These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rhea] Introducing the Bowhead

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#761 - 2014-11-12 10:15:47 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:


So how do you account for the pilots that aren't currently at the staging area and need to get there. Your strategy ONLY works in a perfect situation and completely falls apart otherwise.


You ask your corp for help moving.



A VERY large chunk of people running incursions, don't belong to an incursion corp, much less a corp of anything other than themselves. It's also not uncommon for you to logout for the day, and log in the next day and have the entire community already relocated to the next site. So how is it practical at this point to relocate if the entire ship is balanced around needing logistics support? Beg and plead with the incursion community to travel all the way back just to escort me and my Bowhead all the way out there again? Perhaps I should just give up on this ship providing any actual bennefit and ignore the fact that it exists altogether. Because we all love ships that aren't practical and as such get neglected.


Its not balanced around needing logi support, its just that it works best in an organised group. Just like every single other ship in EVE.

Frankly, this is a good example of why you should leave the state war acadamy and make some friends.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#762 - 2014-11-12 10:17:39 UTC
Barton Breau wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:


So how do you account for the pilots that aren't currently at the staging area and need to get there. Your strategy ONLY works in a perfect situation and completely falls apart otherwise.


You ask your corp for help moving.


Doesnt the inclusion of a corp service kinda shrink the use cases to "i dont want to loose the insurance on my navy bs" ?


So long as they dont enter your ship your insurance is fine.
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#763 - 2014-11-12 10:18:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
stuff

This is like arguing with a brick.

You keep on going on about maths so lets see if you can follow these very easy sums.

one pilot in a bowhead can transport 3 battleships, lets assume each incursion runner owns two battleships and a logi. In a group of 20 you would use 15 bowheads to transport the battleships and logi and 5 pilots to fly a logi support when moving. To do this same move without the bowheads will require 3 trips. The bowheads just saved you a lot of time and by moving in a convoy they were all but invincible to gankers. Transporting your ships in this way is infact much safer than flying the battleships themselves as there is no force in high sec with the manpower or firepower to alpha something with the tank of a bowhead being supported with 5 logi.



Too bad most regular incursionners (more than 6 months old pilot) own 3 BS (mach,vindi,Nm)+2 logi(scimi + basi)+ CS + scout so in group of 20 ,we would need 20 bow head and with the current SMA state that wouldn't be enought.
And your theory of convoy make me laught hard,noone use the convoy tactics anymore because it doesn't change anything expect increasing risk by enhancing the visibility of such convoy.Actually flying the BS one of by one is extremely safe compared to load them in a single ship (speed can go to 5.9 au/s and ehp goes from 145k to 225K on antimatter) so ganking such ships is a no go for gankers.
It 's not surprizing for people to expect that level of security for the bow head meaning at least 450 K EHP for the speed versions and much more for the tankier one around 600 K.
But i don't learn you anything isn't it baltec, your spreadsheet is just crying than at this amount of EHP if people doesn't carry shinnies it won't be that much profitable.But not every ship has to be profitable to suicide gank,it's unlikely than CODE and BAT has to complain about their return on investment.
Currently those incursion BS are out of your reach as far as profitability is concerned i don't see any reasonwhy they should be after the indroduction of this ship...
Nobody can have all they want for example i'd like the set up used on BOW HEAD to be extended to every other freighter and jump freighter meaning 3 R 3 M 3L and enought grid and CPU for a MWD.Even if that would happen ganking would still be profitable when i see the value dropped by freighters in niarjas and uedama .
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#764 - 2014-11-12 10:20:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Frankly, this is a good example of why you should leave the state war acadamy and make some friends.


It's nice to see that you've convinced yourself that despite being an obvious forum alt, There is NO possible way I could be in a corp and or have friends. You've just done wonders for your credibility ;)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#765 - 2014-11-12 10:21:00 UTC
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
stuff

This is like arguing with a brick.

You keep on going on about maths so lets see if you can follow these very easy sums.

one pilot in a bowhead can transport 3 battleships, lets assume each incursion runner owns two battleships and a logi. In a group of 20 you would use 15 bowheads to transport the battleships and logi and 5 pilots to fly a logi support when moving. To do this same move without the bowheads will require 3 trips. The bowheads just saved you a lot of time and by moving in a convoy they were all but invincible to gankers. Transporting your ships in this way is infact much safer than flying the battleships themselves as there is no force in high sec with the manpower or firepower to alpha something with the tank of a bowhead being supported with 5 logi.



