate cruisers, to be honest, this is just a statement of most people's opinion) the pirate faction ships make some pretty bad-ass PvP ships and that's where they shine. The PvE side of them is kind of like an unintended consequence. You can't make every pirate ship great for PvP and useless for PvE for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean that we have to ignore their intended use simply out of preference. If that were the case I'd be petitioning that all pirate ships be changed to fit my gameplay preferences when this has absolutely nothing to do with my style of gameplay.

From my standpoint, this will change nothing but the scenery as I go about my business. From everyone else's standpoint, I think it'd improve the game, even for the high sec PvE players. If some way were found to mitigate the initial cost of flying a pirate ship for security missions they could increase their income enough to warrant the purchase of a pirate ship much earlier in their gameplay. They would only be impacted by long-term costs, which would be minimal in comparison to their income advantage over T1's and also act as a small motivation to move them into other ships and other styles of gameplay.

The crux of the problem is that for PvP players the cost to benefit ratio of pirate ships is pretty poor, whereas for PvE players the cost to benefit ratio is insanely good and there needs to be a change that brings those two considerations back into balance.


There is no need for a change at all. The fact that you think there is does not mean it is not working correctly now. You came again with that "intended" word. You really think most incursion runs happen in low sec? Most incursion ARE in low sec because the one in HS gets closed all the time. The ships were just rebalanced so if they were meant to be more oriented for PvP, the devs would of amde change toward that.

The cost, even if you want to deny is IS the reason why they are used at the current rate in low sec/null. People can't always afford to lose that much money all the time so they use cheaper ships. This usage won't change unless they become cheap. This won't happen unless the BPCs start dropping more so the market gets flooded.

You know what would happen if over average ships were common enough to compare with regular ships in price? Everybody would be flying them and there would be nothing unique about them at that point.

Your request for change is all based on the fact that you perceive a problem with the current system where there is none. They are expensive bling boat so people use them where they are relatively safer.

If you have the usage pf pirate ships in HS so much, go gank them.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-06-18 18:30:36 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:

We really don't want to hear any more bad analogies, so please provide something productive to the topic instead of "Grr, I don't like it."


Your whole argument is "Grrrr I don't like people using the ship they want in HS". It's not just pirate ships that benefit from the change in risk/reward highsec currently provide. Every single ship in the game does.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#27 - 2014-06-18 18:31:57 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
[

Somali pirates stay off the coast of Somalia, where they maintain control. If they showed up in the gulf of Mexico you bet your ass there would be some extra debris floating up on the beaches down by Daytona."


Once again, you are being deliberately obtuse in conflating "Boat often used by Somali Pirate," with, "Somali pirate boat".
When it isn't crewed by pirates, it isn't a pirate ship. So, yes, if SOMALI PIRATES showed up in the gulf, they would likely be attacked.

"Somali pirates" are not the same thing as, "A type of ship commonly used by somali pirates". How the **** is it that you need this distinction explained to you?

Quote:
Navy ships were never mentioned. Great job on muddying the waters.


If non-pirates in pirate-class ships would be regarded as "pirates" by The Authorities, why wouldn't non-naval members in navy-class ships be regarded as being in the navy? Pointing out why your brain-fart is stupid and inconsistent is hardly "muddying the waters".

If Bob the Mariner isn't a pirate, he isn't a pirate when he's at the helm of a cruise ship, he isn't a pirate when he's manning a sailboat, and he isn't a pirate when he's at the helm of a fishing boat - even one that is similar to those frequently used by pirates.

There's no compelling reason why anyone would care about the shape of a ship hull in an environment where the pilots of readily and immediately identifiable.

The whole premise is patently ******* stupid.

Quote:
Could you show up off the shores of New Jersey in a Russian Submarine and not get sunk just out of general purposes?


The issue there would be showing up in a militarized vessel - not the fact that it was of Russian make. A civilian submarine manufactured by a Russian company would require no more licensing or registration than a domestic one. In Eve, general ownership and use of militarized vessels is the norm, and there's nothing in the lore or logic that would indicate there should be any sort of differentiation based on the origin of a particular ship design.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2014-06-18 18:38:04 UTC
OP, I gave you a like because you have such a 'nice guy' face.

But the idea is pretty bad, tbh. Lol

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#29 - 2014-06-18 18:47:51 UTC
I understand where the idea is coming from, even if I think it is one of the things that can't really be changed in term of gameplay at that stage. If it had been introduced in the game design when it started, everybody would have adjusted accordingly. Such kind of change would have to be very gradual, over multiple years to take effect...

Now, there is an angle that could be worked out, without changing much in the game at the moment, but giving potential for the future:

Each ship type has different builders, and technologies.

We could assume that due to the nature of the eve universe, these technologies are not shared widely to have one standard unified technology used by all ships.

As a consequence, a station allowing a ship to dock needs to have installed all the known docking signals technologies from all the existing ship types.

We can assume that today all the stations, NPC and players controlled benefit from all these docking technologies as part of their current costs to set up and/or maintain.

