|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Welcome to EVE, a PVP game full of nasty pirates and terrorists who love people who fail to protect themselves in even the most basic way.
Best you get used to EVE as it is not advertised as a dark and hostile game for nothing. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:
Really? In 2010, I really can't remember less than 50k players on weekends, sometimes around 58k.
Because players online at any one time is the same as active subs. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 21:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:The mids aren't empty. He does have that tracking computer in there. It's an Omni-Directional Tracking Link because.... o.0
To track all those nano rocks |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Wow! That hurt OP.
No mid slot shield help? You had a head full of shield implants and not even an Invul field or extender?
But I do agree it's a sad commentary on the state of this game that CCP thinks suicide ganking is a viable form of PvP.
It and the whole Goon sponsored mess ARE griefing IMO, no matter how CCP glosses over it.
You do realise that ganking untanked hulks can be done for profit right? And that it has been done for near enough a decade now. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:Quote:I have no KM to go on so I will assume you failed to tank your ship while mining when a very well known event was going on. Well known if you keep track of such things, perhaps. I am a casual gamer with disposable income. Believe it or not, the largest segment of MMO revenue is from just such gamers. I don't read EVE news. I don't follow the EVE forum. The first I head of hulkageddon was AFTER I was killed today. And then my reaction went from "oh well" to "why the heck doesn't CCP realize the impact of their inaction". Hence the post.
I work 72 hours a week so tell me more about being a casual gamer. This was advertised in the news, all over the forums, in just about every local, in most alliances and in all the NPC corps and on EVE radio. You really must ask yourself why you are not interacting with the community on even the most basic level. This was entirely your fault. |
baltec1
1194
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 22:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
A fair point.
I don't read the news.
This is one of my first forum posts in years.
I have not seen it in local or I would have known.
My corp is not in an alliance.
I am not in an NPC corp.
Remember, casual gamer, no EVE radio.
Lesson learned then I take it. |
baltec1
1196
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:
So...there you go. They've turned the asylum over to the inmates who're convinced they're the true doctors of EVE. And, they think they're smart in doing so. Worse mistakes have been made. They'll walk away with the satisfaction that "There once was this game called EVE Online...and WE invented it." May their grandchildren be pleased to hear this bedtime story.
Its been like this since day one and has, infact, become safer over the years. The OP failed in may ways. He failed to take an interest in what was happening in the game dispite the vast amount of easy to find info out there. He failed to fit any tank on his ship which allowed for an easy gank. He failed to warp off his pod dispite getting three alarms, each one louder than the last.
EVE online has always and will always punish you for making mistakes. |
baltec1
1196
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Indeed thank you, I have already done so.
And this is why it takes so long to get valid petitions answered. |
baltec1
1199
|
Posted - 2012.05.27 23:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:You know the OP has made a good point when so many knuckle-draggers make such feeble explanations and personal attacks.
What point would that be? |
|
baltec1
1199
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:One of the biggest points is that this PvP game is so fail at PvP that a large pct of the players actually think attacking defensless miners is some kind of accomplishment.
Or it's the only kind of PvP they can afford.
It pays to kill untanked miners. |
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
Makkz wrote:Quote: "A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making othersGÇÖ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account."
Your own quote nullifies your entire argument.
"WHILE HE DOES NOT PROFIT FROM IT IN ANY WAY."
Hulkageddon organizers are both the holders of hulk BPO's, as well as huge stakeholders in the grand tech moon game, it has been quoted as a hulk's current tag of some 330m is some 70-80% based on the cost of tech moon goo.
If you didn't know these facts... your welcome, it shows your business sense is worth crap all in the sandbox, as you basically just got killed by a bigger better industrialist working there isk.
Lets not forget that the ganker will also make a profit on every hulk killed via loot and salvage. Hulkageddon also offers bounties and prises for killed barges. |
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 00:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Well the definitions from the TOS the OP quoted sure sound exactly like Hulkageddon, add in the the Goons sponsorhip and profitrering, as pointed out by you and others, and that sure looks likes a conflict with CCP's definition of griefing. Still my biggest gripe is that their really should be a way for "Skilled" (not throw away alts) pirate types to ply their trade in high sec. Also with them having a chance for a BIG loss, just like the targets. I don't have all the answers, I just find the whole suicide ganking thing, well, lame. Lacking in content :) edit: and yeah, I know about the profit thing. Pfft, which makes it even worse in my opinion. Not the gankers looting, the Goons behind it all.
It wasn't the goons who first found out you could make a profit from killing untanked hulks. It also wasn't the goons who came up with hulkageddon. Your definition of greifing is also wildly wrong as under your idea of what greifing is everyone in 0.0 and lowsec should be banned. |
baltec1
1200
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:04:00 -
[14] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:Virgil Travis wrote:
Nice of you quote what we already knew, did any of it sink in?
Well it tells me that miners are a CCP sanctioned profession despite what Goons feels about it, industrialist are also sanctioned professions in this game.
Again, you say things everyone already knows. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:10:00 -
[15] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
CCP needs to make a call.
Is this a anyone does anything sandbox? Or does high sec mean something? And where is the line drawn? Because today, gamers have found ways to organize and deter mining to the tune of 40% percent, and affect the mining operations and assets of thousands of players. Some of whom may be making the decision that the game is no longer worth the investment or that its not the game they thought it was. Apparently the sandbox only has room for the ones willing to fling crap, and not for those interested in building castles.
CCP made the call 11 years ago when they came up with EVE. I am currently building my castle in high sec and have been for a very long time. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:12:00 -
[16] - Quote
Hroya wrote:What would happen if all Hulk pilots would tank thier ships properly ?
Would you just bring more suiciders to take one out seeing as you have more financial wiggle room before it becomes cost inefficient ? Just curious.
You couldn't gank them for profit and as a result a lot less miners would die. Hulkageddon would still happen but that only lasts for a few weeks at most. Attention would shift to the poorly tanked haulers with far too much isk in their holds and pimp fitted mission boats. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:26:00 -
[17] - Quote
Arcticblue2 wrote:
Actually there are many good ideas... paying fines for suicideganking ... also does make the timer for concord last only in gametime so there is no point for the player to log off to wait out the timer with their main instead ... so that would make them having to wait a while before next target and such.
The ganker loses their ship They get a sec status hit and will be attacked by the empire navies when it gets low enough They turn flashy red in local and on the overveiw Anyone can attack a -10 pirates ship Concord will destroy any ship the pirate gets into within 15 minutes of aggression The "victim" can kill the pirate
Seems we already have penalties in place. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:28:00 -
[18] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Actually I have read your manifesto.
I think you over-reach, frankly. Towers, player owned stations, and larger corps have as much to do with the changes in PvP dynamics as anything you cite in your series of posts. I do, however applaud you for expounding on the idea so extensively, I may not agree with you, but I can appreciate the detail in your position.
My position is that high sec should be as it is today, just with a touch more protection to ensure it remains a "more safe" area in the face of new gank-fests and player organized competitions like hulkageddon.
High sec should stay low/moderate value. High sec should remain neutral and NPC corp controlled. High sec should have all of the nerfs I have already touched on in my earlier posts re anchoring, POS, T1 components only, low missions, etc.
I think that mining can happen in high sec, and be part of the broader economy and game, but that CCP needs to act in SOME way to preserve it as ONE POSSIBLE profession among the many available. When an entire sector of the game has been reduced by half, that is a rousing indictment that the balances available in the system are inadequate and action is needed.
There is nothing new happening. Everything you see going on has been going on for the past 5 years or from the very start. |
baltec1
1201
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 01:34:00 -
[19] - Quote
Oddball Six wrote:
Which are clearly effective [/sarcasm].
I think that's the problem, none of these are particularly effective in a high sec zone. Particularly when these individuals are able to dock at stations, etc, as if nothing had happened.
Log in and jump into a badger
Now park yourself on the perimiter gate in jita and count how long it takes for someone to kill you.
