|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17602
|
Posted - 2016.04.30 16:03:53 -
[1] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote: CCP is aiming for a balance.
They are missing the mark by a rather large margin.
They have already removed profitable barge piracy and jetcan theft. The nerfs to piracy in highsec are never ending while the safety and reward only ever goes up. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17603
|
Posted - 2016.05.01 09:55:04 -
[2] - Quote
Chopper Rollins wrote:
It's still very easy to kill nerds in Empire. I think CCP are doing a great job of treading the fine line between sandbox being allowed to stay sandbox but constantly sitting in Empire being profitable. There's no rails forcing hisec gankers out of Empire or away from what they do, sandbox is still sandbox. You gotta admit though, there's been times when moving through bottlenecks and hubs in hisec is so dangerous it stifles play. I applaud our CCP space overlords in their efforts, i don't know what i would do faced with the same propensity for so many players to become hisec barnacles forever, pvp or not.
People keep on saying things like this yet there is absolutely zero evidence to back it up. The number of freighters getting ganked is staggeringly tiny and there is already highly effective counters to bumping. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17606
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 06:36:17 -
[3] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Think of the poor highsec miners and haulers.
How will they AFK watch Netflix is an unsafe environment? This is what most of the arguments here come down to, and that's on both sides of this, "these people don't play the way I do therefore they are playing wrong". At the end of the day both ganking and mining will continue to exist and it's up to CCP to balance it which so far they've done pretty well with. I don't particularly like AFK play, but I'd rather see CCP make the gameplay more rewarding for being active than punish the entire playstyle because some people do it AFK. Oh, and for the record, it's a bit rich getting on your high horse about people in their safe environment while you are guarding a playstyle that uses alts in cheap disposable ships to shoot people (more often that not rookie or just terrible players) in the same highsec environment. I have a few ganking chars and I'd consider none of them risk takers.
People used to use battleships but that got nerfed. In fact damn near everything ganking related has either been nerfed into the ground or outright removed. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17606
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 06:49:40 -
[4] - Quote
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Think of the poor highsec miners and haulers.
How will they AFK watch Netflix is an unsafe environment? This is what most of the arguments here come down to, and that's on both sides of this, "these people don't play the way I do therefore they are playing wrong". At the end of the day both ganking and mining will continue to exist and it's up to CCP to balance it which so far they've done pretty well with. I don't particularly like AFK play, but I'd rather see CCP make the gameplay more rewarding for being active than punish the entire playstyle because some people do it AFK. Oh, and for the record, it's a bit rich getting on your high horse about people in their safe environment while you are guarding a playstyle that uses alts in cheap disposable ships to shoot people (more often that not rookie or just terrible players) in the same highsec environment. I have a few ganking chars and I'd consider none of them risk takers. People used to use battleships but that got nerfed. In fact damn near everything ganking related has either been nerfed into the ground or outright removed. You mean: "People used battleships when there were easy way to exploit bugs and turn people into aggressors.", right?
No I mean the battleship was the ship of choice for ganking. You can't very well complain about gankers using cheap, disposable ships when the mechanics demand such ships need to be used if you want to turn a profit. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17606
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 06:59:51 -
[5] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Think of the poor highsec miners and haulers.
How will they AFK watch Netflix is an unsafe environment? Well: Would you like to do this job? Staring at the screen and switching the asteroid every 15 minutes isn't my idea of fun. And of cause you only buy ships that are build with certificated non-akf Minerals. By the way: In another thread someone was complaining that his hulk got blown up in High. One reply was to find some Null-Sec miners. That's safer because you have all the intel in Null that you don't have in High. So much for the safety/unsafety of High and Null.
Go try gank an afk skiff in highsec, better yet, try to do it and turn a profit. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17606
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 09:10:22 -
[6] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:"Riddle me this, why is nullsec safer for mining than hisec is?"
It's not. The only reason ganks don't happen there is because CODE dare not venture in null.
And as for ganking a Skiff in highsec and turning a profit ..... there is no ISK profit. There may be some strategic objective involved, a green killboard, or the allegedly "sweet tears". And fun I guess. Or maybe just :because:. But profit? What makes you think blowing up a regular T2 fit Skiff should turn a profit? Best possible drop is some 15k m3 of worthless ores and a couple of mods and drones. Clearly profit does not factor into the equation.
Mining barges are the only subcaps you can't turn a profit on. If you fit t2 mods on any subcap and fit zero tank you can turn a profit.
For example a zealot with t2 guns, damage mods, tracking and so on but no tank mods can be blown up using a single gank ship and can turn a profit. Mining barges were buffed some time ago so that even if you fit zero tank on them your can't turn a profit killing them. This makes them unique in the subcap lineup. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17606
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 13:04:13 -
[7] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:If highsec miners used nullsec risk management in highsec, what do you think would happen? They would be docked up until system was clear of anyone else...
That alone shows just how much safer highsec is. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17607
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 16:29:03 -
[8] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: But defense is what the skiff is naturally designed to have. A zealot is naturally cheaper, smaller, faster and more agile then has far more capability to improve than a skiff thanks to it's slots, CPU and PG.
The zealot is a heavy assault ship, barges are just industrial ships, its bonkers that every subcap combat ship is profitable to gank if you fit t2 mods to them with no tank but the barges which are industrial ships are not. By all means ships such as the skiff should be able to be tanky but that should come from the fittings you chose, not come directly from the hull. If you choose to fit no tank on your hulk, retriever or skiff then your ship should be profitable to gank just like every other ship out there. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17607
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 17:25:13 -
[9] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Trying to work out just what this whine about T2 fitted ship with no tank having to be profitable to gank, seriously baltec1 your arguments are getting weaker...
You never have understood any arguments that go against your campaign of ever more safety. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 19:46:41 -
[10] - Quote
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Geronimo McVain wrote: By the way: In another thread someone was complaining that his hulk got blown up in High. One reply was to find some Null-Sec miners. That's safer because you have all the intel in Null that you don't have in High. So much for the safety/unsafety of High and Null.
You should learn the difference between risk and risk management. If highsec miners used nullsec risk management in highsec, what do you think would happen? Beside the little fact that they can't because they can't kill someone as a proactive defense measure? If highsec miners used nullsec risk management CODE would lose plenty of ships. But CONCORD avenge CODE too.
Code ships are profitable to gank. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 19:56:59 -
[11] - Quote
Well we have the three people who every time the subject of ganking and ganking nerfs come up always ask for and support just one more nerf.
As per the topic yes, CCP has removed pvp content from highsec via the endless nerfs and buffs they have made. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 20:15:28 -
[12] - Quote
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: But defense is what the skiff is naturally designed to have. A zealot is naturally cheaper, smaller, faster and more agile then has far more capability to improve than a skiff thanks to it's slots, CPU and PG.
The zealot is a heavy assault ship, barges are just industrial ships, its bonkers that every subcap combat ship is profitable to gank if you fit t2 mods to them with no tank but the barges which are industrial ships are not. By all means ships such as the skiff should be able to be tanky but that should come from the fittings you chose, not come directly from the hull. If you choose to fit no tank on your hulk, retriever or skiff then your ship should be profitable to gank just like every other ship out there. I fail to see why suiciding a T2 assault ship should pay back at all. you are really convinced that killing a ship priced at about 190 millions will a ship worth about 190 millions that will be destroyed in the process should give you a profit? If it did work that way I would buy skif hulls with an alt, wardec his corp and harvest skiff kills. Or you pretend that every skiff should run around with at least 400 millions in modules so that you get back the price of your assault ship and equipment plus a bit of profit from the drops? Really, your argument seem to be that T2 mining equipment is to cheap.
You kill the untanked zealot with a catalyst and harvest the dropped t2 mods. You don't always win vs the loot fairy but you win enough in the long run to turn a profit. Barges and exhumers used to be profitable to kill due to people fitting no tank and slapping on expanders. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 20:19:59 -
[13] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Shayla Etherodyne wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: But defense is what the skiff is naturally designed to have. A zealot is naturally cheaper, smaller, faster and more agile then has far more capability to improve than a skiff thanks to it's slots, CPU and PG.
The zealot is a heavy assault ship, barges are just industrial ships, its bonkers that every subcap combat ship is profitable to gank if you fit t2 mods to them with no tank but the barges which are industrial ships are not. By all means ships such as the skiff should be able to be tanky but that should come from the fittings you chose, not come directly from the hull. If you choose to fit no tank on your hulk, retriever or skiff then your ship should be profitable to gank just like every other ship out there. I fail to see why suiciding a T2 assault ship should pay back at all. you are really convinced that killing a ship priced at about 190 millions will a ship worth about 190 millions that will be destroyed in the process should give you a profit? If it did work that way I would buy skif hulls with an alt, wardec his corp and harvest skiff kills. Or you pretend that every skiff should run around with at least 400 millions in modules so that you get back the price of your assault ship and equipment plus a bit of profit from the drops? Really, your argument seem to be that T2 mining equipment is to cheap. You kill the untanked zealot with a catalyst and harvest the dropped t2 mods. You don't always win vs the loot fairy but you win enough in the long run to turn a profit. Barges and exhumers used to be profitable to kill due to people fitting no tank and slapping on expanders. So because people are fitting a tank its unfair...
The unfair part is barges and exhumers were buffed in such a way that makes them the only subcap you cant gank for profit in this way. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 20:45:20 -
[14] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dracvlad wrote:So because people are fitting a tank its unfair... The unfair part is barges and exhumers were buffed in such a way that makes them the only subcap you cant gank for profit in this way. So your upset is because barges are mainly structure and that got an adjustment because of changes in certain mechanics, but it is entirely logical that a ship that stores lots of loose ore would have imposing bulk heads and an impact from storing all that ore in theory against weapons fire against a more flexible light hull which is designed for fast combat. It still makes no sense. You are in PL now, Grath and co are having great fun with the new capitals, wouldn't you be better off doing that sort of thing rather than whining about logical mechanics and suggesting that mining ships should not have a tank so your gankers can blow them up to make ISK
The changes to barge HP happened years ago, the DCU change is a different thing that caused other problems.