Too bad most regular incursionners (more than 6 months old pilot) own 3 BS (mach,vindi,Nm)+2 logi(scimi + basi)+ CS + scout so in group of 20 ,we would need 20 bow head and with the current SMA state that wouldn't be enought.
And your theory of convoy make me laught hard,noone use the convoy tactics anymore because it doesn't change anything expect increasing risk by enhancing the visibility of such convoy.Actually flying the BS one of by one is extremely safe compared to load them in a single ship (speed can go to 5.9 au/s and ehp goes from 145k to 225K on antimatter) so ganking such ships is a no go for gankers.
It 's not surprizing for people to expect that level of security for the bow head meaning at least 450 K EHP for the speed versions and much more for the tankier one around 600 K.
But i don't learn you anything isn't it baltec, your spreadsheet is just crying than at this amount of EHP if people doesn't carry shinnies it won't be that much profitable.But not every ship has to be profitable to suicide gank,it's unlikely than CODE and BAT has to complain about their return on investment.
Currently those incursion BS are out of your reach as far as profitability is concerned i don't see any reasonwhy they should be after the indroduction of this ship...
Nobody can have all they want for example i'd like the set up used on BOW HEAD to be extended to every other freighter and jump freighter meaning 3 R 3 M 3L and enought grid and CPU for a MWD.Even if that would happen ganking would still be profitable when i see the value dropped by freighters in niarjas and uedama .



So you make two trips rather than one. This isnt hard people.
Dave Stark
#766 - 2014-11-12 10:22:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Frankly, this is a good example of why you should leave the state war acadamy and make some friends.


It's nice to see that you've convinced yourself that despite being an obvious forum alt, There is NO possible way I could be in a corp and or have friends. You've just done wonders for your credibility ;)


with the amount of whining you're doing, it's pretty evident that you're unlikely to have friends or be in a half decent corp.


baltec1 wrote:
So you make two trips rather than one. This isnt hard people.

or people stop hauling 5 ships to every focus and just take the ones they need (which is like, 2 ships)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#767 - 2014-11-12 10:22:57 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Frankly, this is a good example of why you should leave the state war acadamy and make some friends.


It's nice to see that you've convinced yourself that despite being an obvious forum alt, There is NO possible way I could be in a corp and or have friends. You've just done wonders for your credibility ;)


Point still stands. Get into a corp and life becomes a lot easier in EVE.
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#768 - 2014-11-12 10:28:49 UTC
Quote:
So you make two trips rather than one. This isnt hard people.

Man you are hilarious admitting a 25 jumps move that make 75 jumps at 1.37 au /S ,you won't play this game anymore when we ll end this trip ... Deal with incursions BS are out of your hands now they should remain so after this ship hit TQ
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#769 - 2014-11-12 10:34:54 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We are the corp that invented industrialised ganking of freighters. With a bulkhead setup and three faction battleships in the hold it is unprofitable to gank.

Good girl! Now invent some math.
Hint: there is a difference between "actually not profitable" and "less than 1 billion per hour, meh, not profitable", which you intentionally avoid.

baltec1 wrote:
As for the incursion escort comment, it is entirely viable to run an escort as you will have to do multiple trips if you just fly the ships themselves. This is the entire crux of the argument. These ships sport a good tank and are virtually invincible with an escort of logi. Transporting 3x pirate faction battleships solo in one of these things is not ment to be risk free. You people are forever banging on about how close the incursion community is, its about time you showed this by working together rather than whining that you cant solo your way past 40 people.

You need more escort than ships you can stuff inside this whale, thus there is no point in using it, period. Training into travel fits doesn't take much nowadays - you don't need all those gunnery skills to fly it from A to B, so if you have people to escort, you have people to actually fly them, and since escort+bowhead is at least equal to 3 bs flying by themselves, there is no point in Bowhead, unless it can offer something flying 3 bs doesn't, like less gank vulnerability, faster travel, or anything else to make it stand out.

What's risk free here is ganking it: if you have sufficient force, you win, if you don't, you don't gank.

Flying it doesn't need to be risk free, but it sure as **** shouldn't be MORE risky than any other option. As it stands now, flying bs themselves is less risk, hauling them in freighters is less risk - which basically means that at current values the Bowhead is the most risk option, since it's risk free to gank it. I'd even say it's a suicide option at current values.

It should stand out to be used or it might as well not exist. With a risk-free gank on it, no advantages in speed, and requiring more escort than it hauls there is just nothing in it which is useful outside of blue donut.


I usually do not agree with baltec. But he is RIGHT this time. Incursiosn are the group that would have the LEAST issues making this thing work, as long as you guys use brains. You can send 10 of these ships together and paired by 4 guardians and it would be incredbly safe.

They will be useless as a solo "let me move my whole collection" type of ship. But I do not think that was their intended role.


So how do you account for the pilots that aren't currently at the staging area and need to get there. Your strategy ONLY works in a perfect situation and completely falls apart otherwise.