Then take a badger to a high traffic lowsec gate and count how long you last. |
baltec1
1203
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
Boilerplate Goon lying.
Hulk's cannot be tanked in any reasonable way.
Fly covetors not hulks.
A hulk will tank a pair of alpha maelstroms easily. |
|
baltec1
1203
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:
A far more elegant and functional solution is to change the stats on the exumers or and/or boost their survivability.
Not needed. The hulk can tank very well if people chose to. Even the mac can be fitted with a good tank. |
baltec1
1204
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 02:52:00 -
[22] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:no hope for retriever pilots, huh?
Its possible to tank them against a destroyer. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:03:00 -
[23] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: It's a surprisingly small ship. It would be surprising if battleship weapons hurt it too badly
Of course, this doesn't hold true if a titan (with even bigger weapons) was shooting it, but that's hardly a problem.
Look at what I just cooked up
[Skiff, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Co-Processor II
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
17.9k EHP and no implants in a damn skiff. It even gets +2 warp warp strength to boot. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:04:00 -
[24] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:baltec1 wrote:Year on year EVE has grown and in all that time miners have died. Untrue, but hey keep saying that. http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquilitySince the middle of 2009, the amount of active players online has significantly decreased. I agree with the OP. He posted a very excellent and concise thread.
The number of subscriptions has risen. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 03:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
lol, so has the amount of bookmarks in my browser, it doesn't mean they're all active or even used.
That graph shows the facts, not hearsay and misinformation gained from a company's PR department.
Subscriptions are where the money comes from. A graph of players on a few days is nice but says nothing about how much money is being made. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:14:00 -
[26] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:
Hmph, that's probably good enough, any more expensive than a destroyer is not realyl worth wasting on the retriever,.
I have a procurer fit that stands a 50/50 chance of surviving a destroyer so the retriever should survive most attempts |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:Here two type of people who pvp, a true warriors who fight vs combat ships druing war dec, or on low sec, or null space, second type a carebear who think they badass because he can kill other careberars who using miningbarges, also no balzz ******* bunch of idiots who fell mighty while destroying poor mining barge, even no profit form kiling them only empty killmails statistic with some value but infact 0 profit. Some people say, we do it for lulz but this is bulshit, here no fun at all while kiling carebear who blow in 5sec to two destroyer.
An untanked hulk with t2 strips and MLU will get you millions depending on your luck. |
baltec1
1208
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 04:41:00 -
[28] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:
Fit tornado go to jita area in weekend while a lot people, scan industrals, you can earn bilions depending your luck... Still better solution to get money than hunting for 3 strip miners and mlu, and much easy.
There is an endless supply of badly tanked hulks out there which will earn you a suprising amount of isk in a short time. Ganking miners is easyer as there is just so many of them. |
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:27:00 -
[29] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:
Incarna wasn't mainstream, it was just complete crap. Melting people's GPUs because of some of the most terribly optimized code I've seen in a long time, charging $70 for a monocle, and showing their paying customers the door, literally, when disabling the CQ...well, that's bound to **** some people off.
For the record, I am not a miner. I also apologize for the name-calling; I'm in a foul mood. But, my point, that large nullsec alliances like Goonswarm and TEST wield far more power than the less organized highsec players, stands.
Here's the problem: yes, non-consensual PvP will happen. You are perfectly within your rights to destroy anything you feel like destroying. However, your actions have human consequences that reach far beyond getting your ship destroyed by CONCORD. Like it or not, in the current state of the game, highsec miners provide a large volume of low end minerals. Enticing them to ragequit doesn't help the economy, which directly hurts you and many, many other people, not all of them highsec "carebears." The large alliances mostly don't care about this, since they have renter mining corps and supply trains. But if ship and mineral prices increase significantly, it's yet another entry barrier for new players, especially into small-gang PvP, which is what you ultimately want. If battlecruiser hulls all break 100 mil, cruisers for 20 mil, frigates for 2 mil...you're actually reducing the incentive and ability of people who might have been interested in PvP to get started with it. Consequences have an annoying habit of cascading.