The effect of the barge HP changes resulted in barges and exhumers gaining an unfair advantage that no other subcap enjoys and is inherently unbalanced. It ended barge piracy as a viable activity. The barge changes also killed the far bigger content provider that was jetcan mining. Jetcan theft and the baiting that happened around the activity provided a huge amount of content but that was all wiped out simply because of the introduction of the ore bays and the way they work.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17609
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 21:08:05 -
[15] - Quote
NEONOVUS wrote: It also made it so there was a reason to other barges than hulk/covetor. Even more so after the minimining ships became logi.
The first buff to barges was a total disaster and it simply made the retriever king of the barges. The second revamp while better than the first still falls well short of what was needed with the barges still not the well balanced with eachother. They are also shoehorned into just one or two viable fits, you no longer have to make sacrifices on them for storing ore for example. If you want max cargo space for your rocks you should have to fit for max cargo not get it right out of the box.
NEONOVUS wrote: The real issue was that jetcan mining was the only expectable way to provoke a fight, which inherantly meant basically a combat ship can flipping or the miner just logging. So it didn't really do much, at least not in the sense of anything other than idiots. Same thing for Code bumping, it fell apart once it was pointed that they had to leave people in peace after some time.
The bigger issue is that you have an interest in content that you provoke, not so much a mutual interest. Where functionally you are pushing it on other people in an effort to get them to play your game, and they would rather not.
For a triteness, The wolf and the sheep held a vote, and there were plenty of rams at the table.
The shenanigans that happened around jetcans in belts was hugely enjoyable and productive in terms of pvp. I used to have great fun baiting fights out of pilots using my battle iteron V and there was countless others all happily blowing eachother up all overhighsec. All of that activity is gone which has lead to much more boring highsec which is not good for the game. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 06:18:56 -
[16] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
WTF did I just read?
The sorry history of poor gameplay changes that has removed entire professions from eve all in the name of protecting the stupid from themselves |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 06:38:59 -
[17] - Quote
Quote:
Yeas the change to EHP happened some time ago and I was one yelling at CCP because all the mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag.
The hulk had the same base tank as a HAC and was able to fit a sizable tank. I had actually advocated at the time to boost the fitting room to allow for large shield extenders to be fitted.
Quote: Now I have a choice to sit in a ship that I can tank so you guys have to work to kill me if I chose to go mining, after this was implemented I got back into a mining ship, having given up in disgust because a single Catalyst could kill me in any ship I flew to mine even if I fitted maximum tank. Of course you want to go back to that.
If you fitted a tank then a single catalyst would never have been able to kill you. This is an outright lie.
Quote: No it did not end piracy, I rather like Liek Diaz who works in Osmon, he is very effective and say hello to each other, he kills mining ships and loot scoops and while you are whining he is getting on with it.[quote/] you can't turn a profit ganking barges these days, again, you just lied. [Quote] Jetcan theft and baiting, wow, just go suspect baiting, but you don't like that because there is more risk, other people with combat ships can chose to go in, you are nothing but a carebear ganker who wants easy kills on ships that cannot fight back.
Like I said PL is having a lot of fun with the revitalised Caps, why are you a PL player whining about hisec mining when you have a whole suite of new toys to have fun with, its beyond a parody, really baltec1 you are the person who came up with a very good doctrine for the Goons, but is this really your level, whining about mining ship tanks?
I call out broken mechanics and bad changes no matter where and to who they happen to. The changes I have highlighted have been bad for the game, bad for balance and bad for providing content. Mining piracy in highsec is dead, ganking miners is a loss making operation these days. Jetcan pvp is dead, you don't have the pirates running around the highsec belts anymore nor people like me baiting them into fights. Jetcan pvp is now restricted to a can off the jita 4-4 undock. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 06:49:06 -
[18] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: They don't like suspect baiting because there is greater risk.
I supported the crime watch changes so let's stop assuming silly things like this. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 06:58:52 -
[19] - Quote
Quote:
And I was calling out the bad balance of having mining ships having the tank of a wet paper bag.
If you are going to debate with me you are going to have to actually read what I am typing. I have already said in the very text you quoted the hulk had the same base tank as the HACs.
Quote: Liek Darz is still ganking miners in Osmon, he begs to differ, some miners fit for yield and ease of use, they can be ganked and there is enough reasons for them to fit for yield.
Just because you can still gank them does not mean you can turn a profit doing so. Miner ganking these days isn't piracy, it's terrorism.
Quote: Jetcan baiting has been replaced by suspect baiting, go and do that its not difficult, its just more risky.
It's no more risky than can baiting used to be. Jetcan mining was its own thing and hasn't been replaced with suspect baiting, it was just outright removed from the game. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 07:20:19 -
[20] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: And do you read what other people post instead of quoting snappy of reply one liners. I don't debate with you, I call you out on what you post.
You clearly arn't doing well on that front given I have had to correct you in nearly every post you have made in response to me.
Quote: Liek Darz seems to do fine, he loots a lot of ships and seems to keep well supplied with gank ships.
Code are also well supplied with ships, that doesn't automatically mean they are making a profit. Liek Darz is killing for the joy of killing, they are not pirating.
Quote: I go to a can, I take it, I go suspect, I drop that can again with his ore, the only difference is that I am suspect and can now be shot by anyone.
The point you don't understand is that miners don't Jetcan mine anymore. All the content that surrounded that activity is gone, the hunting, the baiting, the thefts all of it is gone. It cannot be replaced. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 07:43:03 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:
You have corrected nothing.
Apart from having to constantly correct you on my arguments, correct you when you said the hulk had the tank of a wet paper bag, when you said it's profitable to gank miners still, when you said going suspect is more risky than baiting with cans used to be and so on.
Quote: So the balance is right, mining ships are still dying in hisec, what is your problem? The inability to play with their heads by winding them up?
The svipul dies but that doesn't mean it's anywhere close to being balanced.
Simple fact is that content has been removed due to poor changes. Barge piracy is gone, Jetcan mining is gone and along with the went a whole swath of content from baiting fights with theifs in my hauler right up to the ice interdictions. At the end of the day mining is highsec has never been as boring as it is today, literally the only risk and content they have now is code. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 08:24:19 -
[22] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Quote:
You have corrected nothing.
Apart from having to constantly correct you on my arguments, correct you when you said the hulk had the tank of a wet paper bag, when you said it's profitable to gank miners still, when you said going suspect is more risky than baiting with cans used to be and so on. Quote: So the balance is right, mining ships are still dying in hisec, what is your problem? The inability to play with their heads by winding them up?
The svipul dies but that doesn't mean it's anywhere close to being balanced. Simple fact is that content has been removed due to poor changes. Barge piracy is gone, Jetcan mining is gone and along with the went a whole swath of content from baiting fights with theifs in my hauler right up to the ice interdictions. At the end of the day mining is highsec has never been as boring as it is today, literally the only risk and content they have now is code. The Svipul is OP. Nope barge piracy is not done, Liek Darz is doing it, he told me and others in local that he was making ISK out of it. There are plenty of mining ships getting blown up in hisec, I was mining the other day and in came some CODE players and started ganking Mac's, so I hunted one down and podded her. There is plenty of ganking going on that is not CODE, people have adapted and still make money. Stop being entitled and adapt, I had to. EDIT: The Hulk still has the tank of a wet paper bag..., you corrected nothing, everything I said there was correct.
The hulk can fit a tank on par with most T2 cruisers. I guess that means you think almost every cruiser in eve also has the tank of a wet paper bag...
I'm also calling rubbish yet again on you saying it's profitable to gank miners. The average drop rate on hulks is around 5 mil, you need a 9-10 mil ship to kill said hulk if it has no tank. Over time you are operating at a loss even with you looting your own mods which works out at an average of 4 mil return.
There is nothing entitled here, content has been removed. In fact the entitled people here are the ones who think unprofitable barge hp and max cargo should come with the ships hull and not be a choice when fitting the ships. Every other ship needs to make hard choices, there is no reason why miners should have to make those hard choices too.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 08:37:08 -
[23] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote:baltec1 wrote: The svipul dies but that doesn't mean it's anywhere close to being balanced.
Simple fact is that content has been removed due to poor changes. Barge piracy is gone, Jetcan mining is gone and with them went a whole swath of content from baiting fights with theifs in my hauler right up to the ice interdictions. At the end of the day mining in highsec has never been as boring as it is today, literally the only risk and content they have now is code.
If he had a ship that can stand up to you it would be content. If he had a ship and the skills to fight you it would be content. But most likely he doesn't or he wouldn't be mining. If you can just bait him and he has no chance to fight back it's content just for you and griefing for him. And sorry, you are complaining that mining in High is now boring as hell but mining in Null is dangerous as I was told again and again. So why are YOU not out there jetcan mining in NPC Null when it's so much content and fun waiting for someone to gank YOU? Or is just the robbing, baiting and ganking fun and not the being robbed, baited and ganked? Why don't you make content on the other side and start a big jetcan mining operation? Maybe someone will steal from your jetcan and you can shoot him (at least after he blaped your ship). Don't ask what others can do for your content, create it on your own. I'm sure you will have fun
I used to drop a Jetcan in the middle of a fleet of barges and would attack those evil pirates you seem to hate so much using a pvp hauler. Go take a look at the slogan on the front of this website and note what it says. I'm all for making my own content but you have to remember that you are just as much my content as I am yours. Removing content for no other reason than people can't be bothered to protect themselves is not good for the game. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 08:56:31 -
[24] - Quote
Quote:
Liek Darz told that to people in local in Osmon when someone said he was funded to do this, but he ganks different ships, Hulks, Mac's, Retrivers, Covetors and the mining frigates, he even ganks mission running cruisers if that answers your question there. People fit their mac's for yield which is how he kills them with two Catalysts.
