These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Balancing ships and ammo !

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Clementina
University of Caille
#21 - 2014-09-14 01:41:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Clementina
Remiel Pollard wrote:


If it's only taking 5 destroyers to kill a Marauder, someone is doing something very wrong on the Marauder end...

And since when are Marauders defenceless? This is the first I've heard of it...


First I heard it too, I was under the impression that Marauders were tanking beasts that could shrug off small gangs when flown correctly, I certainly felt shrugged off last time I ran into one in low sec.

Anyway, I was interested in seeing the killmail that inspired this post, so I searched for the Original poster on Eve-kill.net. It is a thing of beauty. Man lost 23.8 billion worth of tech 2, faction, deadspace, and officer. Not to 5 destroyers though, it was 6 Pasta Syndicate Tornados that did him in.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2014-09-14 01:45:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Gaming God wrote:


Ok i rememberd it wrong but its stal not balanced :)


Remember what I said about you learning more about the game and actually developing an informed understanding before deciding whether or not it's balanced? Your whole argument was based around it being cheap destroyers. Now your argument has been demonstrated irrelevant by virtue of your aggressors not being destroyers. You will need a new one.

See, you just don't know enough about EVE to determine whether it's balanced or not. It's like if I walked into a hairdresser and started telling all the professional hairdressers they're doing it wrong, except in this case no one's gonna stab you with a pair of scissors.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Gaming God
Gaming God Corporation
#23 - 2014-09-14 01:46:20 UTC
yes that's true you're absolutely right that's a lot of power but i should have bin able to activate some mods ad least the tank mods then i am even not talking about getting a chance to shoot back :)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-09-14 01:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Gaming God wrote:
yes that's true you're absolutely right that's a lot of power but i should have bin able to activate some mods ad least the tank mods then i am even not talking about getting a chance to shoot back :)


Why weren't they already active?

Why didn't you have a Damage Control?

Why did you make it worth 22bil to begin with? All those pointless officer mods when you could have trained for T2 instead is on YOU and nobody else. It's not an imbalance with the game, it's choices that YOU made.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#25 - 2014-09-14 02:04:37 UTC
Gaming God wrote:
...


Your name is what makes this thread and all the plebeians in it so fantastic.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2014-09-14 02:17:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Hiply Rustic
Gaming God wrote:
yes that's true you're absolutely right that's a lot of power but i should have bin able to activate some mods ad least the tank mods then i am even not talking about getting a chance to shoot back :)



No. No you didn't even deserve a chance to turn on your tank.

If you're putting around hisec in that blingfit without bothering to run your tank constantly (and have more of a tank than you had, but that's another story) because you don't realize that you have "Gank Me" painted on both your ass and your forehead, then no...you didn't deserve a chance.

Your effectively untanked 22 billion ISK shiny target got lit up like a christmas tree and ate the alphas from 6 tornados...with predictable results.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-09-14 02:30:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Hiply Rustic
Hiply Rustic wrote:
Gaming God wrote:
yes that's true you're absolutely right that's a lot of power but i should have bin able to activate some mods ad least the tank mods then i am even not talking about getting a chance to shoot back :)



No. No you didn't even deserve a chance to turn on your tank.

If you're putting around hisec in that blingfit without bothering to run your tank constantly (and have more of a tank than you had, but that's another story) because you don't realize that you have "Gank Me" painted on both your ass and your forehead, then no...you didn't deserve a chance.

Your effectively untanked 22 billion ISK shiny target got lit up like a christmas tree and ate the alphas from 6 tornados...with predictable results.


also...don't fly what you can't cheerfully afford to lose

also...HTFU



also...note to self...'edit' Rustic, not 'reply'

Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2014-09-14 02:33:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
These kinds of ganks are also a good demonstration of why EVE isn't pay to win. You might be able to throw a tonne of cash at the game on stuff that gives you a brief advantage (if you do it effectively, which OP has not), but the moment another capsuleer decides to take what you spent that money on, it's gone for good. Permanently. You throw money at this game at your own risk, not at your own advantage.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#29 - 2014-09-14 02:41:34 UTC
I do sympathize with OP. It is far too easy to kill battleships with cheap gank ships. A lot of that is intentional, as CCP wants new players to be able to affect fleet battles, hence the ability of 10 rifters to make life difficult for a Machariel that costs 500x what a Rifter costs. Here the guys actually brought nados, which are not cheap, and are not part of the problem I mentioned. I'm not such a big fan of the nados either, because enough of them can alpha any ship in highsec off the field, regardless of tank. But yes, I am troubled by how easily a gang of cheap catalysts can gank an expensive battleship, regardless of the tank used. A 27 man multibox Catalyst gang very nearly destroyed my dual pith A type Machariel, and I was not especially amused.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2014-09-14 02:46:32 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#31 - 2014-09-14 03:05:03 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.


Actually - they nearly killed my well fitted ships with some gank ships, and I pointed out that that doesn't seem like a good mechanic. And yes, that is how balancing works.

Signed,

"Beers"
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-09-14 03:07:13 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.


Actually - they nearly killed my well fitted ships with some gank ships, and I pointed out that that doesn't seem like a good mechanic. And yes, that is how balancing works.

Signed,

"Beers"


I don't have any reason to believe that you're capable of fitting well, and even if you did, no, that's still not how balancing works.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#33 - 2014-09-14 03:09:57 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.


Actually - they nearly killed my well fitted ships with some gank ships, and I pointed out that that doesn't seem like a good mechanic. And yes, that is how balancing works.

Signed,

"Beers"


I don't have any reason to believe that you're capable of fitting well, and even if you did, no, that's still not how balancing works.



Well, truth be told I could care less what you think of my fits or skill level. I can't think of a single reason why impressing you would make my list of things I'd like to accomplish. And astutely pointing out how cheap gank ships can destroy a much more expensive and well tanked battleship, which seems odd, is part of a balancing discussion.
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2014-09-14 03:13:25 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.


Actually - they nearly killed my well fitted ships with some gank ships, and I pointed out that that doesn't seem like a good mechanic. And yes, that is how balancing works.

Signed,

"Beers"


I don't have any reason to believe that you're capable of fitting well, and even if you did, no, that's still not how balancing works.


If there was a balance issue, you'd see the underpowered ship in question would never be used. Players simply wouldn't want to pay for the ship above manufature cost, which means no one would build it. CCP can easily see these problems and they rebalance ships based on those observations. They don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence or "ten people ganged up on me and my solo ship almost died" whines.

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2014-09-14 03:15:24 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


Well, truth be told I could care less what you think of my fits or skill level. I can't think of a single reason why impressing you would make my list of things I'd like to accomplish. And astutely pointing out how cheap gank ships can destroy a much more expensive and well tanked battleship, which seems odd, is part of a balancing discussion.


It's not just what I think, and it's not about impressing anyone. You have failed to define 'well tanked' in order to establish a premise for your argument. As such, I have no reason to believe that you are capable of understanding what 'well tanked' means.

On the other hand, you can be as 'well tanked' as you like, if you have a hundred Velators with civ electron blasters on 'em, you're bound to feel some hurt.

Balancing in this game is as such that smaller ships can be capable of taking on the larger ones, and visa-versa. This is why we tell newbs that bigger =/= better, because it's not. I killed a Raven in a Wolf the other day. You out to nerf the Wolf too because a 40mil fit killed a 170mil one? You probably are because you don't understand how balancing works, but I'll give you a hint - it has zero to do with the value of the ganker ship vs the value of the target.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Hiasa Kite
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2014-09-14 03:18:28 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Balancing in this game is as such that smaller ships can be capable of taking on the larger ones, and visa-versa. This is why we tell newbs that bigger =/= better, because it's not. I killed a Raven in a Wolf the other day. You out to nerf the Wolf too because a 40mil fit killed a 170mil one? You probably are because you don't understand how balancing works, but I'll give you a hint - it has zero to do with the value of the ganker ship vs the value of the target.

But, but ISK tank = best tank!

"Playing an MMO by yourself is like masturbating in the middle of an orgy." -Jonah Gravenstein
Gaming God
Gaming God Corporation
#37 - 2014-09-14 03:20:16 UTC
Hiply Rustic wrote:
Gaming God wrote:
yes that's true you're absolutely right that's a lot of power but i should have bin able to activate some mods ad least the tank mods then i am even not talking about getting a chance to shoot back :)



No. No you didn't even deserve a chance to turn on your tank.

If you're putting around hisec in that blingfit without bothering to run your tank constantly (and have more of a tank than you had, but that's another story) because you don't realize that you have "Gank Me" painted on both your ass and your forehead, then no...you didn't deserve a chance.

Your effectively untanked 22 billion ISK shiny target got lit up like a christmas tree and ate the alphas from 6 tornados...with predictable results.



Hmm when i bild this ship i know it would not last 1 week alraidy infront :)
I was bored and i wanted to spend my isk on someting nice and i dident espect the ship would live long .

I was uncloaking after going truw a gate thats why my mods where not turnd on .

Any way al this **** dossend mather . The point is that suecide ganking needs a balance and a nerf :)
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#38 - 2014-09-14 03:21:07 UTC
Hiasa Kite wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
They killed me with something, nerf it!!


Sorry Beers, that's not how balancing works.


Actually - they nearly killed my well fitted ships with some gank ships, and I pointed out that that doesn't seem like a good mechanic. And yes, that is how balancing works.

Signed,

"Beers"


I don't have any reason to believe that you're capable of fitting well, and even if you did, no, that's still not how balancing works.


If there was a balance issue, you'd see the underpowered ship in question would never be used. Players simply wouldn't want to pay for the ship above manufature cost, which means no one would build it. CCP can easily see these problems and they rebalance ships based on those observations. They don't need to rely on anecdotal evidence or "ten people ganged up on me and my solo ship almost died" whines.


A. This is not true - just because a ship is too easy to gank in highsec does not mean it would cease to exist in the game. It does mean that it would be used less than otherwise.

B. Battleships are the ugly duckling of Eve. They are used by mission runners who generally are not worried about getting ganked since it is a pain to scan them down and gank them. They are not seen as much in low/null because of their relatively high cost, and the easy of ganking them with frigs, cruisers, bombers, etc.. etc...
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2014-09-14 03:22:36 UTC
Gaming God wrote:


Any way al this **** dossend mather . The point is that suecide ganking needs a balance and a nerf :)


Good luck trying to get people to believe that with no argument behind it whatsoever.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#40 - 2014-09-14 03:24:27 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:


It's not just what I think, and it's not about impressing anyone. You have failed to define 'well tanked' in order to establish a premise for your argument. As such, I have no reason to believe that you are capable of understanding what 'well tanked' means.

On the other hand, you can be as 'well tanked' as you like, if you have a hundred Velators with civ electron blasters on 'em, you're bound to feel some hurt.

Balancing in this game is as such that smaller ships can be capable of taking on the larger ones, and visa-versa. This is why we tell newbs that bigger =/= better, because it's not. I killed a Raven in a Wolf the other day. You out to nerf the Wolf too because a 40mil fit killed a 170mil one? You probably are because you don't understand how balancing works, but I'll give you a hint - it has zero to do with the value of the ganker ship vs the value of the target.



My battleship had 127k ehp, a DC, and two pith A invuls that I overheated. There were 27 catas, all controlled by 1 person of course, in a 0.5 system. Your example is inapposite since the battleship chose to engage you, not realizing that his guns couldn't track you. My point relates specifically to suicide ganking, mainly comparing the dps of the cheap gank ships to the ehp of my expensive battleship, and seeing how much buffer they will burn through before my CONCORD allies arrive. And my conclusion is that the dps of the cheap gank ships is too high relative to the ehp of my well tank battleship. End of story.