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is don't **** in your own sandbox, because nobody will want to play with you.
If miners were going to quit they would have done it years ago and prices have in fact been dropping over the last few weeks. |
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 05:52:00 -
[30] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: Years ago Suicide Ganking Industrial ships wasn't as prevalent in-game as it is now.
Also the majority of players who rage quit this game are Industrialists.
Sure it was. You think its bad now? You should have been here when M0o were camping the space lanes killing everything including CONCORD
They are what brought about the CONCORD we see today. And its not industrialists that quit in a fit of rage. Its the risk adverce cowardly fools who do stupid things and the blaim everyone and everything for their own mistakes. The type of people who, rather than learn from mistakes will whine to CCP to change the core of a 9 year old game because they don't want to face failing. |
|
baltec1
1209
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 06:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
ah but isnt that CCP's definition of actionable ganking?
Nope. |
baltec1
1215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:17:00 -
[32] - Quote
Maraner wrote:Yup it's a sandbox, I've shot up more than a few hulks in high sec but I do think for a 200 million + ship they could use a raw HP buff. Seems a bit lightweight that a single destoyer can pop a hulk with ease (granted dependant upon **** fit), three of them can kill anything.
Still there is a way to spawn your own concord at a belt folks, just think about it......
Spawning CONCORD for personal protection in a belt is an exploit and a bannable offence.
The hulk is more than able to tank 3 destroyers. |
baltec1
1215
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:19:00 -
[33] - Quote
Hroya wrote:Oddball Six wrote:Reposting baltec1's fits from another post because of thier utility, in case someone else discovers this thread later looking at a similar issue to my own. Quote:[Hulk, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
32k tank +4 implant needed
[Hulk, New Setup 2] Damage Control II Mining Laser Upgrade II
Small Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Magnetic Scattering Amplifier II Survey Scanner II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
22.4k tank no implants needed.
Good post pointing out that a Hulk definatly isnt a miningvessel. If you would show up in a pvp roam with a crossover setup like this you can pack your suitcase and go home. The yield on this multi million isk mining setup makes it more viable to mine in a tormentor.
By all means show us that tormentor fit. |
baltec1
1216
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:26:00 -
[34] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:Quote:i'm quite new to eve Yep and what continues to amaze me are the guys who think this is profitable?????? Heck running high sec plexs is more profitable than this, and I quit going that YEARS ago. Gank a goon, they may have borrowed an implamt from Mittens!
At the start of the year my corp went on a caldari ice interdiction with just a handfull of gankers and killed 600+ miners in just two weeks. We made billions in profits just from the salvage and loot. |
baltec1
1216
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 10:38:00 -
[35] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:
Sigh... No it's not. It's banable to biomass the character that specifically is used to spawn Concord. As to not have to deal with the security hit(s).
An even then, the concord response time remains the same. So why even bother?
Wrong, spawning CONCORD for protection is a violation of the CONCORD mechanics. If CONCORD are in the belt then they will jam the offending ganker instantly.
It is also a violation to recycle ganking alts to avoid the sec status drop. |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:01:00 -
[36] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote: Because everyone *knows* that pirates only come in pairs... There is *no* way to tank a hulk effectively, because those people attacking (if they want it) will just bring "*tank+1". Industrial ships will never be more than "lol" for pvp. All the videos showing people getting kills with their industrials are funny precisely because of this...
Go find 5 solo hulk kills with 2 or more battleships on the mail. |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 15:06:00 -
[37] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote: "*tank +1" = still dead.... [Catalyst, Pure Gank] Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I Magnetic Field Stabilizer I
Warp Scrambler I Warp Scrambler I
Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Modal Light Ion Particle Accelerator I, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
10 and 7 dead catalysts, to be exact...
371 dps with my skills....
Yeah, too bad pirates don't organize...
Glad us pirates *never* go in groups...
Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. |
baltec1
1218
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 17:11:00 -
[38] - Quote
Ituhata Saken wrote:Rhah Kaundur wrote:Bring an alt or friend to the belt with you in a very cheap frigate. Attack your own Hulk so that concord responds. The concord ships should hang around with you for awhile. That should give you a nice little escort fleet while you mine. If concord leaves..do it again. Old trick, and I love the ingenuity of it, but I thought that was deemed an exploit at one time?
It is. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:06:00 -
[39] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:baltec1 wrote:Good luck making any kind of profit on that kill. Dude, I don't know you, or where your coming from, but really, you sound as bad as any hi-sec carebear with your "profit"/"loss" statements... If i were to start ganking again, isk would be a secondary concern.
Good for you. Just about everyone else who ganks however do it for the isk. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:11:00 -
[40] - Quote
According to CCP and the GMs that we as a corp and alliance have been told when we did our ice interdictions, spawning CONCORD in a belt to be bodyguards is a missuse of the mechanic and seen as an exploit. Anyone caught doing this will get a warning and further missuse will result in a temp ban. Anyone doing this should be reported to a GM.
What you are thinking about is not biomassing a ganking alt to avoid having to grind up sec status.
|
|
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:12:00 -
[41] - Quote
Talon SilverHawk wrote:
Your argument fell flat the moment you claimed to know what any other player in the game has experience of.
I'm not knocking what any large large entity including Goons have achieved even if I dislike their methods.
Still does not get away from the fact that its too easy and cheap to grief in hi sec. I like that hi sec can still be a dodgy place, but at the moment Its not balanced.
Lots of Goons in here as any change would affect Mittanis plans adversely.
Again why would anybody but a griefer complain about losing the chance to shoot defenceless targets in hi sec ?
Tal
Its only easy because people make it easy. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:33:00 -
[42] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. |
baltec1
1220
|
Posted - 2012.05.28 19:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:baltec1 wrote:EVE Roy Mustang wrote:
Its also suggested by Mittens in the Goonswarm Shrugged thread Google it. Its a good read
Wrong again. That was undocking in an ibis after a gank to drag concord away from a belt which is a legit tactic. Interesting how its legal for the gankers to kite them but not the defenders
The difference is we were not using CONCORD for protection just moving them about system. Thats the difference.
It is also very easy to prove someone is spawing concord for protection because the logs show the same ibis getting killed over and over by concord in the same system. |
baltec1
1223
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 09:44:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Everyone makes tradeoffs. Miners have simply decided that 2x MLU Hulk is the baseline for mining in a Hulk and started making arguments from that false premise. The baseline for a Hulk is 0 MLUs.
So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame. Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
Out of 600 hulks and macs that we killed in the caladri ice interdiction not a single one was tanked. So I fully belive that 99% of killed miners have little to no tank fitted. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 12:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
Pak Narhoo wrote:And if they do you bring in more guns. In the end the miner always loses.
Only for big events like an interdiction or hulkageddon which offer more funding. Normal day to day ganks on tanked hulks happens rarely because there is no isk to be made. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:20:00 -
[46] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:RubyPorto wrote:So 10m worth of ships to kill a hulk that drops an average of ~10m isk. 5 people spending at least 15m (GCC cooldown limits the rate of ganking) to maybe break even, or if they're very lucky (20m drop), make 2m each (compensating for a bad loot drop earlier, maybe).
Sounds really profitable. Well, those 5 Catalysts will drop an average of about 4-500k ISK each in modules as well, so if they break even from the Hulk gank (and your numbers there aren't including the T2 salvage from the Hulk which could add a few more million in profit) they'd each be 4-500k better off overall. More to the point, the fact that there's no overall ISK cost for the ganks means there's no economic discouragement, like there is for every other ship.
You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:41:00 -
[47] - Quote
Ten Bulls wrote:
Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield.
Haulers have to give up defencive ability to run a max cargo hold. Comabt ships have to give up defences to go max offence and so on. What makes you think hulks shouldn't follow the same rules as everyone else? |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:43:00 -
[48] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:baltec1 wrote:You can alpha a 1bil tengu in a tornado and kill most transports in a destroyer. Like everything if you fit no defences and people can profitfrom your death they will go for it. Yeah, but even if you fit defences on a Hulk or a Mack people can still profit from killing you. It's more effort, but it doesn't result in negative ISK unless the loot gods hate you.