I have had people tell me they fit for yeild because they hate losing ISK, go kill them, I fit for tank and I accept the loss of yield from sitting in a tanked Skiff when I mine.
This is the reality, I liked Black Pedro's post even if I disagreed on this part of it, because hisec is going to change and become more fun in my opinion. Now come on baltec1 stop whining about the past and embrace the coming fun.
He lied to you. It's a loss making operation, there is simply not enough isk in the loot to cover the costs. It only ever worked when people fitted cargo expanders with no tank. After the hp buff combined with not needing cargo expanders the cost to gank exceeded the reward.
Same thing with all the old content with jetcan mining. Nobody jetcan mines so nobody is hunting for can which means I have no jetcan flippers to hunt myself. It was a mistake for CCP to make these changes to barges and it has resulted in less pvp in highsec. The loss in content also goes further. Less barges, haulers and combat ships and mod are getting killed which means fewer ships are getting bought, less ships getting bought means less reward for industrialists.
You tell me to adapt, well I adapted right up until the point they removed my gameplay. The people who didn't adapt were the people who demanded and celebrated CCP removing pirates from mining. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 09:27:40 -
[25] - Quote
Quote:
Why would the most successful miner ganker in the game lie to me, you don't do it, he does. That said his reply did surprise me at the time.
To troll you. He is using the ships and tactics invented by my corp, I probably know more than he does on this subject and it's history as I was there from the start.
Quote: Regardless of that it still comes back to the fact that you feel that you should profit from a T2 fitted mining ship if you gank it, which seems like a silly benchmark in any game. Pirates gank haulers now, seriously your benchmark does not make any sense. Every other subcap bat maybe the abandon is profitable to gank when fitted in this way. It makes perfect sense for barges to be like this too. It's not like they would be at some kind of disadvantage, even the most token of tanks would push it above the limit of being profitable to gank. Hell if it was up to me I would give the barges the power grid they need to fit a large shield extender.
Quote: You can go after suspect baiters, there was a PL one outside the Preimeter X citadel, thats a fun challenge for you.
Lots of ships are dying in the game at the moment.
Pirates are going where the money is, which is interdicting haulers on gates, you should try it...
Being able to go do something else doesn't alter the fact that all of that content is gone. What happens when piracy against freighters is gone? When it becomes unprofitable to target haulers? You will point out that ganking is still possible but for a pirate it will mean their profession is gone. That is what has happened to mining piracy, it no longer exists all that is left is code style ganking to terrorise. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 09:55:46 -
[26] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 you are trying to push me into replying on ISK tanking so you can pull my chain on that. I disagree with your benchmark for reasons I explained earlier in terms of structure for a mining ship as compared to a combat ship. I still feel that you think you are entitled to gank every ship that can be fitted to a T2 level and profit from it, I don't agree with that benchmark
You have given a role play reason to justify barges not being balanced like every other subcap out there. You can avoid being profitable simply by fitting a tank, that's it. Why is this too much to ask from barge pilots?
Quote: Freighters can still be ganked even with a full on correct 3 minute warp timer, its just become more difficult and more likely to be interdicted, more content...
That's not what I was talking about. I said what happens to pirates when ganking haulers and freights becomes unprofitable? A rhetorical question granted but the point was the pirates have no other content to move to.
Quote:Pirate is a profession, they have to adapt to changing circumstances, a Miner pirate is however a bit low brow to be honest.
You can't adapt to impossible. Miner pirates were indeed to low bar of the profession with the poorest of payouts but it was where people started out. It was a newer pilot thing much like level 1 missions. They cut their teeth on it then progressed on to other things. There is still no reason that their profession, even it it was the lowest of low in the eyes of people such as yourself, should have been removed simply because people who fitted no tank on their expanded barges refused to adapt and fit a tank.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 10:47:41 -
[27] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:You have given a role play reason to justify barges not being balanced like every other subcap out there. You can avoid being profitable simply by fitting a tank, that's it. Why is this too much to ask from barge pilots? Again though you're talking about a versatile ship vs a ship with a rigid set of fitting options and crying that a ship built for defense has a naturally tougher defense than a more flexible ship built to fulfill multiple roles. Stop being terrible.
I'm comparing barges to every single other subcap. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17610
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 11:00:03 -
[28] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:You have given a role play reason to justify barges not being balanced like every other subcap out there. You can avoid being profitable simply by fitting a tank, that's it. Why is this too much to ask from barge pilots? Again though you're talking about a versatile ship vs a ship with a rigid set of fitting options and crying that a ship built for defense has a naturally tougher defense than a more flexible ship built to fulfill multiple roles. Stop being terrible. So much this.
You are agreeing with a blatantly wrong comment. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17612
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 13:14:42 -
[29] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:I'm comparing barges to every single other subcap. Well you're not, are you. A fitted, empty occator with no tank wouldn't be profitable either, neither would any shuttle. What you're doing is completely ignoring the fact that most ships are built to be flexible so they can fulfil many roles meaning the empty ship itself is in a worse position but it has much broader fitting options which make it excel in whatever area you want and you're comparing it to an exhumer designed specifically to tank. Effectively you're complaining that other ships have more fitting options than Exhumers. What you're fundamentally missing is that rather than having one single versatile exhumer, they have 3 rigid exhumers, one for yield, one for capacity and one for tank. You are suggesting that an untanked skiff should be the equivalent of an untanked Zealot, but it's not, as they've already opted to tank by choosing the skiff in the first place.
You don't understand the point I am making at all. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 15:19:31 -
[30] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:But then all ships should be the same, and traits would no longer exist and everyone would come down to fittings. The zealot wouldn't get a laser bonus and the sacrilege wouldn't get a missile one. Either way, you'd still end up with players flying the same yield and tank as a skiff because the players smart enough to choose a skiff over a hulk now would still sacrifice the additional yield for additional tank. If anything all it would do is allow some of us to squeeze out a bit more yield and still have a tank that makes them unprofitable.
Bit of a leap off the deep end you are making there. Changing barges will do none of those things. You can give the skiff it's current tank simply by upping the fitting room to allow it. Reverse the hp buffs they made to the ship, keep the bonuses and simply add a few slots here and there and up the cpu and power grid to allow you to fit stuff. That's what should have happened.
Quote:No, what these ships represent is a fixed directions for exhumers. One for yield, one for capacity, one for tank, and no way to balance it out with fittings. You just said the same thing I did. CCP fitted the ships for you.
Quote:What would be the opposing choice though. So in yoru ideal world if a skiff chose not to fit tank, could they fit for yield and achieve hulk yield instead? or fit for ore hold and reach mackinaw capacity? Could they fit between the extremes and have both an improved yield an a formidable tank?
Because quite honestly it sounds like you just want a weak skiff and a separate "skiff tank module" that they have to choose to bolt on with no other viable choice. But if someone is making the decision to use a skiff now, they'll probably continue to make the decision to tank even if they made it that way, since they've already demonstrated that they choose tank over max yield by picking the Skiff.
I would give you the option to increase its hold at the expense of tank but also give you more options in terms of tank. Frankly I would change the barges to be armour tankers rather than shield as it would mean having to make real choices for yield, tank and cargo just like every other ship in eve. It makes eve a lot more interesting and varied. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:03:37 -
[31] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:But don't you see that all that would do is mean they fit a few more modules to do exactly what they already do? Anyone making the choice of a skiff already will still be fitting
Im fine with them choosing to fit a tank, its their choice. Equally I would be fine with someone choosing to fit no tank, slapping on some cargo expanders or going with max yield and even someone getting creative and fitting an ECM fit on them. The whole point would be its up to them how they use the ship.
Lucas Kell wrote:No, what I said is that rather than making a super exhumer and giving you freedom of fittign choice they puroposly restricted you to one of three choices of hull so you can;t be as flexible as other ships. It's still the responsibility of the player to pick between tank, capacity and yield and it's still the choice of the players fittings to pick how much more tank or yield they want to add.
You dont need to merge them into one super exhumer, they would work perfectly well being specialized for a certain task just like how every other class of ships has specializations. Remove the HP buff they got, add enough powergrid, cpu and slots to be able to fit the equipment the require and you will have fixed barges, brought back mining piracy and probably jetcan mining too. The barges would not be easy pickings and people would get the content back. Everyone wins.
Lucas Kell wrote:But surely the end result from a gankers perspective would be the same, since anyone smart enough to choose a skiff now would still be smart enough to tank their ship if it was fitting based. Switching to armor would just mean they have useless midslots and would be forced to sacrifice yield for tank since tank is a necessity. And since highsec miners are already at the bottom of the PVE income ladder, I'd question why you feel they need to be punished further, especially if they are the players already choosing the lower yield skiff over the higher yield hulk.
Am I getting punished for having to fit a tank on my Megathron rather than fill all the lows with magstabs and tracking? Everyone has to make the choice between more firepower, more speed, more tank, more utility and so on in every other ship. Why should miners not also have to think about these things? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:09:16 -
[32] - Quote
Xiahou Altiska wrote:
1. Why do you feel entitled to consistent profit in high-sec ganking when high-sec mining is not very profitable?
I don't, but I do think there should be a chance to make a profit. Right now there isn't one.
Xiahou Altiska wrote: 2. Why do you feel entitled to profitable high-sec ganking against players specifically fit and prepared against it and accepting the penalty in the form of reduced capacity and yield?
I don't and never have. As I have said many time in this thread if you fit a tank you should expect to not be profitable to gank unless you are fitting silly things such as hundreds of millions in mods.
Xiahou Altiska wrote: 3. The loss of jetcan mining is due to player behavior, not game mechanics. Some people still do it, because mining ships still fill up very quickly. Many don't because they accept the additional travel time as the cost of doing business rather than putting up with can-flipping shenanigans.
The introduction of the much larger ore holds has resulted is the death of jetcan mining. Before the change you could find it happening everywhere in highsec. These days it is more rare than fining an active sentinel.
Xiahou Altiska wrote: Now you're really just complaining about a lack of stupid or careless people, which is quite funny. Welcome to EVE.
Why exactly should the stupid be protected from their own mistakes? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:10:51 -
[33] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:baltec1 wrote: That's not how eve should work ......... um, Baltec.... entire articles are written when carebears who were ganked say things like that.
Context is important here. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:21:10 -
[34] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: To be blunt, I complained and dropped the game for a bit, but you are whining to a stupid degree or you are trolling. If I can accept that my play style is dead so can you. If you can't then it sucks to be you...
Its funny, you started out saying you are all for balance yet when I show you something that has removed content from highsec for no other reason than to stop miners from making bad choices you suddenly wont support balance. With the changes I highlighted miners would continue to be as safe as today, literally nothing would change for any miner that fits a tank but it would bring back content for pirates in highsec. Your hatred of a playstyle is so deep that you simply cannot bring yourself to support an action that bring back a lot of highsec content not just for pirates but for the miners too. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:27:24 -
[35] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:That's exactly what is happening though. People choose tank by picking the skiff hull over the hulk hull, and you're going nuts about how wrong it is that they should be able to make that decision.
No, Im pointing out that having a subcap ship that is unprofitable to gank even when no tank is fitted, its using cargo expanders and is sporting a full t2 loadout is a broken thing. Piking a skiff because it can fit a big tank is fine, but that tank should come from the fittings they choose, not from CCP.
Lucas Kell wrote:But all you'd end up with is the exact same ships fit to be at the same standard they are now.
Correct, you lose nothing but we bring back a lot of lost content.
Lucas Kell wrote:No, because the megathron is designed specifically to do that.
Every ship in eve is designed to do that, you make tradeoffs. Why should barges be any different to anything else out there?
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 16:39:42 -
[36] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
You are trolling, the balance is already here and mining ships are at the right level, your balance is not the balance for the game. This has nothing to do with any hatred for a play style, that is you projecting your feelings on me.
Every single time there is a thread even remotely to do with ganking or piracy in highsec you are in it calling people trolls, and saying things such as "hur dur tearz". Your entire reputation around here and on reddit is one of an angry bear with an axe to grind for whatever reason you have. Not a single time have you ever been against a change that increased the safety in highsec.
I have it all there before you. Literally nothing would change for any miner who currently mines with a tank in mind yet you won't have it and accuse me of trolling. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:12:35 -
[37] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Which is completely irrelevant since ships aren't balanced on the amount they drop when ganked, and even if they tanked with modules they still wouldn't be profitable.
Again, barges are the only subcaps that are unprofitable to gank even when fitted with zero tank, cargo extenders/rigs and a full fit of t2 mods. The only ones.
Why is it that you feel miners should get this special treatment?
Lucas Kell wrote:Except you wouldn't have more content, since the ships would be identical in stats to what they are now just with more modules getting them there. You're not going to pound through 90k EHP of a skiff just to get the handful of extra tank modules they put on there.
Those wouldnt be the target, the target would be the barges choosing to fit no tank at all.
Lucas Kell wrote:They aren't different in that respect, the only way the are different is you make that tradeoff when picking out your hull
How many times must I make the same point?
Barges are the only subcaps that are unprofitable to gank even when fitted with zero tank, cargo extenders/rigs and a full fit of t2 mods.
What are you so afraid of? Fit a tank, any tank and you are safe, fit no tank and you are profitable to gank, just like a suicide gank talos. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:15:01 -
[38] - Quote
Artemis Ellery Sazas wrote:Over the years there have been many posts from gankers/griefers telling high sec carebears to adapt or GTFO. It would seem now griefers should take their own advice.
How do you adapt when your entire activity is removed from the game? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:29:15 -
[39] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
I don't care what people think of me, this is not a beauty parade for me, its to get the correct balance for the game, if players like you hate me that's fine, I won't lose sleep about it, it means that I am making the right points, also I do not post on reddit.
My point of view is simply that gankers have it too easy in Eve and the balance needed to be changed, its seems that we are almost there in my view hence the change in my sig. If you call me a bear with an axe to grind so what, I still think you are trolling at this point.
And I am telling you simply that miners get ganked when they fit for yield, and in Hulks and Mac's they get ganked even when they fit a tank.
EDIT: Though I do acknowledge that you have lost a play style that you enjoyed, just like Herzog and myself, we lost those due to balance you have too. You throw so many one liners to goad people its very difficult to work out if you are trolling or actually making a proper point.
Well let me come at this from a slightly different angle.
We all can agree that mining is the single more boring activity in eve today. There is next to no risk when you are sitting in a skiff in highsec even compared to the low income level. Back in 2010-12 mining had some of the most interesting gamplay going in highsec. Yes, it was because they were exploding due to failing to fit a tank but that level of content kept them busy. They were activly playing the game trying to protect themselves, hunt down attackers, banding together to protect their cans and so on. At the time the forums were aflame with propaganda and speculation while the interdictions happened. Mining was exciting, there were stories nearly every day getting made.
Today, you suck on a rock and are ignored. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17613
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:30:20 -
[40] - Quote
Andrei Rianovski wrote:
Don't be so dramatic, it hasn't been removed from the game
Mining piracy has indeed been removed from the game. All you have left is a terrorist organisation known as code. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17614
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 18:25:04 -
[41] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Except we know that's not true, I already pointed out the occator and all the shuttles.
The shuttles cant fit anything and I already said the deep space transports suffer from similar problems as the barges.
Lucas Kell wrote:I don't, I just think you're picking out ridiculous metrics to claim them as special. I'm sure if we look hard enough we can find a metric by which every ship is a special snowflake, and most of them would be as ridiculous as this one.
You won't. Simply put piracy against mining was removed simply because people such as yourself feel miners should be exempt from profitable attack.
Lucas Kell wrote:Which is exactly as it is now. Those people who choose to fit no tank, they are called "hulk pilots". Someone flying a skiff has already made an active decision to pick tank over yield. How the hell do you still not understand that?
What part of no barge is profitable to attack are you not getting?
Lucas Kell wrote:Oh, you mean kinda like it is right now? Once again for those playing along at home, by choosing a skiff you are choosing tank over yield and thus do not have "no tank".
Again, no barge is profitable to gank. What I am asking for is a level playing field. Gank ships are profitable to gank, why do you feel mining barges fitted with no tank should not be profitable to gank? Where is the balance in that? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17614
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 07:47:29 -
[42] - Quote
Well all this thread has shown is that you miners are indeed the most spineless, lazy and clueless players in eve. So inept at this game that you feel CCP needs to fit your ships for you and so cowardly you cant stand the idea of of people hunting for anti-tanked barges. Miners demand to be viewed as more than drones chewing on rocks but frankly, that's exactly what you are today.
You say gankers are cowards, well I don't see them fighting to make their untanked ships unprofitable to gank like you are in here. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17615
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 18:31:31 -
[43] - Quote
Aurelius Ignum wrote:baltec1 wrote:
You say gankers are cowards, well I don't see them fighting to make their untanked ships unprofitable to gank like you are in here.
Poor, spoiled, little child. Who told you that every action or endeavor is, or even should be profitable?
The irony of a miner calling anyone else spoiled when they have been removed from the threat of piracy is rich. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17616
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 19:04:58 -
[44] - Quote
Aurelius Ignum wrote:baltec1 wrote:
The irony of a miner calling anyone else spoiled when they have been removed from the threat of piracy is rich.
Ahh. This seems to be part of your difficulty. Just as you are incapable of finding a profitable target that you can actually take down, you are also incapable of distinguishing miners from other occupations. As a solution to your impotence...I mean "problem", I would recommend taking the following steps. 1: Realize that not every activity in the game has to net you a profit in ISK. Some activities are just a means to an end. 2: Realize that not everyone who disagrees with you or thinks poorly of you is a miner. 3: Or you could just stay on the short bus. I'm sure milk and cookies will be along... "Soon" (TM). Ganking effectively defenseless ships is a tactic. But one of many. It is not the End All and Be All of the game. If your ability to enjoy the game revolves solely around the ability to make a profit from shooting fish in a barrel, then perhaps you are doing it wrong. Either that or maybe you should look for activities that more closely match your proclivities? Like frying ants with a magnifying glass.
So you are now comparing miners to being as basic in thought and stature as ants. Is it any wonder most people in eve have no respect of them when even their so call defenders do nothing but belittle them. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17620
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 19:56:47 -
[45] - Quote
Marton Gastolfer wrote:baltec1 wrote: Today, you suck on a rock and are ignored.
The problem seem to be that you feel ignored and that make you mad. Making you feel important isn't the goal of the game.
Best part of this is I wouldn't even be taking part in any of this content, Im busy burning down empires I helped to build.
You are the one sitting there with no content because you got it all removed. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17620
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 20:13:58 -
[46] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:I'm not seeing the difference between a miner feeling entitled to make a profit off of peacefully mining asteroids and a ganker feeling entitled to prey on whomever they choose for an unlimited amount of time. Both feel entitled. Both seem to think 'their' way of playing needs to be protected by CCP. Both come here in the forums and gripe about it.
I also don't see the difference between mining an asteroid and mining a ship, so it's amusing to see vitriol tossed at miners from those that just mine the miners. Asteroids don't shoot back and neither do industrials.
Trust me, if CCP REALLY wanted HiSec suicide ganking dead, they'd let BattleCruisers mount strip miners. If they really wanted mining/hauling/industry dead, they'd change the Concord mechanics. So from where I stand, both sides are pretty balanced and you guys are just spouting out self-serving propaganda.
Key difference here.
Mining piracy has been removed from the game. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17620
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 20:43:58 -
[47] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Well, we're mostly concerned about balancing game mechanics. I try to leave personal feelings out of the matter as best I can. This latest storm of back-and-forth is triggered by bumping -- and let's be honest ..... wasn't it about time they fixed that? Out of the many possible fixes CCP still picked the most ganker-friendly.
Why such threads always have to deteriorate into mudslinging is beyond me.
We are at the point where ganking or more accurately, highsec pvp has been nerfed so much that every single little nerf is now reviled. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17623
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 21:00:39 -
[48] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Why aren't we celebrating? Why the long faces?
They didn't adapt, CCP did it for them. Jetcan mining ended only because CCP gave miners large ore holds right out of the box. They also removed profitable ganking of miners when they buffed barge HP.
The stupid is still there, its just protected from itself by CCP. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17623
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 21:07:31 -
[49] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:@Devil's Rejects
Agreed.
There are several things wrong with highsec, but this has much to do with a lack of assets. I believe CCP is trying to address this by making Citadels "better" than the freebee stations.
With tax rates and refining efficiency, possible production efficiency as well, many indy corps may consider putting up a Citadel if it is worthwhile -- and then you'd have something you can pinpoint and shoot.
These things however are rarely brought up in highsec threads because they don't fit the narrative of "CCP Nerfed My Gameplay".
Hub camping and blanket wardecs still seem to bring plenty of content as well. Watchlists ...... were bad for multiple reasons. Territorial control of a region is still possible to achieve, so I guess there's still a role for good mercenaries in the grand scheme of things. I have the utmost confidence in your abilities.
Well its not much use for all of the solo/small gang players out there. Wardecs are still super easy to avoid and a citadel is not exactly something you can take on as a small corp/solo. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 08:03:10 -
[50] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:OK lets nail this on the alter of balance.
baltec1 wants it balanced as he puts it so that it is profitable to gank a T2 fitted barge of any description, that includes exhumers. I presume that this will include all security systems, so that a T1 fitted Catalyst could gank all of the mining barges in 0.5 systems. In effect he wants to go back to how it was.
You left out the part where I said profitable to gank an untanked barge sporting expanders and full t2 fit.
Dracvlad wrote: Lets talk about a miner in hisec, I don't mean any one using bots and 20 characters or something like that, I am talking about people actively playing their accounts and trying to progress in the game. Their income is very very low, I used two skiffs and was getting 12.5m an hour. Again they can fit for yield use better ships in terms of yield and increase that by perhaps 30%
A Hulk costs 220m a Mackinaw 180m and a Skiff 150m, then the T1's, Covetor 32.5m Retreiver 29m and the Procurer 26m., simple fact that the game balance would be out of kilter in terms of the miner having a low income profession with what are very expensive ships. This was the situation before the ships were given better tank options. If CCP decides to go back to that situation then they have to reduce the cost of the mining ships so the Hulk will cost no more than 5m ISK because that would balance off against the the ganker and his ship which is the Catalyst in terms of the ship at risk and their income being able to sustain that loss.
All of the people I know who left the game before the tanks were revised saw no hope of progression, all they saw was that in that environment their ships were easy prey and it was massive hits against the income and they saw their asset progression go backwards at an impossible to sustain rate, there was so much risk and so little reward that they saw no way to continue. The balance on risk and reward was way out of touch...
These people who were getting ganked by pirates simply because they were not fitting a tank, they were infact fitting an anti-tank. The simplest solution to their problem was super easy, fit a tank. That one simple step resulted in gankers overlooking you.
Dracvlad wrote: The balance currently is that the yield and ease of use in terms of warping back and forth require, some people make that decision and get an increase yield, and people gank them for fun or strategic reasons but not for ISK.
So in a nutshell, the mining ships in hisec before the tank had massive risk and no reward and that was it.
baltec1 will throw risk and reward around at times, but only when it suits him, but the balance issue with mining before the tanks were improved was that it was the most risky profession in the game with the lowest reward and people only did it because it was restful and enabled them to build stuff. In a Skiff with a tank its low risk but it is also low reward, EVE in a nutshell.
CCP will not listen to his arguments because they finally worked out that they lost a huge amount of people who paid for their accounts, I think CCP changed it too late in the day, because I can tell you now that not a single one of those people I knew who used to mine in Eve came back, not one single one.
The risk scaled with how you fitted your barge, no tank high risk, max tank very little.
The thing you willfully ignore was that the rewards for pirating barges was equally low and it relied entirely upon the miners themselves not fitting a tank. There is no balance when an entire profession is removed from eve, balance is when both sides have counters.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 08:05:52 -
[51] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mining piracy has been removed from the game.
Except of course that it obviously hasn't since it still happens daily.[/quote]
Ganks happen, profitable ganks don't.
Lucas Kell wrote: I saw someone jetcan mining yesterday, as they do every day.
No you didn't. This is just like when you "saw" people bumping freighters for an hour or when "saw" no freighters making it past the famous choke points.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 09:30:06 -
[52] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
The statement that they were getting ganked because they were not fitting a tank, sorry but people were fitting a full tank for the ship and still getting blown up easily.
Ok lets deal with this myth.
What was the tank on a hulk back then? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 10:16:57 -
[53] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote:Simple: If mining isn't as profitable as ratting then ganking miners can't be very profitable too. Mining has to be profitable or nobody would do it. But because of the ore price miners are at the beginning of the food chain so they don't make a lot of money. If it would be really profitable to gank miners everyone would do it and that would make mining even more unprofitable. Fitting for Tank will cut down profitability even more..
Now this is where the fun starts.
First, back then ganking miners for profit earned you less than the miner was making. The second is when the ice interdictions happened the reward for braving the ganking was huge. Ice miners during the caldari ice interdiction were selling the ice they managed to mine for a fortune. Equally, the profits to be made for supplying both mining barges AND gank ships was lucrative. By far the biggest winners of this time were the manufactures. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 10:26:00 -
[54] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
It is not a myth and off you go and do the numbers, if you want to make a point make the effort. What I will tell you is that the Hulk of then is not much worse than it is now, but the Hulk was the best tanking ship and it could be destroyed by a single Catalyst in 0.7 and worse systems even when fitted for tank, what happened is people in their desperation fitted expensive modules that made no difference at all and just gave a load of ISK to the gankers when they dropped.
Toddle off and do the work and prove what exactly?
There it is, a number to work with.
Back then you could fit a t2 tank to a hulk that would very easily give you 33k EHP. What did that mean? Well it would require 3x full alpha fit tornados to punch through that. So the chances of a single Catalyst managing to chew through all of that ehp before concord turned up? Zero. If you overloaded and fitted a few inexpensive impants turned that up to 40k ehp and thats the omni resists number. VS a catalyst the tank was higher due to the resist profile being more geared towards the damage blaster put out.
So let me be clear in saying this. What you just said is rubbish, the hulk could tank very well. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 10:58:18 -
[55] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Good I pushed you to make some numbers based on a deliberate over statement of effective, but what you said there about tornado's is rubbish and invalidates your profit argument. The final reality was that the 33k tank would take two catalysts in a 0.5 system when destroyers were buffed, which is when it went silly. The 40K is totally false and was only ever used by people who were very targetted by the gankers.
40k is the tank my barge had vs catalysts, you needed more than 2 to kill it in 0.5 and a large number to go after it in higher sec space which is where the bulk of miners live. Clearly, you cant turn a profit if you are sporting a tank. This is what balance looks like.
Dracvlad wrote: We know the numbers, a properly setup and overheating gank catalyst produces around 700 DPS, that would be 25 seconds having pulled away CONCORD in a 0.5 system which is 17,500 hit points and 35,000 in total meaning that two Catalysts could take it out in a 0.5 system., after that it was 3 uo to 0.8 if my memory is correct which is stuff that I no longer have access to.
Please continue...
Its not correct. You miss out that said hulk had ECM drones, getting perfect hits is rare, the gank pilots will not have perfect skills and very very few of them will be sporting an SH-604 implant so the destroyers wont be getting 700 DPS. The destroyer of choice for tuning a profit wasn't even t2 fitted, it was meta fit in order to turn a profit on ganking the untanked barges. The firepower of your average catalyst was more like 400-500 dps. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17629
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 11:40:43 -
[56] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Your barge, that is funny, now turn that into the required number of Catalysts with T1 fits now make that statement again about not turning a profit...
Small drone bay at the time need to clear rats, you always go on perfect situations like your 40k tank Hulk. I got my hulk up to around 35k and that was it, also if I had ECM drones I had to fit a small booster, so many compromises if my memory here is correct..
Keep going...
Not too many pages ago you were saying your barge had the tank of a wet paper bag, now you are suddenly sporting a tank on par with a curse. As for the rats, they cant even threaten a day 1 ibis. I'm sorry but if you want anyone to take you seriously your lies have got to stop. You argument is thoroughly trounced, you used to be able to fit a sizable tank on barges, way more than what was needed to make them unprofitable to gank. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17630
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 11:46:21 -
[57] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:[so who is paying bounty to kill miners in hisec, well the Goons were, but now they are not.
That only happened in the miner interdictions and the funding came from playing the ice markets which required the total shutdown of ice mining in highsec (aka no mining in caldari space). The average pirate operating outside of the targeted racial icebelts got nothing. Again, don't lie. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17630
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 11:53:58 -
[58] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
It was a wet paper bag, a tank does not just come from its resists and base tank, it comes from its speed, its ability to project force and so on, a Catalyst ganking a Curse will suddenly find its guns shutting off though a lack of cap. Try better with comparisons because that one was especially weak.
EHP is EHP, a curse sitting still is no harder to gank than a hulk sitting still.
Dracvlad wrote: You have only trounced yourself, and people do take me seriously, I get plenty of eupport emails from people who thank me for posting like I do on the forums, you would be surprised at how many.
Yea I'll take "things that doesn't happen" for 600 alex.
Dracvlad wrote: The rest of the barges had really poor tanks that were much worse than the Hulk, and I just proved to you that four T1 fit catalysts would tank your 40k EHP ship and make a profit. Keep it up you are digging yourself deeper...
So in the span of a page we went from 1 destroyer to 2 and now to 4. Is 8 next? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17630
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 11:54:45 -
[59] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Actually the Goons were funding CODE, we know differently.
Problem with this argument is code didn't exist back then. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17631
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 12:40:22 -
[60] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dracvlad wrote:
Actually the Goons were funding CODE, we know differently.
Problem with this argument is code didn't exist back then. OK lets deal with that one: http://www.minerbumping.com/2012/12/any-day-now.html And the first sentence is: Nearly five months ago, I declared I was taking command of the ice field in Halaima. Since then, my Agents and I have been endlessly threatened and conspired against by our enemies. For some reason, though, the Big Attack never seems to occur. So July 2012.
Bat Countrys Ice interdiction, February 2012. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17632
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 13:20:29 -
[61] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ganks happen, profitable ganks don't. Sure they do, just not apparently by you because your target selection and attack methods are flawed because you're lazy. baltec1 wrote:No you didn't. This is just like when you "saw" people bumping freighters for an hour or when "saw" no freighters making it past the famous choke points. Yes I did. Feel free to look up the recent orca kill by Manjiro within the last few days on zkb. At the end of the day you're still banging on about procurers and skiffs as if they are the only barges used, ignoring the fact that by choosing them the pilot is choosing to tank (thus are not untanked), and you're still pretending the only method of pirating people in highsec is ganking and that ganking isn't profitable which is demonstrably false. You are a prime example of the type of player you claim to hate. HTFU.
I have twice now shown you the maths on this, twice I have shown you that its a loss making operation. If there was money to be had we wouldn't be in the situation where code is the only organisation ganking miners.
We also should not be in the situation where CCP are pre fitting our ships for us. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17634
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 16:20:27 -
[62] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
Code was operating before the buff to tank on mining ships, they were especially active in Gallente and Caldari space and that was linked in with certain top level Goons having lots of Gallente ice. I rather like that as a reason to gank mining ships, to put the price up of Gallente ice.
Gal ice got targeted because of the bottleneck in POS operations, not because of anything code may or may not have been up to. These attempts are reworking history isn't going to work any better than your claims that barges were profitable to kill no matter what they fitted. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17634
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 16:22:04 -
[63] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:No you haven't, you simply stated that it's not then pointed at the tankiest mining barges and said "those can't be ganked for profit if they are empty, therefore highsec piracy is dead". People do gank other exhumers and barges for profit and there's other methods of piracy that also work.
I used the hulk because not only was that the ship everyone was flying back then but also because it was the ship with the most potential profit. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17634
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 16:24:19 -
[64] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote: Just take a look at the economic Report: mining. And have a look which Null/low regions are in the upper tiers: None. Why not? You pointed out yourself that the ores are much better.
Eves strength is, that there is something for everybody. Do you really think that all miners will go to Null/Low or will they just cancel their account? IMHO this would be a fatal step towards a pure shooter and not a living breathing universe with a niche for everybody.
EVE grew for a decade while miners were profitable to gank and while jetcan theft operated. Your argument is a hollow one. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17634
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 19:32:38 -
[65] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:It was my understanding that minerganking was more of a public relations stunt (which worked wonders as some guys poop their pants even when not in danger) but that this was nothing but an entertaining pass-time.
The PROFIT is made by haulers; and I'm not even talking freighters here but overcharged bestowers, badgers, expensive mods on incursion runners etc. - and yes, expanded cargohold freighters.
I have no idea what Baltec is trying to prove here; we've been wondering for years why gankers blow up our barges if there's no profit to be made, never got a straight reply aside from "UR TEARZ R DELICIUSS" Okay. Fine. You do it for tears, do it for tears then. Don't harp on about profit. You want profit, go after the haulers or the assembly yard POS.
(plus, let's not forget your cheap catalysts were covered by insurance back in the day -- you didn't actually PAY for your loss now did ya?)
The gank catalyst didnt exist when insurance payouts were a thing, that was an age where the gank battleship was the go to ship.
These days there isn't any reason to gank barges. It really is just for the tears and to make things go boom. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17634
|
Posted - 2016.05.06 19:38:28 -
[66] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:baltec1 wrote: This thread is about CCP removing content and in this case they have. To me thats not a good thing to be doing, especially given that pvp is the only content mining has.
.....not true. There are social, organized groups at work with anti-gank defenses, boosts, haulers, reprocessing POSses ... there's a lot more at play here than merely sitting in the belt.
You sit a skiff in a belt and go watch TV or play another game, thats as hard as it gets. There is no challenge, no risk, no choices to be made. Just sit there and suck on a rock. It is the single most boring activity in EVE simply because miners whined until CCP removed everything that could possibly make them fail at their task. Literally the only thing left is a gank organisation that will last only so long as people keep on donating to them, and even they will very very rarely form up enough people to take down a skiff. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17635
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 00:26:12 -
[67] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: There is no challenge, no risk, no choices to be made. Sounds like joining some bloated nullsec corporation. baltec1 wrote: It is the single most boring activity in EVE . Yes ... indeed it is. If you're bored pick a fight with PL. I'm sure they'll provide you with enough excitement and ISK loss that you'll learn to appreciate having a highsec area to recover in. Until then you're just an entitled biomass that wants to pick on the weak.
Do we tell him or let him figure this one out? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 11:28:15 -
[68] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Well, they do die if you apply enough firepower - and the game engine does not forbid you from doing so.
Making that profitable is another matter entirely.
I can think flying a T1 fit Mammoth through Aridia is a neat idea for content creation but when I die should I b!tch about it on the forums how CCP ruined my gameplay?
Shouldn't there be a viable reason to gank miners? Right now there isn't one which means the attacks are simply random. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 11:36:24 -
[69] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:Shouldn't there be a viable reason to gank miners? Right now there isn't one which means the attacks are simply random. There's no more or less of a reason to gank miners than any other ship.
Every other ganking target can provide an income. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 12:11:28 -
[70] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:No it can't. Good luck ganking my Tengu bro.
While not a gank kill, it would have been very profitable to gank
Lucas Kell wrote: You'll not that most ships don't get ganked, it's mainly haulers, miners and one-shots like frigates and shuttles.
They don't, but they can be. Every single cov ops frigate that fits a sisters probe launcher also tends to fir zero tank and are rather profitable to blap for example. but the out there are not profitable simply because they fit a tank.
Lucas Kell wrote: What you're upset with is that some miners choose to be tanked and therefore avoid being ganked
They dont choose anything, CCP does it for them. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 16:39:16 -
[71] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:David Therman wrote:I'm no ganker by any stretch of the imagination, but that tengu had 2 small boosters, and no buffer. 2 Nado's, or even a few AC thrashers in somewhere like Niarja/Uedama... wouldn't that be enough to pop it, regardless if the hardeners were up? Probably, but the point is that catching a Tengu is basically Impossible. I regularly shift upwards of 20b isk in Tengus across highsec and have yet to be ganked, and most of the time I don't even activate my active tank when jumping through gates.
If it aligns slower than 2 seconds it can be caught. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 16:45:08 -
[72] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Gwenaelle de Ardevon wrote:Tsss! Tsss! And why did'n CCP choose for you? Can you be a bit more precise with this?
You use a skiff, a ship that CCP has pre fitted for you to tank. Same as how the mack is pre fitted with a massive cargo and also tank. This is the issue you just cant seem to understand. CCP is fitting your ships for you in order to protect you from your own bad choices. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17638
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 16:53:20 -
[73] - Quote
Gwenaelle de Ard wrote:
Maybe, they do. Did someone wrote somewhere that you shall every time have easy kills?
Its only easy if they fit zero tank, sit still, pay no attention and have no ecm drones out, just like every other ship. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17640
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 17:16:57 -
[74] - Quote
Gwenaelle de Ardevon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Gwenaelle de Ard wrote:
Maybe, they do. Did someone wrote somewhere that you shall every time have easy kills?
Its only easy if they fit zero tank, sit still, pay no attention and have no ecm drones out, just like every other ship. I can assure you that my Barges and Exhumers are allways Tanked Max. Always have ECM drones in the hole. And i enjoy it to see mistanked ships be destroyed. Is perfect for my profession. I also remember a memorable try of ganking in Concord Assembly. It was in a 0.6 system, i was alone in the Belts with an Retriever; Two Catalysts warped in, started shoting at me. My ECM Drones did good work, they saved me. After the two went blewed up by Concord, i did fly to station, switched ship, and got around 6 millions of loot from the wrecks. Much more worth than my ore.
Thats the kind of content I want. Smart miners getting kills and loot as well as bragging rights, dumb ones falling foul of the pirates out there. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17643
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 18:25:48 -
[75] - Quote
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:
It is interesting to note that baltec1 want to gank a cruise class ship (and he has recognized a few times i this thread that the barges are cruise class ships) with a single destroyer to get a positive cash flow. That shouldn't be the norm, that should be a very rare exception.
Im calling for if you fit the single worst possible tank on any barge it should be profitable to gank.
Shayla Etherodyne wrote: And another thing about baltec1: he can be someone in the pirate community, no idea, but here is a guy crying in forum because a change done years ago still upset him. Pirate tears best tears.
Pointing out a bad game change is not tears. Tears is when you make bad choices in game and rather than take the loss that inevitably comes you run to the forums and demand the game changed to stop the bad guys from touching you, which is what miners did. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17643
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 18:30:15 -
[76] - Quote
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Why does there need to be a reason other than for fun? When my mates and I go out on a roam, we dont have a viable reason for killing anything we come across, we do it for fun.
Same thing, no?
Take away the reward for missioning or mining and see if people continue to do it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17643
|
Posted - 2016.05.07 18:34:45 -
[77] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Quote:Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted. I am going to post that every time you post.
They also thought titans would be restricted to 1 or 2 per alliance. It doesnt matter if CCP didn't intend for it to happen, it happened and it brought enjoyable content. They were operating under the wrong assumptions and believed the BS miners were saying such as every barge no matter what it put on was profitable to gank.
CCP got it wrong, a barge revamp was needed but not the way they did it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17644
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 02:55:33 -
[78] - Quote
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:baltec1 wrote:Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Why does there need to be a reason other than for fun? When my mates and I go out on a roam, we dont have a viable reason for killing anything we come across, we do it for fun.
Same thing, no?
Take away the reward for missioning or mining and see if people continue to do it. Dude, I cant believe anyone seriously tries to make a profit from an actual miner gank. As I said earlier, I used to gank haulers for profit... that's one thing. But miner ganking? I had an alt once upon a time for ganking miners. I did it for fun... what profit could one expect to make, anyway? I mean really, whats so valuable in or on a hisec miner's ship? Don't get em wrong, I'm all for hisec ganking and not making it too easy on the carebears... I'd even be omre than ok with it if there were no hisec at all, ok? but please, as some one who used to do it every night, don't tell me miner gankers used to be able to make a profit comparable to missioning or even mining. You're exaggerating too much, dude.
For a time goons got 200 million per hulk plus whatever mods dropped and salvage on top and the profits from playing the ice market. Naturally thats no longer possible nor should it be (the 200 mil bit) but miner ganking should return to profitability as the low end starter section for new gankers. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17644
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 10:03:34 -
[79] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:I'm sure it can, and yet it doesn't tend to happen. I've clocked thousands of jumps with vastly more than required to entice gankers and not once even had my shield tinkled.
Which goes to show how rare ganking actually is if thats true.
Lucas Kell wrote:And once again, that's not pre-fitting
You get a tank that makes profitable ganking impossible right out of the box, thats fitting a ship for you.
Lucas Kell wrote:I think you missed his point. Of course if there were no purpose to PvE, it wouldn't get done, but what he was pointing out is that when he PvPs he doesn't sit around going "Oh I can only shoot ships that drop good loot", as the enemy ship exploding is the purpose of the activity. That said, many mining ganks are profitable and there's more than one way to kill miners in highsec some of which don't even require you losing your ship.
If ganking freighters stopped providing income that would also stop, piracy requires that you be able to make a profit. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17644
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 10:12:20 -
[80] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:baltec1 wrote:Shouldn't there be a viable reason to gank miners? Right now there isn't one which means the attacks are simply random. There's no more or less of a reason to gank miners than any other ship. Every other ganking target can provide an income. really? Is lvl4 mission runner fully T2 fitted BS profitable? Is empty capsule profitable? Is empty rookie ship profitable? .....
If said mission ship fits no tank, full cargo extenders in lows/rigs and goes with full t2 gear then yes it is. The gank talos for example can be ganked for profit.
The empty pod and rookie ship obviously not because they have nothing of value fitted to them. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17644
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 10:15:16 -
[81] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
As you know Miniluv was tasked with messing with hisec insted of this 200m, maybe you will admit that part next, to be blunt I used to watch War Akini with a certain amount of wow, but then I realised he was using multi-boxing software to do his ganks, I think he stopped when that was banned.
The 200 mil was the reason goons went all in for a time and warr has not been banned. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17644
|
Posted - 2016.05.08 10:22:32 -
[82] - Quote
Kieron VonDeux wrote:I haven't seen this much salt since I visited the Bonneville Salt Flats.
So your gameplay gets nerf'd a bit. One day the great Pendulum of Balance will swing back in your direction. Learn to adapt and try something different for a while.
You can't adapt to outright removal. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17667
|
Posted - 2016.06.26 10:36:52 -
[83] - Quote
Exaido wrote:
This.
Industry is the basis of the economy in a sandbox environment. If industry is exposed to continuous open war. Prices will rise and their will be fewer industry players.
Which means higher rewards for the industry players who get on with it. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17669
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 17:14:30 -
[84] - Quote
W33b3l wrote:Well without really reading any of this...
EVE is a game set up in a way that highsec shouldn't even exist. The problem is that if it followed Elite Dangerous rules and allowed anyone and everyone to prison **** you for even thinking about peering outside the station regardless where you are, it would have died years ago.
They had enough foresight to realize this and created highsec. Just to make the game playable by new people and create somewhat of a safe haven. Thing is, people like myself decided to either stay there or still spend a lot of time there so it became a much larger part of the game then really anticipated.
A problem with highsec content creating is that the translation for that is usually nothing more then people finding a way to still prison **** people (all be it getting there arses kicked by the guards) or flat out being **** bags because they they cant handle living where real retaliation is a possibility. You know like school bullying back before the 80's.
Its a PVP game and nothing is wrong with using the game mechanics the best you can... but CCP realizes that they have to keep highsec balanced in order to insure they keep subscriptions. Dont let the asshats get to much power while not letting the carebears be too safe at the same time. People always find ways around things so they mess with stuff from time to time. Especially since if highsec commerce is disrupted too much.. the game breaks. There is a reason people run stuff to and from null to highsec and back.
If you arent able to make baby's cry as much as you like, go somewhere where you can...
Piracy is done on shipping and this shipping only exists in highsec. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17670
|
Posted - 2016.07.02 10:51:48 -
[85] - Quote
Aaron wrote:
Piracy can be done anywhere on anything imo
There are no shipping lanes outside of highsec. What happens outside of highsec is roaming gangs, empires fighting each other and raids from WH. None of these things tend to be done with profit in mind while profit is the entire remit of a pirate. There is no bullying involved in some degenerate blowing you up and stealing your cargo, he is playing a role that has always been a selling point of this game. This content has been rather shat on over the last 5-7 years with seemingly no end in sight mostly to make it harder for haulers and miners to suffer the consequences of their own mistakes.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17672
|
Posted - 2016.07.02 16:23:29 -
[86] - Quote
Aaron wrote:It is the gankers tears we can see in the OP and not the miners. It is important we stay on topic here.
It was the carebear tears from miners, haulers and pacifists that have resulted in pvp in highsec getting over nerfed which means less content for everyone. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17672
|
Posted - 2016.07.02 18:02:12 -
[87] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Wouldn't call it "overnerfed" -- it's a system that balances itself.
When it's no longer worth mining, people stop doing it. Same with cargo hauling: I wouldn't use a T2 if a T1 did the job just fine.
On my industry alt I, same as every other industrialist I'd wager, sat down and did the math. Can I fly X ship to perform Y task under Z circumstances? When math says no, I can either change the ship or the circumstances. (or stop doing Y altogether).
When barges have no tank and no means of defending themselves, we stop flying them. When there is nothing I can *reasonably* do to protect my freighter, I don't fly it either.
Apparently, we're expected to have (a) a scout, (b) a webber, (c) avoid certain pipes even with a scout and a webber, (d) completely gimped fits to make the ordeal as unprofitable or uncomfortable as possible: any mod to increase cargo capacity, yield or speed is frowned upon. Essentially forcing me to take net losses even when there's no pirate around, just for protection.
That's okay.
What was not okay, is that even when I take those losses, game mechanics allowed pirates to keep me tackled for as long as they'd want, without concord interfering because no "official" crime was committed. They were, after all, only bumping right- ain't no harm in that?
So I do my math again- this time taking the 30 second window out of the equation. And all of a sudden, I find there is literally nothing I myself can do to protect myself. Now I need (e) a counterbumper, (f) a suicide alt of my own to gank your bumper, or (g) friends. I run the numbers again, frown in annoyance, and decide to ditch the T1 Freighters class as a whole. I've written it off as a bad idea, and happily run my cargo using Jump freighters and deep space transports.
So, after a fashion, I did take care of my problem.
Now you complain content is gone?
Well that, my friend, is Your problem. Not mine.
There used to be a time when big industrial corps held power and could go toe to toe with the PL, gons and russians of the day. This no longer happens because there is no need for industry players to group up anymore. At the same time merc groups are suffering incredibly badly due to mechanics changes. Piracy has equally been squeezed to breaking point.
Right now a miner faces just one threat and that threat only exists while people donate to code. You don't see the highsec wars or the hunting we used to find all over highsec and EVE is not better off without all of that content and story telling. We don't even have the old battle badgers prowling the space lanes. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17672
|
Posted - 2016.07.02 18:30:47 -
[88] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:
I would just like to quote the post again as it is truly excellent. When all mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag so that a single Catalyst, or perhaps two could blow up all of them in any hisec system I stopped mining. I hardly used my Charon as the risk was too great, so two days ago I sold it. Well said Brokkk, damn fine post...
The hulk could tank the firepower of two alpha tornadoes, its a myth that a pair of catalysts could kill any hulk no matter how you fit it. The risk of your freighter getting ganked stands at less than 0.01% out of several million gate jumps. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17679
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 08:46:18 -
[89] - Quote
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Eventually all this glorious sociopathy will result in empty servers (or maybe a non-PLEX subscription model).
But you carry on. I hope they implement all your suggestions.
EVE grew at its fastest rate back when the game was a lot more dangerous. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18259
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 08:53:07 -
[90] - Quote
Sire Sparrow wrote:I played eve on another account a year after release. It was great, mining and chatting all day. No griefers.
My rl mate tried eve a couple years ago, he just wanted to mine, he got stalked and constantly greifed in HS so he quit EvE. Thanks you greifing shmucky Kids.
Please don't lie.
