Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
159
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 22:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
OK so there are a lot of threads complaining about ganked hulks. And the conversation always comes back to risk vs reward in highsec.
Well let's bring risk vs reward into the actual fitting of a hulk by giving them an armor tank instead of a shield tank. That way they can balance their lowslots between Mining Laser Upgrades and tanking modules.
First take away some of it's midslots and give it more lowslots.
And turn the shield skill bonuses to armor bonuses.
Then replace the 3% yield bonus from the Exhumers skill to a bonus to the effectiveness of Mining Laser Upgrades (I'll get back to this)
And finally give the hulk just enough CPU and Powergrid to fit 3 strip miners, a 1600 plate, damage control, explosive hardener, and some EANMs.
Now with these changes whenever someone fits up a hulk they are making choices about risk vs reward before they even undock. So for example there would be two logical extremes in hulk fits, and most players will probably fit something in between.
All Tank They fit 3 strip miners, trimark armor pumps, and a sweet buffer tank. Because of the removal of the raw mining yield bonus per level in Exhumers they'll get the exact same yield as a covetor. But for the T2 price tag they are getting a lot more EHP.
All Yield They fit 3 strip miners, cargo expanders, and a full rack of MLUs in their lowslots. Because of the addition of the MLU effectiveness per level in Exhumers they'll have a sweet mining yield. But it'll come with a paper think tank.
Ideally to keep things fair a "new hulk" with the right balance of tanking modules and Mining Laser Upgrades should get the same yield and EHP as an "old hulk" with invulns, Co processor, and an MLU. But at least with an armor tank people could have a sliding scale of how much risk vs reward they want.
Also as an added bonus all hulkageddon whining threads could be countered with "Fit a tank fool". Because I'd be willing to bet most people would just go all MLUs all the time. |
leviticus ander
CATO.nss
175
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 00:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
if it were given the fitting stats to "just" fit that armor tank you specified, it would never be able to use more than one or 2 MLUs. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
8
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 03:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
so then the bulk of the miners would run cargo expanders to run longer (most likelt afk or alt tabbed) than whine about getting ganked still. Itty 5 an ingame example of this. Lots of lows, rarely do people use them for tank.
And a switch to plates adds time to an already horrendous warp out cycle when you need to gtfo. Don't be a muppet and stay anywhere near a default warp in to the belt/field and a few seconds can help get that hulk/mack clear. I use to ice mine. One day it was raid the ice field time. tons of mouth breathers who did not move from warp to 0 very far got caught. I took my mack to a bfe spot in the field. Warp off before I could be reached, dock, smoke break time as would be a bit till I would go out again.
|
Feligast
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1230
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 05:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
When will people realize the Hulks stats aren't the problem, it's the people fitting them that are the problem? If you believe max yield is the only way to fit, you're going to die. Period.
Adding slots/changing tank isn't going to do anything, as said above. |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
159
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 05:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
leviticus ander wrote:if it were given the fitting stats to "just" fit that armor tank you specified, it would never be able to use more than one or 2 MLUs. You know I have been thinking about this. And I am not sure giving miners a higher yield is such a bad thing, (now that drones and reprocessing got nerfed).
For the miners there is very little end difference between mining a few hours and selling 1 million units of tritanium for 6 isk / unit. Or mining a few hours and selling 2 million units of tritanium for 3 isk / unit. Granted this is assuming that doubling the mineral supply would result in half prices, which is probably innumerate.
I would imagine that the isk / hour of mining would stay pretty much the same. Because the market price of minerals is dependent on how much people are willing to put up with mining.
But the one thing that is sure, is that ships would get cheaper with higher mining yields. Then it comes down to a question of how expensive do you think things should be.
If ships get too cheap then you might as well just play on the test server, and it is nice to know that when you blow up someone's drake it's going to hurt them. Although more expensive ships means that more people spend more time grinding than doing pvp or other interesting activities.
Zan Shiro wrote:so then the bulk of the miners would run cargo expanders to run longer (most likelt afk or alt tabbed) than whine about getting ganked still. Itty 5 an ingame example of this. Lots of lows, rarely do people use them for tank. Pretty much yeah. Except this time when they explode it'd be their fault, and not the hulk's fault. |
Acac Sunflyier
Burning Star L.L.C. Dark Phoenix Rising.
158
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 05:34:00 -
[6] - Quote
The hulk is under tanked. It's a tech two cruiser that can be ganked by 1 destroyer in under 7 seconds. Even shield repping. Sometimes, the best thing to do is have a random moment of compassion. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
700
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 08:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
Acac Sunflyier wrote:The hulk is under tanked. It's a tech two cruiser that can be ganked by 1 destroyer in under 7 seconds. Even shield repping.
Except that it's not a cruiser, and if fit with an actual tank, cannot be ganked by a T1 destroyer at all.
Also, buffer tank is the way to go, not active. |
Bouh Revetoile
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
24
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 09:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
You already can fit a descent shield tank on a hulk -- I read 40kehp which is a lot more than enough. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1532
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 09:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
If we did this and reduced the cost of the hulk to be less expensive than the BC/BS you'd need to gank it solo, I wont have any complaints. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
235
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 10:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Acac Sunflyier wrote:The hulk is under tanked. It's a tech two cruiser that can be ganked by 1 destroyer in under 7 seconds. Even shield repping. Except that it's not a cruiser, and if fit with an actual tank, cannot be ganked by a T1 destroyer at all. Also, buffer tank is the way to go, not active.
correct.. it's status is in limbo.. but look at the unrealistic size of the ship. I believe it should receive battle ship status and be improved. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
|
Ruareve
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 10:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Acac Sunflyier wrote:The hulk is under tanked. It's a tech two cruiser that can be ganked by 1 destroyer in under 7 seconds. Even shield repping. Except that it's not a cruiser, and if fit with an actual tank, cannot be ganked by a T1 destroyer at all. Also, buffer tank is the way to go, not active.
So it takes what, two or three whole destroyers to kill a Hulk with a tank? That totally seems fair. Yet another blog about Eve- http://ruar-eve.blogspot.com/ |
Liliana Rahl
Remote Soviet Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
77
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 11:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
Maybe if people didn't afk mine in high sec and instead mined in null sec with friends around to protect and intel channels to give heads up, dead hulks wouldn't be as much of a thing.
Seriously its literally the top end ship of mining and people....afk mine in high sec with it. They deserve to be destroyed. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |