Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ltclowen
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 13:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
I would like to start with, i dont mind that mining ships can be ganked. I just feel that the economic risk vs reward in ganking a mining ship especially exhumers needs to be balanced.
this is from the eve encyclopedia.
Exhumer
(The source of the majority of the minerals and ice in the galaxy, these are the ORE fleet of miners, known as Exhumers. They pull in massive amounts of material for reprocessing while able to survive short exposure to enemy attack. )
also Skiff
(They are also far more resilient, better able to handle the dangers of deep space)
I suggest that if a 300million+ ISK ship can get ganked by a single Catalyst at under 1million ISK, reliably,consistantly, and within 20 seconds, i do not see how any of the Exhumer class of ships can meet the definition of what they are.
This effectively makes an exhumer a giant rock you can mine with a Catalyst for ISK, who wouldent risk a 1mil bet on a huge payout in possible modules parts and ore. You might as well be mining rocks in a ship made out of plex.
I realise that it most likely is just feature creep which made this happen. I would suggest that the Exhumer line needs to be re-examined, to make them able to actually survive a player attack for a short amount of time. Maybe add additional skill requriement for additional protection, or add a T3 mining ship that is better at surviving, more slots stats or something.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
730
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 15:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
fit a tank instead of cargo and mlu buffs
request denied |
Ltclowen
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 15:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
that is with a tank, also that is not the problem, the problem i propsed was risk vs reward.
even with a tank fit, it takes 3 catalysts to take it down in sub 20 seconds. 3 mil vs 300+? The ship class needs balancing. |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
610
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 15:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Better suggestion is to reduce the tank of all T2 ships and that all mag stabs, ballistic control, gyro control and heat sinks cause CPU to increase. Why is the hulk a difference when its +gank to asteroid causes the CPU to increase is beyond our understanding to comprehend, all T2 items have worse fittings but T2 guns get 2 skills to reduce their fitting and their gank mods do not increase CPU...while Mining upgrades cause the CPU to increase while there are no skills to decrease the fitting of Stripper Miner. So, lets get T2 ships to have worse fitting options and further decrease their tanks to 42k hitpoints since the hulk is the standard of having fitting options. |
Frau Leinsmarch
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 05:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
I would like CCP to compile statistics on just how many topics there are about miners QQing that they are not indestructable.
Understand this, YOU ARE IN AN INDUSTRIAL SHIP! You would not expect an HGV to stand up against a Tank in RL so why should eve be any different. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
770
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 07:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ltclowen wrote:that is with a tank, also that is not the problem, the problem i propsed was risk vs reward.
even with a tank fit, it takes 3 catalysts to take it down in sub 20 seconds. 3 mil vs 300+? The ship class needs balancing. Okay
Hulkageddon is underway, so we have a large collection of sample data to determine if tanking helps. Here's the first 17 ships in sequential order that I saw in evekill. No 'cherrypicking' has occurred in these kms I've picked - all purely sequential.
1st on board http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231197 <- No, no dcu, no tanking rigs 2nd: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231177 <- pimp mods but empty mid + MLU II/cargo rig greed fit = not a tank 3rd: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231157 <- not even fully tanked, still took 4 to do it. 4th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231054 <- No mods except MLUs and strip miners. 5th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231080 <- No mods except MLUs and strip miners. 6th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231107 <- No tanking mods but somehow it took RAZOR 4 thrashers and a nado to kill it 7th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231026 <- No tanking mods 8th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230979 <- T2 cargo rigs, MLU IIs, no tanking mods 9th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230939 <- two T1 small shield extenders is not a tank 10th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230826 <- closest I've seen to a tanked hulk yet, but it would still die to nullsec rats, plus no DCU or shield rigs. 11th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230841 <- two T1 invulns is not a tank 12th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230642 <- no mods except 2 expanded cargoholds 13th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230635 <- a nullsec carebear tries the above in 0.0, dies to a vigil 14th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230710 <- two T1 invulns is not a tank 15th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230551 <- no mods except for MLUs, strip miners and survey scanner 16th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230501 <- this was a crappy 11M isk tank with no dcu or rigs and it still took 7 thrashers to gank it 17th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230203 <- no mods fitted except for strip miners and expanded cargoholds
So either tanking your hulk properly helps, and no fix is needed, or everyone in highsec refuses to fit a tank to their hulk, and no fix is needed. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
432
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 09:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ltclowen wrote:that is with a tank, also that is not the problem, the problem i propsed was risk vs reward.
even with a tank fit, it takes 3 catalysts to take it down in sub 20 seconds. 3 mil vs 300+? The ship class needs balancing.
You do realise cost is irrelevant when it comes to ship balance, right? |
Thomas Gallant
Eyes In The Dark Lunar Industries Partnership
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 11:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
I do wonder, is there such a thing as a PVE ship in eve? or just PVP ships that can't fight or survive well? tank on a exhumer is Pretty much meaningless against rats in high sec, the only time you could ever die to rats in high sec is if you are afk.
As such, there is but one threat to exhumers (or even miners period) in high sec, ganking, and an exhumers "durablity" is meaningless there, unless maybe you tank it out and give up some mining effectiveness.
What I want to know is, does tanking a hulk work? how many people have failed to gank a hulk because it was tanked?
Also I disagreee that Cost isn't a factor when it comes to balancing, it's about risk vs. reward. If a hulk costs 3 billion isk, how many people would use it instead of a 20 mil covetor? the idea is that every ship should have its use. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
74
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:17:00 -
[9] - Quote
I have to agree with all those people who say Exhumers are working as intended. They're not intended to be survivable even with a tank unless you use expensive faction and complex mods and even then in anything except rat fights or badly fitted 1v1 you're still going to die and lose it all. As an example take a look at the list of hulk kills. Even those who fit a tank died because they were attacked by more than one person. The fact is that high sec gankers will check out what's in your ship first a lot of the time and then bring what is needed to destroy it. What you fit, in most situations, is irrelevant
"Adapt or die" is a meme that's bandied around repeatedly for a very good reason; it's a truism. As an example I had a friend who rage-quit because he lost 3 Tengus in a row flying through nullsec because in his mind fitting a cov ops cloak and an interdiction nullifier should have made it invulnerable. He didn't adapt so he died repeatedly.
So the "Adapt" in this instance is to either:
1) Stop using Exhumers, start using either Retrievers or Coveters - Yes, I know this isn't ideal but it does mean the risk is lower (gankers will be more likely to ignore you over others using exhumers and when you do get ganked it costs a LOT less to replace it).
2) Stop mining altogether. These people who keep blowing up mining ships are, I'm sure, all very clever individuals. They're obviously all aware that now that mining is the predominant source of all minerals that killing all the miners will just make their gank ships more expensive along with everyone else. If enough people stop mining the game will implode do to inflation (supply and demand and all that)
3) join a WH mining corp and get a level of protection.
4) join a nullsec mining corp living in protected space. Safer than high sec.
Just so I make this clear, I'm a miner. I just don't think that CCP should buff ships because the players are making things difficult for other players. That is what this game is all about; player content. The players should sort these things out for themselves. You see, Hulks work just fine in WHs and Nullsec because you know you're not safe so you do everything you can to avoid other people and you don't (unless you're a moron) mine even semi-afk. |
Hortense Sledgemallet
Hedion University Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 12:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
I'd like to see someone post an example of how a decently tanked Hulk fended off two destroyers or two cruisers or a battlecruiser in high sec. That might validate all this "tank your hulk" talk. But then 12 year old griefers dont like to post their losses. |
|
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
242
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 15:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
I would suggest people post fits that work on Hulks.
Killmails are a great source of fits or tactics, which by obvious virtue of being on a killmail, are shown to be fail. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
777
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 15:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Hortense Sledgemallet wrote:I'd like to see someone post an example of how a decently tanked Hulk fended off two destroyers or two cruisers or a battlecruiser in high sec. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13224468 <- my favorite, loses a 1.3b pod to a hulk's drones http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13220134 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13221303 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13233116 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13231499 |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
242
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 15:57:00 -
[13] - Quote
This proves it can be done.
How about some of the fits that did the job? |
Lubomir Sakato
Sakato Engineering Services
6
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 19:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
This is a fit I posted in the same subforum just a few posts away from this thread:
[Hulk, tanked] Mining Laser Upgrade II Damage Control II
Small Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I ML-3 Amphilotite Mining Probe
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Mining Drone II x5
This fit givs 22,5k EHP and is definately not solokillable in Highsec.
You only lose less than 7% yield compared to a "perfect-yield"-fit, but therefore you survive the "gank for the lulz" sologanker. I think in fact it would need at least 3 or 4 perfectly traind destroyers to have even the sliver of a chance to bring it down before Concord ecm-¦s the gankers out of business...
regards Lubo |
Velicitia
Open Designs
898
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 19:05:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:(good post)
3 and 4 can be combined into "move out of hisec".
|
mxzf
Shovel Bros
1466
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 19:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:So the "Adapt" in this instance is to either: ...
5) Stop mining in crowded systems. Seriously, there are TONS of nearly unpopulated systems out there. Gankers don't go looking for systems in the middle of nowhere to gank people, they look in the crowded systems where there are a bunch of miners all AFK.
I completely agree with you though. The issue isn't Exhumers' tanks, it's that miners assume that fitting a max-yield 0-tank Hulk and parking it in a belt and walking away is a safe thing to do. This is Eve, you're only perfectly safe if you're docked up, otherwise you're fair game to everyone. But if you do play safe and smart, then most of that risk can be mitigated. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 20:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
quoting Nicolo da'Vicenza's listed hulkaggedon kills.
1st on board http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231197 <- No, no dcu, no tanking rigs Loss to hulk pilot - 315 mil Loss to gankers - 15 mil for catalyst, (rupture didn't appear to have a killmail) but if we assume it was killed and fitted like another rupture loss he had, then 17 mil = total of 32 mil
2nd: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231177 <- pimp mods but empty mid + MLU II/cargo rig greed fit = not a tank Hulk loss - 392 mil Gank loss - 14 mil catalyst, 2 mil thrasher = total 16mil
3rd: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231157 <- not even fully tanked, still took 4 to do it. hulk - 324 mil Gank - 1st catalyst 3mil, (no mail for thrasher) we'll assume the same as the last thrasher and raise it to 3 mil, (no killmail on second catalyst) assuming same as another catalyst loss this player had at 2 mil, 3rd catalyst at 2 mil = total 10 mil
4th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231054 <- No mods except MLUs and strip miners. hulk - 313 mil gank - catalyst unlisted we'll assume the worst at 15 mil
5th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231080 <- No mods except MLUs and strip miners. hulk - 315 mil gank - 14 mil catalyst, Thrasher not listed but found similar loss at 2mil = total 16 mil
6th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231107 <- No tanking mods but somehow it took RAZOR 4 thrashers and a nado to kill it Hulk - 320 mil Gank - tornado 77 mil, Thrasher no listed assuming 2 mil, Other thrasher not listed assuming 2 mil, Sevyn nine appeared to have been in a thrasher as well so 2mil, Enidan Lost was in a catalyst worth 17 mil = total 100mil (overkill but significantly less than cost of the hulk)
7th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13231026 <- No tanking mods hulk - 318 mil Gank - Catalyst @ 15 mil, npc doesn't count
8th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230979 <- T2 cargo rigs, MLU IIs, no tanking mods Hulk - Ouch t2 rigs...listed kill at 1.1 billion. I'll be conservative and say 600 mil though Gank - Tornado not listed so we'll assume the same as the other one at 77mil
9th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230939 <- two T1 small shield extenders is not a tank Hulk - 313 mil Gank - First catalyst not listed but he lost several all at 2 mil, Only 1 of the 4 thrashers on the mail were shown, so we'll assume they wer all the same price at 3mil = total of 14mil
10th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230826 <- closest I've seen to a tanked hulk yet, but it would still die to nullsec rats, plus no DCU or shield rigs. hulk - 374 mil Gank - Catalyst not listed but several others lost by this pilot at 15mil each, 3 thrashers unlisted assuming 3 mil each = total 24mil
11th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230841 <- two T1 invulns is not a tank Hulk - 321 mil gank - 6 x thrashers assuming 3 mil each = total 18mil
12th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230642 <- no mods except 2 expanded cargoholds Hulk - 310 mil Gank - catalyst 14 mil
13th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230635 <- a nullsec carebear tries the above in 0.0, dies to a vigil Hulk - 298 mil Gank - Null sec kill, so no loss
14th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230710 <- two T1 invulns is not a tank Hulk - 321 mil Gank - Tornado @ Unlisted assuming 77 mil
15th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230551 <- no mods except for MLUs, strip miners and survey scanner Hulk - 311 mil gank - catalyst unlisted with similar losses at 15 mil, 3 trashers @ 3mil(unlisted) = total 24mil (same ppl as in #10)
16th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230501 <- this was a crappy 11M isk tank with no dcu or rigs and it still took 7 thrashers to gank it hulk - 301 mil Gank - 6 x thrashers @ 3 mil = total 18 mil (same gankers as in #11)
17th: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13230203 <- no mods fitted except for strip miners and expanded cargoholds Hulk - 299 mil Gank - thorax no... |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
783
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 21:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
Quote:Does this seem fair? Yes. No other "occupation class" in the game feels entitled to failfit their ships. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 21:38:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Quote:Does this seem fair? Yes. No other "occupation class" in the game feels entitled to failfit their ships.