Back when you claimed to play we had the likes of M0o, a pirate organisation that makes todays look as deadly as cotton wool wrapped in air and mechanics that made EVE a hell of a lot more dangerous. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18259
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 11:19:12 -
[91] - Quote
Sire Sparrow wrote:Well, no I'm not lying. It was a new player to eve. Obviously someone was using locator agents and finding him whenever he moved systems and was trying to extort ISK, of which he had none. After a week on greifing by the same guy he gave up on EvE; if he couldn't even mine in HS with a two week old toon (which is how he was learning the game) then he never saw the point in continuing. New bros whould be protected against multiple grefiing attacks in HS at least for the 1st month while they get to grips.
They are, doing what you just described is in fact a bannable offence. It is also extremely rare. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18259
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 15:04:27 -
[92] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:It is funny to read these forums.
The wolves killed most of the sheep.
Now new sheep do not want to come in to the pasture. So the farmer is trying to protect the sheep that are left and to entice new ones in.
And now the wolves complain even more.
Why would anyone feel sorry for the wolves?
Because that's not what happened.
The wolfs got heavily culled over the years and now the sheep are leaving because they are bored. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18260
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 18:37:41 -
[93] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:
Because that's not what happened.
The wolfs got heavily culled over the years and now the sheep are leaving because they are bored.
... still waiting for proofs[/quote]
More danger/content subs grow, the more nerfs that happened to danger/content the worse the subs got.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18260
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 18:41:44 -
[94] - Quote
Lasisha Mishi wrote:high sec ganking seems active as ever to me
At a record low.
Lasisha Mishi wrote:
heck systems like Uedama are still so lethal that they are black holes....
Thousands pass through for every ship killed, including the gankers to concord.
Lasisha Mishi wrote: castrating high sec content creators? Uedama says otherwise. as its literally a high sec SIEGE system that "content creates" anyone dumb enough to go in.
and systems like Osmon are still very active.
Mining barge profitable ganking, jetcan piracy, targeted wardecs, ninja salvaging, jetcan baiting of pirates are just a few things removed from the game.
Lasisha Mishi wrote: gotta remember high sec is not low sec. but despite that, high sec is still pretty dangerous. which is fine as it is now.
It has a fraction of the content it used to have.
Lasisha Mishi wrote: plus, high sec "content creators" don't seem to have problems war deccing everyone who comes through the jita stargate. they do it like its free candy.
They are now forced to do that due to recent nerfs. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18260
|
Posted - 2016.10.06 18:47:39 -
[95] - Quote
Railyn Quisqueya wrote:baltec1 wrote: The wolfs got heavily culled over the years and now the sheep are leaving because they are bored.
I think it's amazing how you can take anything, flip it, twist it, and serve it to your purpose. I wonder if you really believe this delusion, or you're just trying to sell it for your cause.
My cause being the return of a ton of content that has been removed to keep idiots happy who then subsequently quit because they made their own game boring. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18263
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 04:27:33 -
[96] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
If you put your hand in a deep fryer you do not need a thermometer to tell you it is hot. Just look around. Look at this forum, look in the game. Hi sec is dead, the wolves are still there but the sheep have moved on.
Where is the evidence for this?
You say miners no longer mine in large groups, well that would be because they no longer have to because the only threats to them have either been heavily nerfed or removed entirely. They don't mine in groups or even talk to each other because they don't have to.
Mark Marconi wrote: As you have said CCP is starting to actually use data to make business decisions and they are making Hi-sec and mining safer.
They made a lot of changes to make highsec much safer before they based their approach on data. What the data shows is that their assumptions that things like ganking is bad for the game were entirely wrong and that it actually benefits the game.
Mark Marconi wrote: The Orca is about to be buffed massively, the Skiff is a tank. They have added bumping timers and the list will continue. Hi-sec will get safer as they try to bring back the sheep. Just wait for the restrictions on free accounts to come out, just to protect the sheep from free gank accounts.
And what they will find is a game where you spend hours in a belt chewing on rocks with nothing else happening. Their only risk comes from a terrorist organisation that can only continue so long as people keep on donating money to it. They will quit because its boring.
Mark Marconi wrote: If there were to many sheep then Hi-sec would be getting more dangerous to bring back the wolves but it is not.
Sheep is about all thats left now. We have a handful of organisation left that are ganking, war dec mercs are relegated to mass decking and hoping their prey comes to them because they cant hunt anymore and everything else that used to happen is now gone.
Subs are down because CCP listened to the likes of you and removed most of the content highsec used to have and made the game boring. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18268
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 16:25:53 -
[97] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote: They don't mine in groups or by themselves. Most of them have gone. They left, got sick of getting to the top of their profession only to be blown away by some alts in cheap ships.
Risk vs Reward. All the risk is the miners as the gankers just trash their characters and start again. The gankers got richer and the miners poorer so the miners left.
Gankers are mostly gone, notice that it has been years since the last ice interdiction and hulkageddon? Notice the utter lack of profitable barge ganking. Equally miners also quit because their gameplay is downright boring now. Nothing ever challenges them, nothing rewards a miner for being good at either fitting their ship or being good at actual mining. All of the hard challenging stuff has been removed. Hell, even the barges themselves don't allow for customisation, CCP have literally fitted them for you.
Want miners to not only come back but to stay? Then they need content and the best content they have ever had came from the very PvP you hate. CCP made it clear, people who get ganked are more likely to stay longer and 85% of people who quit do so having done no PvP. We need that content back.
Mark Marconi wrote: No they made exhumers made out of tin foil and made destroyers and other ship a lot more powerful so that a couple of destroyers could blow a few hundred million or a billion worth of ship out of the sky. Then the subs fell more and they suddenly started to go in the other direction.
The Hulk used to be able to fit a 32-36k EHP tank USING T2 mods and T1 rigs. Todays that same hulk gets only a 26k EHP tank with T2 mods and T2 rigs and requires a fitting mod or rig to actually use all of its fitting slots. Todays hulk is worse than the one you think had a "tin foil" tank.
Mark Marconi wrote: Actually they wont, what you may call boring a large number of people call enjoyable.
Tell me, what do high sec miners have to enjoy in todays game?
Mark Marconi wrote: If sheep are all that is left why are the mining belts so empty?
Because a large number of people who did both have quit. Mining, hauling and mission running has far less content than it did before but they do at least have content. People who used to be mining pirates saw their entire gameplay option removed so they no longer exist at all.
This is something you don't get, PvP provides content to both parties, a miner who had his can flipped and dcides to fight back is both getting and giving content from and to others. The ships killed provides content to ship and mod builders, this in turn creates more content for miners. Remove the PvP and you remove a lot of content from a lot of people. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18268
|
Posted - 2016.10.07 16:30:00 -
[98] - Quote
March rabbit wrote: Actually there is no benefit to mine in groups.
- Having only 10-15 seconds to react to suicide aggression you won't even be able to lock suicider and launch drones. Add here that suicider will die anyway. => group cannot protect themself
If we can lock and land reps vs 1000 man blobs miners can lock and rep vs a handful of gankers.
March rabbit wrote: - jetcan mining is too dangerous. Too many experienced suspect-baiters with logi/OGB/etc around.
There are no jetcan pirates anymore, mostly because jetcan miners are very hard to come by anymore, because CCP decided to give 2 barges massive cargo holds with no drawbacks or fitting options.
[/quote]
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18275
|
Posted - 2016.10.08 16:32:40 -
[99] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
All I can say is if you think miners like to be ganked, to make their game more interesting. Well it is obvious you don't know many miners. Mining is something you can do to "Play" a game, when you are to knackered from work or for that matter are still doing work.
Miners used to be more than that.
Mark Marconi wrote: And that has ben the problem for so long. CCP listening to people who "know best" and we ended up with a hi-sec that was lo-sec and players leaving in droves.
No they listened to the exact opposite side, hence why so much content has been removed.
Mark Marconi wrote: You want players to kill players, want them to ruin someone elses day to make them selves feel better. Fine, that was what lo-sec was made for..
Wrong, that's what ALL of EVE was made for. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18280
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 16:36:44 -
[100] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:WoW.... ... just WoW ... calm down, you can hurt yourself
With March rabbit on this, calm your mammories and just whack it with facts. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18284
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 20:08:54 -
[101] - Quote
Mr Crowley wrote:Fiddly Pop wrote:Bexol Regyri wrote: I am guessing you are talking about the bumping changes, but again that can be avoided by checking your route on a map. If anything for that change it should be some kind of warp module that can placed on a ship or just take the whole aligning and getting up to speed a way instead of having some kind of loophole in the game mechanics.
You are absolutely correct putting a 3 minute time on warps is a loophole. It should be a warp fail safe module or the aligning and hitting warp speed should be done away with if they want to stop bumping. Na, you and pro bump people don't get it. It is an exploit of a game mechanic. CCP never intended it's (failed) physics engine to be used in this way. There is no way to counteract it through independent normal gameplay and the expectation of 20+ additional jumps is just silly. Thusly this exploit was nursed in a way that still provides reasonable use to content creation. Suicide ganking if you. Price has not been touched. Why? Well because through normal play it can be countered. (MWD and cloak, passive tanks etc. So all the content creators are free to keep doing what they do, they are just not allowed to exploit anymore. Boo-whoo
Its been used for over a decade in null to get stuff out of a POS or out of docking range on a station. Not an exploit, what CCP are doing is what they have been doing for the last 5 years. They are catering to the bears of highsec who don't want to put any effort into protecting themselves. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18286
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 12:05:13 -
[102] - Quote
Commander Spurty wrote:Proper fix for bumping.
If a pilot rams a ship they are not in fleet with, the bigger ship wins. The smaller one pops.
It's good for the economy - ships exploding.
So much content, you would think it was Christmas. But so many tears, you'd think the snow was salt.
Park a wall of freighters outside the jita undock. |
|
|
|