They need to move their single battleship alone. Since they are alone, there is no sense on usign a ship capable of moving 3 battleships at a time?

Also.. you want to ccp take you by the hand? if you lost the onvoy, it is YOUR FAULT>

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#770 - 2014-11-12 10:36:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
Warr Akini wrote:
Again, try not to assume too much about the ganker mindset.


I haven't really been involved in this whole ganking debate, honestly because it shouldn't be part of this thread. But I'd like to add my two cents at this point just because people don't have to assume anything about your mindset or motivations for this "mechanic" to be insanely stupid to begin with.

And before I get started on why, no I don't believe hi-sec space should be 100% safe.

That being said, the fact that people can repeatedly kill ships in hi sec over and over again is stupid. Think of it this way. Criminals today usually get second and third chances, but at some point, the legal systems realizes a person is a lost cause and removes them civilization. In this case you can repair your sec an unlimited number of times. How does that make sense? What needs to happen is that the system needs to be modified so that hi sec gankers after a certain amount of ganks get un-repairable sec status so as to make it very risky for them to move around empire. This allows people to engage in the activity on a limited basis with actual true consequences for their actions should they try to make it a full time career.


if they made it a 3 strikes and your sec is unfixable per account .. then that would work as a deterrant i would think... and any further accounts using the same computer should be affeted the same.. too stop trial accounts/secound accounts expoting the rule.


You just killed eve for families/students ect who share a computer and anyone who pvps in low sec plus anyone who accidentaly shoots things in high sec thinking its low sec and people who wish to give up their life of crime. Meanwhile the people who are neg ten all the time anyway are not impacted.

Please take these terrible ideas to another thread.


we were talking about high sec ganking.. low sec pirates don't really come into that.. if you take a ship into lowsec especially this type of ship you should expect too be ganked by pirates..
CCP do need too add more awareness info in the game beyond basic tutorials ... eve wiki is just old and out of date most of the time i expect ..
give us a eve rulebook in game .. covering most things ... have basic and advanced parts too cater for the young and old pilots ..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Dave Stark
#771 - 2014-11-12 10:43:58 UTC
there's almost no way you get increased risk, and increased travel time using this ship.

at the very worst, you sacrifice one for the other. which is fine, this ship shouldn't do both in every situation anyway.
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#772 - 2014-11-12 10:49:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Nya Kittenheart
Quote:
In what world do you live in? You are literally arguing that making two trips is more travel time than six or seven.

Another nice tentative to troll and to make the thread derail ....6 trips are indeed faster at 5 au/s or more than 2 trip at 1.37s do the math i'm pretty sure such a veteran as yourself as heard about warpspeed change and their effect on accelerations ....
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#773 - 2014-11-12 10:51:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Anonymous Forumposter
Kagura Nikon wrote:
They need to move their single battleship alone. Since they are alone, there is no sense on usign a ship capable of moving 3 battleships at a time?


This assumes they have only one ship to move. This is not the norm amongst Incursioners.

Kagura Nikon wrote:
Also.. you want to ccp take you by the hand?


By resorting to such cliche and terrible personal attacks you discredit yourself which actually works against you in the long run.

Kagura Nikon wrote:
if you lost the onvoy, it is YOUR FAULT>


It's a reality that is common for Incursioners to log in and have the entire focus moved in a matter of hours. Your ignorance of such a simple fact demonstrates your lack of context to effectively debate the situation thereby negating any validity you could have offered to the debate on this aspect.

Dave Stark wrote:
if you support the ship, the only way around it is unfeasably expensive.


I'm not sure you comprehend what unfeasibly expensive is in the context of EVE online which comes as a little bit of a shock to me as you didn't seem like you were THAT uninformed.

Dave Stark wrote:
if you don't want to support the ship and you're moving between incursions, and everyone's already ahead of you and in the fleet, then you're in no rush and you can move everything more safely anyway.

somehow, the fact that you can move everything as safely as before, but now with added convenience somehow isn't good enough for him?


You're suggesting a drastic behavioral shift of an entire community just to provide them with a mediocre solution when the changes you imposed benefit only the tiny population of gankers at the expense of convenience of a much larger group.
Dave Stark
#774 - 2014-11-12 10:53:09 UTC
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Quote:
In what world do you live in? You are literally arguing that making two trips is more travel time than six or seven.

Another nice tentative to troll and to make the thread derail ....6 trips are indeed faster at 5 au/s or more than 2 trip at 1.37s do the math i'm pretty sure such a veteran as yourself as heard about warpspeed change and their effect on accelerations ....


i can't log in to eve right now but, according to eve uni, a machariel warps at 3au

so even if we can do the math on 5au warping, it's irrelevant.
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#775 - 2014-11-12 10:55:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Nya Kittenheart
Ever heard of ASCENDANCY implants and or warp accelerators .Welcome to eve Roll for info a proper fitted machariel go at 5.9 au /S in travel fit other BS reach 5.4 au /s according warspeed chart those ships would go 4 time faster than the BOW head for similar or higher combined ehp
Dave Stark
#776 - 2014-11-12 10:57:35 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
if you support the ship, the only way around it is unfeasably expensive.[/qoute]

I'm not sure you comprehend what unfeasibly expensive is in the context of EVE online which comes a little bit of a shock to me as you didn't seem like you were THAT uninformed.

[quote=Dave Stark]if you don't want to support the ship and you're moving between incursions, and everyone's already ahead of you and in the fleet, then you're in no rush and you can move everything more safely anyway.

somehow, the fact that you can move everything as safely as before, but now with added convenience somehow isn't good enough for him?


You're suggesting a drastic behavioral shift of an entire community just to provide them with a mediocre solution when the changes you imposed benefit only the tiny population of gankers at the expense of convenience of a much larger group.


if you're ganking for profit, spending 2.4bn isk on hulls alone, to gank something carrying only 1.8bn isk of hulls... is unfeasably expensive. considering your expected profit is only 900m (assuming ship bays drop like cargo bays?), that's not even half of your costs (before ship fittings).
if some one wants to gank you for ***** and giggles, they'll do it regardless of this ship so it's a moot point.

if people don't feel the extra convenience is worth the extra effort, they're under no obligation to use the bowhead. also, people can't expected to be given a way to transport billions of isk across eve completely risk free.
you don't need everyone to form bigass convoys to get a benefit out of the bowhead, but if you do the benefit is exponentially increased.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#777 - 2014-11-12 10:58:04 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Quote:
In what world do you live in? You are literally arguing that making two trips is more travel time than six or seven.

Another nice tentative to troll and to make the thread derail ....6 trips are indeed faster at 5 au/s or more than 2 trip at 1.37s do the math i'm pretty sure such a veteran as yourself as heard about warpspeed change and their effect on accelerations ....


Assuming you are moving 30 jumps to a new spot then we get the sum of 90 jumps for the bowhead fleet vs 390 for manually piloting all the ships. Yes, the bowhead fleet is faster even without using any warp speed tools. On top of the faster speed of the operation you also have the fact that the bowhead fleet is effectivly unkillable thanks to having 200k more ehp than the battleships they carry and if you have a full incursion group moving you will have at least 10 logi in support.
Dave Stark
#778 - 2014-11-12 10:59:20 UTC
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Ever heard of ASCENDANCY implants and or warp accelerators .Welcome to eve ....


sure i've heard of them. but nobody's going to pod jump to a warp speed clone to move ships from one incursion site to another.
just like nobody's going to fit warp accelerators instead of a travel fit if they're traveling.

sure they could, but then we're back at risk vs convenience. you know, a choice, the thing ccp loves because that's what encourages interesting gameplay.
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#779 - 2014-11-12 11:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Nya Kittenheart
Dave Stark wrote:
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Ever heard of ASCENDANCY implants and or warp accelerators .Welcome to eve ....


sure i've heard of them. but nobody's going to pod jump to a warp speed clone to move ships from one incursion site to another.
just like nobody's going to fit warp accelerators instead of a travel fit if they're traveling.

sure they could, but then we're back at risk vs convenience. you know, a choice, the thing ccp loves because that's what encourages interesting gameplay.


Why won't we such ships maintain a 150 K ehp or higher
....+ clone jumpings for moving isn't really a bother for most pilots for only 1 slots change aka PDS or RC 2 and only for the most extreme of them assuming full skill full genolutions clone ... and only for a median 20 hours or so
Dave Stark
#780 - 2014-11-12 11:06:53 UTC
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Nya Kittenheart wrote:
Ever heard of ASCENDANCY implants and or warp accelerators .Welcome to eve ....


sure i've heard of them. but nobody's going to pod jump to a warp speed clone to move ships from one incursion site to another.
just like nobody's going to fit warp accelerators instead of a travel fit if they're traveling.

sure they could, but then we're back at risk vs convenience. you know, a choice, the thing ccp loves because that's what encourages interesting gameplay.


Why won't we such ships maintain a 150 K ehp or higher
....+ clone jumpings for moving isn't really a bother for most pilots for only 1 slots change aka PDS or RC 2 and only for the most extreme of them assuming full skill full genolutions clone ...


so 150k ehp is fine? good, that mean the bowhead's 400k+ ehp is more than acceptable.

i was more pointing out that you've then got no skill hardwirings or pirate implants. etc.