This means that for the cost of that hulk I can buy and fit 20 catalysts
Reguardless of whether you fit your hulk with pure tank or not, they have up to 20 catalysts they can use before it would cost more than they destroyed.
Full tanked, how many would it take to destroy a hulk???? 3? Maybe 4?
Fail fit or not it's still way too easy to gank them |
Kitt JT
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Nulli Secunda
40
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 22:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
The problem is not that hulks aren't tanky enough... look at orcas. they're pretty tanky and they die to suiganks too.
The problem is that miners think that since hisec is safe, they're entitled to not watching whats going on around them. Not watching local. Not watching those in belts.
I've seen people mining in a belt, and ship after ship gets popped, and they still stay there.... hmmmm, i wonder what could happen. |
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
623
|
Posted - 2012.04.30 22:59:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:So, for less than the costs of 2 hulks these players were able to gank 17 hulks worth over 5 BILLION isk total with all but one of them being performed in high sec.
Which means we have an isk loss ratio of 10.44 to 1. So for every 1 isk the gankers spent, the hulk pilots spent 10.44.
A 30 million ISK Interceptor can warp disrupt a carrier worth a billion and a half. A HIC worth 200 million can point a supercapital worth 20 to 100 billion. Do any of those seem fair?
Cost is not a reliable metric for effectiveness. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Nariya Kentaya
Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking
181
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 00:10:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kitt JT wrote:The problem is not that hulks aren't tanky enough... look at orcas. they're pretty tanky and they die to suiganks too.
The problem is that miners think that since hisec is safe, they're entitled to not watching whats going on around them. Not watching local. Not watching those in belts.
I've seen people mining in a belt, and ship after ship gets popped, and they still stay there.... hmmmm, i wonder what could happen. i've watched covetors and retrievers sitting in a 0.3 system mining belts, and i guess are either stupid or AFK, cause their will be soem frigs warp in, whcih then get popped by a destroyer or BC thatw as chasing them, which then gets ganked by the support BS that was coming to help the frigs, the ENTIRE TIME this miner sits their WATCHING THE FIGHT while mining, and never even attempts to align before the battleship targets and kills him in 2 volleys.
the thing is, its NOT that mining ships are weak, it's that somehow miners egt this "im safe" attitude to go AFK wherever they want and ***** about it later.
(did i metnion that after watching this fight go down, it was a VERY good day for me to be in a cov-ops with a salvager i was using earlier for cleaning up rat-wrecks? cause several fo the frigs were T2, so yeah, nice salvage.) |
Nariya Kentaya
Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking
181
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 00:13:00 -
[23] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Quote:So, for less than the costs of 2 hulks these players were able to gank 17 hulks worth over 5 BILLION isk total with all but one of them being performed in high sec.