No they cant. It take 3-4 destroyers to kill a a well tanked mac and anything up to 10 to kill a supertank hulk. It is not possible to make a profit from suicide ganking that kind of ship. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 13:43:00 -
[49] - Quote
Chris Cooley wrote:Totally agree with the OP. The recent heavy high sec griefing has imbalanced the game considerably. ORE boats need a big buff and or greifers need a larger penalty.
Space is just as safe now as it was 6 years ago for hulks. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:01:00 -
[50] - Quote
Chris Cooley wrote:Ten Bulls wrote: So 8500 ships blew up in Hulkageddon because of bad fits eh... nothing to do with the ships baseline attributes, its the fitting thats totally to blame.
Try and be objective, you might find it enlightening.
werd
The base stats of the hulk are in the same ballpark as heavy assault ships in defence.
|
|
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:24:00 -
[51] - Quote
Jeniam Retriat wrote:
You'd probably know better than me, but the best Hulk tank fits I've found are still only about 30k EHP, whereas a 2mil gank cata can do >6k in under 15 seconds. Obviously I'm not counting bait hulks that don't have strip miners, and I guess an off-grid booster could swing things in the Hulk's favour, but that seems about as far as you can take it. For Macks it's only about 18.5k, which would be about 3 Catas, though the fit on that is also cheaper.
We tested this on sisi at the start of the year before the two ice interdictions. 3 catalysts will not kill a supertank hulk, 3 tornados can pull it off but a 4th is needed to garentee the kill. You also do not get 15 seconds in a lot of high sec. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:37:00 -
[52] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Ludi Burek wrote:
6.) Demanding that one play style is wrong and it should be curbed goes directly against the concept of the sandbox.
ah, like James 315 and the gankers are DOING to the miners? Glad you agree with the miners then.
Because miners are the only people getting attacked and killed in space. |
baltec1
1227
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 14:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:Tippia wrote:Ten Bulls wrote:Gameplay isnt fine, Hulks have to give up all defensive ability to gain a little more yield. No, they don't. really... post the build that gets max defense and max yield at the same time tippia, Im calling you on that BS
In those three words please tell me where tippia said that was possible. |
baltec1
1228
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:29:00 -
[54] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
No, Hulkageddon is a byproduct of the factor, not the cause.
In fact you can easily go back and find pre-Hulkageddon ganks and even other initiatives (see Bat Country). You will NOT find Bat "Tengu" Country or other things, all and only against miners.
So there's a kickstart factor that all the other factors being equal, still pushes gankers to go after one target and not the other, even if both are failfit, both share the same Concord mechanics, both are not exactly awake at the keyboard and so on.
I found one easy factor: miners are easily found while all the others need to be scanned (unless they autopilot the pinata thru Uedama). I am sure there are others.
Hi Bat Country here. Killing droves of tengu doesn't mess with the ice market. Thats why we have not bothered to kill them. |
baltec1
1228
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 16:34:00 -
[55] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well tbh you can find systems in The Forge with up to 73 miners kills in 24h, how many L4 Tengus and CNR kills do you get in the most busy L4 system? I bet less than 73.
Show me the droves of untanked CNR and tengu. I bet its less than 73. |
baltec1
1237
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:20:00 -
[56] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I know for certain that your upper ranks also mess with Technetium. Why not messing with minerals by killing Tengus? Less loot goes to the market => prices rise. This is now expecially evident, as since CCP nerfed the M0 drops, missioneers can now easily loot again in a solo setup (expecially on marauders but hey, why would you not kill them too ) and this is causing serious M3-M4 drop in price and by result, mineral prices are also affected.
Mission tengu activity is far too widespread to make any impact on the market on the corp level. Even on the CFC level a full interdiction on tangu mission runners would cost a fortune for little return from the markets other than perhaps slightly elevated tengu prices. An anti Tengu campain is not viable let alone an anti mission crusade. Both of the interdictions worked because the vast bulk of miners fail to fit any tank where as mission runners always have a tank and dont sit still very long. |
baltec1
1237
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 18:24:00 -
[57] - Quote
Yet another reason to fit a tank. |
baltec1
1239
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:00:00 -
[58] - Quote
Kaaeliaa wrote:Bootleg Jack wrote:ShipToaster wrote:Sandbox. Like all great things, can be taken too far. This is not even something "cool" it is the strongest picking on the weakest, it is just lame. Everything has limits. This is essentially what I've been trying to point out. We love EVE because it's possible to do almost anything. One group of people trying to make certain things impossible to do, however, is just as bad as a rule that states the same thing. There's a huge difference between nullsec alliances attacking each others' supply chains (which is sound strategic doctrine) and trying to basically make mining illegal everywhere. After you drive off all the miners, what's next? Industrial ships? Go after the traders, too, because no one should be able to move their stuff around? And then comes the missioners, right? Where does it end? The inmates running the asylum doesn't always work out. Some of the inmates, even though they're still inmates, just want to be left alone. If you fill the sandbox with raw sewage, no one is going to want to play with you unless they enjoy being covered in ****.
My heart bleeds for the miners who dont want to fit a tank to their ships because it messes with thie max yeild. Perhaps this is the kick in the balls they need to understand the dark and harsh place they are in. |
baltec1
1242
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:38:00 -
[59] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not *my* job to be alert, since *my* job is to make money by selling the minerals that GS help make pricier. I don't need to undock, ever.
It's also not *their* job to be forced into playing in hi sec like they were in Amamake yet get the lowest payout in game.
This is why it's completely stupid to mine, they get all the risk and no ISK. From today it's even stupider.
Its always your job to look after yourself. |
baltec1
1242
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 19:46:00 -
[60] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Maybe once they implement Gank In Station
Even in stations you are not safe from pvp. God I love this game. |
|
baltec1
1244
|
Posted - 2012.05.29 20:57:00 -
[61] - Quote
EVE Roy Mustang wrote:I still like my idea. low sec status you get podded.
Real consequences for your actions. Unless of course that consequences thing is just another bs smoke screen like "we dont care about insurance" (given the QQ that came after the insurance nerf and how ppl are convinced that CCP are caving to the carebears over it shows THAT lie)
There are consequences for not fitting a tank too. |
baltec1
1252
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 18:26:00 -
[62] - Quote
Roccia19 wrote:At its origins I thought Hulkageddon was a great idea, but I really think it has crossed the line of ridiculous. It has become an imbalance in the game. Look at the top player in Hulkageddon, it is an alt that is only a month old and has been able to solo suicide gank 300 minors with ease. That certainly runs contrary to the underlying principles of balance in eve and the implied increase in capabilities with more SP. Granted superior knowledge of the game can and should be able to counter these balances, but within reason.
After reading Oddball's post and excerpts I am curious as to whether a group of players who have been affected by CCP's negligence of their own player agreement would be able to take legal action. The player agreement is a contractual obligation for the terms of service purchased from CCP, a company that does not withholding those terms under gross negligence opens themselves up to liability. Nuttier things have been successful in the US courts.
Thats 300 people who failed to fit any tank at all, working as intended. Also space lawyers. |
baltec1
1254
|
Posted - 2012.05.30 20:00:00 -
[63] - Quote
Drax Dremal wrote:Hulkageddon for a week was just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for a month was still just a nuisance. Hulkageddon for more than a month will start to lower the playerbase.
Only the ones that fail to adapt. |
baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.05.31 18:20:00 -
[64] - Quote
Samuel Wess wrote:It just shows a badly architected fitting solution for a hulk.
On the other hand the predators are dependent on their prey, over hunting will exterminate both.
We also hate it when people tank them. |
baltec1
1453
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:49:00 -
[65] - Quote
Look at all that rock. |
|
|
|