These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

so the hulk WTF CCP?!!?!?

First post
Author
Whitehound
#901 - 2012-04-13 21:36:34 UTC
lanyaie wrote:
You're probably saying thats bs ...

0/10

Your comment is lacking the balls to be BS. You are only off topic.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#902 - 2012-04-13 21:38:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Too expensive? Well, still over 1000 dps with cheap T2 magstabs.
No, not that either, and no, it's not just a matter of expense, but of location. The conditions required don't exist in the context being discussed.


Just go through wormhole. It's not that difficult. Surviving there isn't a problem if you know how to use probes and d-scan, because there is no local and intel channels.
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#903 - 2012-04-13 21:43:02 UTC
Ildryn wrote:


Before i got into this friendly debate i should have remembered that hulks are fine and they wont be changed anytime soon.
And just continue ganking them.Big smile



I dont care if its changed or not. I have already stated that. I'll play my game with the tools given to me. I have also stated the hulk for solo play is exceptionally balanced. My concern is for fleets. where it falls short.

It is your game to play as you choose. Go ahead and gank the greedy ones. more roids for me. Evil

Ildryn
Idle Guns.
#904 - 2012-04-13 21:43:42 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Too expensive? Well, still over 1000 dps with cheap T2 magstabs.
No, not that either, and no, it's not just a matter of expense, but of location. The conditions required don't exist in the context being discussed.


Just go through wormhole. It's not that difficult. Surviving there isn't a problem if you know how to use probes and d-scan, because there is no local and intel channels.


And he would know with his month old character.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#905 - 2012-04-13 21:47:23 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Just go through wormhole.
…where there is no CONCORD, making it a not-suicide gank, meaning the DPS becomes quite irrelevant since you don't have a very short window in which to kill the guy before you auto-explode.

So no. Try about 700 for the context being discussed here, with a Hulk can tank quite nicely for the time required to survive.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#906 - 2012-04-13 21:53:35 UTC
Tippia wrote:
So no. Try about 700 for the context being discussed here, with a Hulk can tank quite nicely for the time required to survive.


True, if it's only one Cat. But that's not always the case. Usually they run in small groups (2-4 Cats/Trashers) and sometimes in 30 man Catalyst fleets.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#907 - 2012-04-13 21:58:57 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
True, if it's only one Cat. But that's not always the case. Usually they run in small groups (2-4 Cats/Trashers) and sometimes in 30 man Catalyst fleets.
…at which point we have a situation where several ships beats one ship, which seems wonderfully suitable.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#908 - 2012-04-13 22:03:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…at which point we have a situation where several ships beats one ship, which seems wonderfully suitable.


Easy mode...
July Oumis
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#909 - 2012-04-13 22:42:20 UTC  |  Edited by: July Oumis
So as a highsec carebear I demand to buff the 17 k ehp of a Tengu, or the 48 k ehp of a Machariel, when fitted for max damage.
A Tengu can be soloed by one Tornado and costs between 650 and 2000 mil. I don't see the missionrunners whining, because they know they sacrifice security over efficiency.

Some Miners actually don't get it.
Whitehound
#910 - 2012-04-13 22:58:54 UTC
July Oumis wrote:
So as a highsec carebear I demand to buff the 17 k ehp of a Tengu, or the 48 k ehp of a Machariel, when fitted for max damage.
A Tengu can be soloed by one Tornado and costs between 650 and 2000 mil. I don't see the missionrunners whining, because they know they sacrifice security over efficiency.

Some Miners actually don't get it.

No, you do not get it. Mission runners do not whine, because they use the offence as their defence. Mining ships are ships designed to be victims and this is what we do not need in EVE. Everyone can and shall become a victim and it does not need 300m ISK coffins to artificially shift the balance onto the miners. Players have been ganking mining ships for years, mostly for fun, but they also do it because the game designers created this "profession of being a victim". CCP is slowly letting go off it as you can see with ships like the Noctis and the Primea. Even the Primea (the little PI ship) features 175 PG.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#911 - 2012-04-13 23:06:26 UTC
Whitehound wrote:

No, you do not get it. Mission runners do not whine, because they use the offence as their defence.

Defense against what? Mission runners almost never avoid ganks by killing potential gankers.
Whitehound
#912 - 2012-04-13 23:20:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Plus 1 wrote:
Defense against what? Mission runners almost never avoid ganks by killing potential gankers.

I meant for mission runners doing what they are doing. My statement is also true for most combat ships and I am not talking about ganking in general, because my understanding is that every ship can get ganked.

The only need for a change I see currently is the one regarding the power grid and to get mining ships out of their pathetic state. What people do with the extra power grid is their business.

Do you agree with me or do you say we need ships designed for victims?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#913 - 2012-04-13 23:26:27 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
No, you do not get it. Mission runners do not whine, because they use the offence as their defence.
No, they don't, because that offence has no chance of making any difference. In fact, using that offence is a very bad idea, since it invalidates the opportunity of revenge you'd get.

Quote:
CCP is slowly letting go off it as you can see with ships like the Noctis and the Primea.
Oh, you mean those ships that are even easier to kill than the Hulk? No, they don't particularly signify any kind of change in how they design industrial ships.

Quote:
The only need for a change I see currently is the one regarding the power grid and to get mining ships out of their pathetic state
That can already be done by fitting them with a tank.
Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#914 - 2012-04-13 23:29:22 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Plus 1 wrote:
Defense against what? Mission runners almost never avoid ganks by killing potential gankers.

I meant for mission runners doing what they are doing. My statement is also true for most combat ships and I am not talking about ganking in general, because my understanding is that every ship can get ganked.

The only need for a change I see currently is the one regarding the power grid and to get mining ships out of their pathetic state. What people do with the extra power grid is their business.

Do you agree with me or do you say we need ships designed for victims?

If "designed to be victims" means they should continue being non-combat ships, then yeah, they could stay that way.
Whitehound
#915 - 2012-04-14 00:01:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Plus 1 wrote:
If "designed to be victims" means they should continue being non-combat ships, then yeah, they could stay that way.

Thank you. I would not dream of giving them gunnery bonuses. The mining ships should only have the ability to reach eHP values close to those of the T1 and T2 industrial ships without exceeding them or copying any of their bonuses like cloaks or warp scramble strength or just their active tanking bonuses. The Hulk already comes with a bonus to resistances, but can at best only reach half the eHP of a much cheaper T2 transporter fitted with a primitive shield tank (i.e. 2x LSE II, 1x AIF II gives about 50k eHP on a Mastodon). A supertanked T2 transporter can easily reach 80k eHP and more. The game designers' argument was that T2 transporters shall operate in harsh environments, but we all know that this can only mean in all of EVE. Nor does there exist a save zone where mining ships can operate in for the same reason.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#916 - 2012-04-14 00:05:24 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Do you agree with me or do you say we need ships designed for victims?


Look, the reason people are concerned about losing their Hulks is not because Hulks are easy to kill, it's because people want to kill Hulks. Why do people want to kill Hulks? Because when they do, they are rewarded with tears, and mega-rage-threads like this one.

If people complained this much about being ranked with an Iteron full of 5B ISK worth of blueprints, more gankers would be hunting down those Iterons. The catch is there aren't that many people flying 5B ISK Iterons around, but there are plenty of foolish pilots flying Hulks with three Cargohold Optimization rigs and two Expanded Cargobay IIs in the lowslots.

Here's the first step to tanking your Hulk: DO NOT FIT FOR CARGO. A naked Hulk has about 8000m3 cargo capacity. You really don't need more than that.

Here's the second step to tanking your Hulk: DO IT IN A FLEET. Just about every ship with improved resistances as part of the bonuses is considered a fleet ship. Why is that? The resistances make them easier to repair. So you combine your innate resistances, the fleet bonuses and a few resistance modules to get really good resistances. The bonuses for the Hulk are to shields, so you'd fly in a fleet with a Tengu booster (not a Vulture, with it's ****-weak 3% per level) carrying the shield harmonisation link.

Here's the third step to tanking your Hulk: fit for yield. If you fit for yield, you will be finishing up sites faster, which means you're hanging around in space for less time, and you have to pay attention to the screen. Thus you will be seeing people entering local, you will be monitoring D-scan. This is the mining equivalent of "gank tanking".

Of course, I'd love it if I could fit a 30k EHP buffer while simultaneously being able to fit two MLUs. I'd love it if I could use saved fittings to adjust my Hulk's fitting from the Orca fitting service. I'd love it if the Orca could be fitted with an MWD and three gang links at the same time.

In the meantime, I have to play with the cards I'm dealt.
Whitehound
#917 - 2012-04-14 00:09:44 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Look, ...

Rant ...

In the meantime, I have to play with the cards I'm dealt.

No, you look. When you quote a question then this is a card you got dealt. Answer it and do not rant about.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#918 - 2012-04-14 00:14:19 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
No, you look. When you quote a question then this is a card you got dealt. Answer it and do not rant about.
He did answer it: the design is not where the victimisation happens.
Whitehound
#919 - 2012-04-14 00:17:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
He did answer it: the design is not where the victimisation happens.

If you think it did then why can you not shut up? When I think I was not given a proper response do I keep posting, too.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#920 - 2012-04-14 00:21:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
Whitehound wrote:
The only need for a change I see currently is the one regarding the power grid and to get mining ships out of their pathetic state. What people do with the extra power grid is their business.

Do you agree with me or do you say we need ships designed for victims?


No I do not agree with you that not increasing the PG of a Hulk means that it is a ship designed for victims.

Victim mentality is designed for victims. Victim mentality is that state in which you only perceive the weaknesses of your state, have no intention of addressing those weaknesses, and expect everyone else to take pity on you to fix your situation.

The current design of a Hulk allows you to produce much higher yields than any other mining ship. The expense of the hull makes it a popular target for killboard stuffers. As a Hulk pilot, you cannot afford to be complacent. Stop looking at the problem as "CCP needs to fix this" and look at it from the point of view of "what can I do to fix this?"

I agree with you only as far as your statement that the Hulk would really benefit from an extra 10MW or so of power grid. End of story.

Your rhetorical question is rhetorical. Expecting me to answer it and complaining when I don't is plain and simple trolling.