Now, if we were to allow station owners to save a bit of setup,and/or maintenance money by cutting out some technologies, this would in turn prevent the ships with the unsupported technology to dock there.

So a station owner could prevent a specific type ship to dock in, for whatever reasons they choose.

In the long run, It would naturally lead to some area of space where a specific technology is not supported to not have many ships with this technology flying around.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#30 - 2014-06-18 18:51:09 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
OP, I gave you a like because you have such a 'nice guy' face.

But the idea is pretty bad, tbh. Lol


I'll take having a nice guy face over being liked for my opinions. They wouldn't be mine if everybody liked them.

And still no one has provided a decent argument to the fact that (even when the cost to reward ratio of other ships used in high sec PvE are taken into account) the high sec PvE side of things has a disproportionately high benefit to using pirate faction ships, and the PvP side has a disproportionately low benefit to using pirate faction ships.

Cost isn't everything. Efficacy plays a huge role in PvP too. PL runs those Navy Apocalypse fleets for a reason even though they are pretty damn expensive in comparison to a full fleet of T1 BS's. The Navy Apocs get it done. So why don't we see other large alliances pulling similar metas with pirate ships? Because the cost efficiency isn't there. Simple up-front cost is not what determines usefulness, it's how much you get for the isk you paid. Having these ships ruled out for such activities because they can't approach anything resembling the cost efficiency of a Domi or Navy Apoc is just bland.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#31 - 2014-06-18 18:52:27 UTC
Saisin wrote:


We could assume that due to the nature of the eve universe, these technologies are not shared widely to have one standard unified technology used by all ships.



Uh, no we really couldn't assume that without a lot of idiotic retconning. Anyway, it's all clearly TCP/IP with an ansible at layer 1.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-06-18 18:59:51 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
OP, I gave you a like because you have such a 'nice guy' face.

But the idea is pretty bad, tbh. Lol


I'll take having a nice guy face over being liked for my opinions. They wouldn't be mine if everybody liked them.

And still no one has provided a decent argument to the fact that (even when the cost to reward ratio of other ships used in high sec PvE are taken into account) the high sec PvE side of things has a disproportionately high benefit to using pirate faction ships, and the PvP side has a disproportionately low benefit to using pirate faction ships.

Cost isn't everything. Efficacy plays a huge role in PvP too. PL runs those Navy Apocalypse fleets for a reason even though they are pretty damn expensive in comparison to a full fleet of T1 BS's. The Navy Apocs get it done. So why don't we see other large alliances pulling similar metas with pirate ships? Because the cost efficiency isn't there. Simple up-front cost is not what determines usefulness, it's how much you get for the isk you paid. Having these ships ruled out for such activities because they can't approach anything resembling the cost efficiency of a Domi or Navy Apoc is just bland.
Sorry mate, I'm a free market fan.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#33 - 2014-06-18 19:52:36 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
OP, I gave you a like because you have such a 'nice guy' face.

But the idea is pretty bad, tbh. Lol


I'll take having a nice guy face over being liked for my opinions. They wouldn't be mine if everybody liked them.

And still no one has provided a decent argument to the fact that (even when the cost to reward ratio of other ships used in high sec PvE are taken into account) the high sec PvE side of things has a disproportionately high benefit to using pirate faction ships, and the PvP side has a disproportionately low benefit to using pirate faction ships.

Cost isn't everything. Efficacy plays a huge role in PvP too. PL runs those Navy Apocalypse fleets for a reason even though they are pretty damn expensive in comparison to a full fleet of T1 BS's. The Navy Apocs get it done. So why don't we see other large alliances pulling similar metas with pirate ships? Because the cost efficiency isn't there. Simple up-front cost is not what determines usefulness, it's how much you get for the isk you paid. Having these ships ruled out for such activities because they can't approach anything resembling the cost efficiency of a Domi or Navy Apoc is just bland.


What you are asking for is impossible. You will never get a ship worth enough on the battlefield to justify spening over a bill per subcap hull on a regular rate. Remember you are approaching cap prices with a vindi for example.

If you want more in low/null, you need more supply to drive the price down. That is the only way you will get the risk/reward in a PvP encounter at a rate more people are willing to splash for it.
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2014-06-18 20:06:22 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:

the high sec PvE side of things has a disproportionately high benefit to using pirate faction ships, and the PvP side has a disproportionately low benefit to using pirate faction ships.

Cost isn't everything. Efficacy plays a huge role in PvP too. PL runs those Navy Apocalypse fleets for a reason even though they are pretty damn expensive in comparison to a full fleet of T1 BS's. The Navy Apocs get it done. So why don't we see other large alliances pulling similar metas with pirate ships? Because the cost efficiency isn't there. Simple up-front cost is not what determines usefulness, it's how much you get for the isk you paid. Having these ships ruled out for such activities because they can't approach anything resembling the cost efficiency of a Domi or Navy Apoc is just bland.


Look, bud, (can I call you bud?) you won't see me complaining if faction ships drop down to .5B. Rattlesnake is already there.

Until then though I don't see a change being necessary to anything.
Previous page12