Which means we have an isk loss ratio of 10.44 to 1. So for every 1 isk the gankers spent, the hulk pilots spent 10.44. A 30 million ISK Interceptor can warp disrupt a carrier worth a billion and a half. A HIC worth 200 million can point a supercapital worth 20 to 100 billion. Do any of those seem fair? Cost is not a reliable metric for effectiveness. A city worth up to 500 billion USD can be annihilated instantly by a single nuclear weapon costing approximately 500million dolalrs, assuming they bought the primo-package for the missile. all of this before the UN can show up and stop the evil people form popping poor cities with their nukes.
maybe we should nerf nuclear weapons to not be so cost effective...
i gues what ims aying is, if a ship can only kill another ship worth less than or equal to itself, then that would be ********, the POINT of a military weapon si to be as COST-EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE, youa lwasy want to cost your opponent more then it costed you, elsewise there is no point in waging war. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
623
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 00:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:... (stuff)... lol... you missed the point I was trying to make. I was illustrating to Mr. Risalo that "relatively cheap" ships can ruin the day of ships that are vastly more expensive. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
239
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 01:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Quote:So, for less than the costs of 2 hulks these players were able to gank 17 hulks worth over 5 BILLION isk total with all but one of them being performed in high sec.
Which means we have an isk loss ratio of 10.44 to 1. So for every 1 isk the gankers spent, the hulk pilots spent 10.44. A 30 million ISK Interceptor can warp disrupt a carrier worth a billion and a half. A HIC worth 200 million can point a supercapital worth 20 to 100 billion. Do any of those seem fair? Cost is not a reliable metric for effectiveness.
I'm glad you got a thumb up on that post.
Yet, what you failed to express in that post is that it takes significantly more isk to actually take down that carrier or super capital than just that interceptor or HIC, while all the time it still just takes 1 or 2 destroyers pop a hulk.
Try to take down a titan with just 2 HICs and you'll be laughed away. However, bring a good amount of high damage dealing ships with you and sure, you might take it down, or you might get hotdropped by billions of isk worth of ships.
Ganking industrial ships is the only thing done in Eve where people actually try to bring less ships. |
GizzyBoy
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 02:35:00 -
[26] - Quote
so if the primary reason of the complaint is cost of ship to gank vrs cost of ship being ganked.
Perhaps they can relook at the cost to build & invent the hulk in the first place. the current price isn't reflective in its true cost to invent and build and to the invent / build crowd this represents a @#$ ton of isk & profit currently.
the only thing making the hulk a 300 mill ship, is current player demand, after a number of years of declining market demand due to low min prices, suddenly every one wants to afk mine them a bit of trit and other mins for their ammo or to sell to market.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
783
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 02:44:00 -
[27] - Quote
are people seriously pointing to supercaps as an example of balancing? |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
97
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 04:01:00 -
[28] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:fit a tank instead of cargo and mlu buffs
request denied
ultimately this really will not help. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
97
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 04:04:00 -
[29] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote: You do realise cost is irrelevant when it comes to ship balance, right?
this is only vaguely true.. for the more part the more expensive the ship the more powerfully it can be tanked. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Velicitia
Open Designs
899
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 12:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
TBH, the barges are fine. The real problem is the belts themselves.
Hulk Description:
Quote: The Hulk is the largest craft in the second generation of mining vessels created by the ORE Syndicate. Exhumers, like their mining barge cousins, are equipped with electronic subsystems specifically designed to accommodate Strip Mining modules. They are also far more resilient, better able to handle the dangers of deep space. The Hulk is, bar none, the most efficient mining vessel available.
First off, "Deep Space" IS NOT that guy over there with a full rack of 1400mm arties. Deal with it.
So, what "dangers" can be in deep space? How about the belts themselves being destructive?
Hisec -- moderate/low DPS to the mining frigates and cruisers. Non-industrial/mining classed vessels (i.e. the rest of the frigates, cruisers, bc/bs) take moderate-high DPS, and also have their sensors negatively affected*. Industrials and T1 barges shields are more resilient to this stuff and don't take damage.
Lowsec -- Moderate-High DPS to non-barge mining vessels. High damage to non-industrial/mining vessels, and sensors even more negatively affected than in HS. Low/Moderate DPS to T1 barges/industrials. Exhumers and DST take low/no damage
Nullsec -- you really don't want anything there except hulks/T2 haulers/Orca/Rorqual. The only non-industrial/mining classed vessel that can survive for an appreciable amount of time is a BS...
*negative effects to sensors can be either: 1. Scan Resolution gets reduced by some factor (note, does not apply to mining barges) 2. ships "inside" the belt get a reduction to sig radius 3. both 1 & 2
This is obviously a reql quick "back of the napkin" thought ...
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |