Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country
4558
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 00:32:00 -
[211] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hopefully we can get CCP to make another pass on the barges so we can get a balanced lineup this time around.
So what do you consider a balanced line up ?
EHP nerf on the mack to the level of the hulk and a slight reduction in yeild for the skiff and mack. That way we get 3 ships for different jobs rather than the mack fits all. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2590
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 00:39:00 -
[212] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hopefully we can get CCP to make another pass on the barges so we can get a balanced lineup this time around.
So what do you consider a balanced line up ? EHP nerf on the mack to the level of the hulk and a slight reduction in yeild for the skiff and mack. That way we get 3 ships for different jobs rather than the mack fits all. No, all of them need more EHP buffs. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1042
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 00:42:00 -
[213] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hopefully we can get CCP to make another pass on the barges so we can get a balanced lineup this time around.
So what do you consider a balanced line up ? EHP nerf on the mack to the level of the hulk and a slight reduction in yeild for the skiff and mack. That way we get 3 ships for different jobs rather than the mack fits all. No, all of them need more EHP buffs.
They also need more yield buffs and cargo buffs. The retriever still isn't good enough for casual gameplay. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
635
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:43:00 -
[214] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hopefully we can get CCP to make another pass on the barges so we can get a balanced lineup this time around.
So what do you consider a balanced line up ? EHP nerf on the mack to the level of the hulk and a slight reduction in yeild for the skiff and mack. That way we get 3 ships for different jobs rather than the mack fits all.
Really have you done a comparision of the signal radious ? If you look at the before and after results EHP are not what they appear.
The mack is really not that good of a ship.
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
baltec1
Bat Country
4559
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:55:00 -
[215] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:
Really have you done a comparision of the signal radious ? If you look at the before and after results EHP are not what they appear.
The mack is really not that good of a ship.
They are unprofitable to gank even with no tank. This means the skiff is redundant because the mack can do its job with a bigger hold and yeild. The hulk can be profitably ganked if the pilot fits no tank and does not offer enough extra yeild to offset the massive cargo hold of the mack.
CCP wanted to end the one ship to rule them all but ended up with the mack being king of the hill. |
Luc Chastot
Moira. Villore Accords
152
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:27:00 -
[216] - Quote
The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1819
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:38:00 -
[217] - Quote
Rebel Witch wrote:I will laugh if CCP makes policy that forces an end to AFK mining but does nothing to AFK Cloaking. Both are doing something in the game while not playing. Kill one you kill the other i think.
Read my eyes!
AFK cloaking doesn't reward you for not playing the game. AFK mining does.
The Adventures of a Belligerent Undesirable |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1047
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:40:00 -
[218] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design.
Lets do it like in Freelancer where you have to pop hundreds of little asteroids that drop only a small amount of ore. And be careful not to accidentally ram/shoot the ore or it blows up. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2596
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:56:00 -
[219] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design. Lets do it like in Freelancer where you have to pop hundreds of little asteroids that drop only a small amount of ore. And be careful not to accidentally ram/shoot the ore or it blows up. Ore blows up, eh.
When you make ships out of it, are they safe? Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1049
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:59:00 -
[220] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design. Lets do it like in Freelancer where you have to pop hundreds of little asteroids that drop only a small amount of ore. And be careful not to accidentally ram/shoot the ore or it blows up. Ore blows up, eh. When you make ships out of it, are they safe?
I meant if you ram the ore it goes poof, wasting effort.
But there are these really cool volatile gas clouds that blow up when you get too close and can kill most ships quickly
EDIT: Freelancer is a far more dangerous PVE environment than EVE. There's lethal radiation, asteroid thickets, nebulas as thick as pea soup, dangerous NPCs that even the best ship can't guarantee victory against, deadly star coronas, collision damage, planet atmosphere dearths, etc. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2596
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 04:02:00 -
[221] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design. Lets do it like in Freelancer where you have to pop hundreds of little asteroids that drop only a small amount of ore. And be careful not to accidentally ram/shoot the ore or it blows up. Ore blows up, eh. When you make ships out of it, are they safe? I meant if you ram the ore it goes poof, wasting effort. But there are these really cool volatile gas clouds that blow up when you get too close and can kill most ships quickly We have also the dangerous gas clouds, I think? Not just the mercoxit, but the other gas clouds also do things that damage you.... Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1049
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 04:07:00 -
[222] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:The problem with AFK mining is mining itself. Mining in EVE is a horribly outdated mechanic product of extemely old game design. Lets do it like in Freelancer where you have to pop hundreds of little asteroids that drop only a small amount of ore. And be careful not to accidentally ram/shoot the ore or it blows up. Ore blows up, eh. When you make ships out of it, are they safe? I meant if you ram the ore it goes poof, wasting effort. But there are these really cool volatile gas clouds that blow up when you get too close and can kill most ships quickly We have also the dangerous gas clouds, I think? Not just the mercoxit, but the other gas clouds also do things that damage you....
Oh no not like these imagine a region covering half a solar system with deadly pockets of gas every couple meters that explodes if you get too close and deals significant damage.
When I played Freelancer those clouds killed me way too many times.
Thinking of Freelancer I did Discovery mod for a while and did the Corsair / Order thing as an Order fighter pilot in the nomad edge worlds (Omicron Minor, Iota, Kappa, etc). If the open PVP and bloodthirsty roleplayers didn't kill you, the NPCs or radiation would. Every 3 minutes or so you'd have to fight off a horde of high end enemy fighters from 3 different factions (Liberty Navy Guard, Bounty Hunters Guard, Nomads) that could reduce our high end fighters ( http://discoverygc.com/wiki/Nephthys ) to scrap metal in under 30 seconds.
Playing in the nomad edge worlds was playing on hard core mode. Surviving against even the PVE content required constant teamwork and alertness, let alone the PVP. There were no safe zones either, the entire solar systems would drop hazards on you wherever you went. I died a lot. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Thomas Orca
Zero Fun Allowed Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
134
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 04:09:00 -
[223] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: We have also the dangerous gas clouds, I think? Not just the mercoxit, but the other gas clouds also do things that damage you....
Though sometimes people forget |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2596
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 04:29:00 -
[224] - Quote
Thomas Orca wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote: We have also the dangerous gas clouds, I think? Not just the mercoxit, but the other gas clouds also do things that damage you....
Though sometimes people forget Yep, that's the case I was thinking of. Odd risk, suddenly an enemy comes in and dies. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
504
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 05:11:00 -
[225] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:So where, exactly, is the logic in not-playing a game?
Um, are you aware how EvE's skill point system works?
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:Please explain to me, logically, how you can enjoy a thing you aren't actually doing.
Pornography. Look it up sometime.
Murk Paradox wrote:I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about stacking your isk into isk/hour. The yield from a 3rd MLU will not make you more money than if you survived due to having a DC2 fitted as opposed to replacing retrievers.
This is quite true. If your average rock holds, say, 5000m3 of ore and your current yield is 2000m3 then it is going to take 3 cycles to mine that asteroid. If you jump that up to 2250m3 then it is still going to take 3 cycles to mine. Unless the difference in yield can shave an entire cycle off an asteroid (which is unlikely) then they're just wasted space.
Erika Mayne wrote:I do love how posts denouncing the New Order tend to devolve into discussions of pandasex or worse.
Yeah, it's like they know you or something.
PS - I read this entire thread while AFK mining. Or as I call it, "Multitasking"
EvE Forum Bingo |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
637
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 06:13:00 -
[226] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:
Really have you done a comparision of the signal radious ? If you look at the before and after results EHP are not what they appear.
The mack is really not that good of a ship.
They are unprofitable to gank even with no tank. This means the skiff is redundant because the mack can do its job with a bigger hold and yeild. The hulk can be profitably ganked if the pilot fits no tank and does not offer enough extra yeild to offset the massive cargo hold of the mack. CCP wanted to end the one ship to rule them all but ended up with the mack being king of the hill.
OKay that made me laugh "unprofitable to gank " something tells me CCP did not and should not make that a factor when balancing a ship designed for null operations.
Bad enough they increased the signal radius on them. Now you want to decrease the tank as well, to make it profitable to gank EVERYBODY KNOWS |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2605
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 06:22:00 -
[227] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:
Really have you done a comparision of the signal radious ? If you look at the before and after results EHP are not what they appear.
The mack is really not that good of a ship.
They are unprofitable to gank even with no tank. This means the skiff is redundant because the mack can do its job with a bigger hold and yeild. The hulk can be profitably ganked if the pilot fits no tank and does not offer enough extra yeild to offset the massive cargo hold of the mack. CCP wanted to end the one ship to rule them all but ended up with the mack being king of the hill. OKay that made me laugh "unprofitable to gank " something tells me CCP did not and should not make that a factor when balancing a ship designed for null operations. Bad enough they increased the signal radius on them. Now you want to decrease the tank as well, to make it profitable to gank NEVER profitable ganking, even if they don't fit any tank. Never ever, that would be evil.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Dave stark
1193
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 07:13:00 -
[228] - Quote
doesn't really matter what you think of the barge changes, ccp have stated they're perfectly happy with king mackinaw. "100k for notifications of stupidity, i love this bounty system." |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2609
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 07:24:00 -
[229] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:doesn't really matter what you think of the barge changes, ccp have stated they're perfectly happy with king mackinaw. The mackinaw, the miner, a match made in New Eden. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
baltec1
Bat Country
4559
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 09:23:00 -
[230] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:OKay that made me laugh "unprofitable to gank " something tells me CCP did not and should not make that a factor when balancing a ship designed for null operations. Bad enough they increased the signal radius on them. Now you want to decrease the tank as well, to make it profitable to gank
Just about every single subcap is profitable to gank if you put no tank on them and fill all the slots with t2 mods. The skiff was designed as the anti gank boat, a job the mack can do only with better yeild and cargo bay. CCPs aim was to give all the barges a role not provide another king of barges. The mack must be nerfed to balance the barges. |
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2609
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 09:27:00 -
[231] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:OKay that made me laugh "unprofitable to gank " something tells me CCP did not and should not make that a factor when balancing a ship designed for null operations. Bad enough they increased the signal radius on them. Now you want to decrease the tank as well, to make it profitable to gank Just about every single subcap is profitable to gank if you put no tank on them and fill all the slots with t2 mods. The skiff was designed as the anti gank boat, a job the mack can do only with better yeild and cargo bay. CCPs aim was to give all the barges a role not provide another king of barges. The mack must be nerfed to balance the barges. So next, the skiff will be king of exhumers? Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
baltec1
Bat Country
4560
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 09:35:00 -
[232] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote: So next, the skiff will be king of exhumers?
nah, most would stick with the mack and its huge bay. But we would at least see more hulks and the smart miners would be rewarded with the destruction of all the terrible pilots around them. Kinda like a free fireworks display both in space and in local chat so the good miners wouldn't be afk because they would be getting free entertainment. Win win. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
70
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 09:49:00 -
[233] - Quote
The Mack has an extra slot compared to the other two exhumers, so even as a miner I'm on board with either nerfing that extra slot or giving the other barges one more to match. That extra low on the Mack is probably where I would take it from. |
Dave stark
1195
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 10:11:00 -
[234] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:The Mack has an extra slot compared to the other two exhumers, so even as a miner I'm on board with either nerfing that extra slot or giving the other barges one more to match. That extra low on the Mack is probably where I would take it from.
the slot layout isn't the issue. it's the innate ehp given to the mackinaw vs that of the hulk, hence why the most logical and often suggested idea is to simply swap the mack's ehp and hulk's ehp.
also it makes sense from another standpoint. what happens when you put cargo mods on an hauler? you lose ehp. why then, has the mackinaw got a huge cargo boost and gained ehp instead of lost ehp? surely you'd have to get rid of some of the structure of the ship to find that space, it didn't magically come from nowhere. not that an argument like that means **** in a game but it's a nice point to think about. "100k for notifications of stupidity, i love this bounty system." |
Dave stark
1195
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 10:12:00 -
[235] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:OKay that made me laugh "unprofitable to gank " something tells me CCP did not and should not make that a factor when balancing a ship designed for null operations. Bad enough they increased the signal radius on them. Now you want to decrease the tank as well, to make it profitable to gank Just about every single subcap is profitable to gank if you put no tank on them and fill all the slots with t2 mods. The skiff was designed as the anti gank boat, a job the mack can do only with better yeild and cargo bay. CCPs aim was to give all the barges a role not provide another king of barges. The mack must be nerfed to balance the barges. So next, the skiff will be king of exhumers?
ironically, the skiff is actually the most balanced exhumer we have. sadly, it is also the most useless since it's niche is a waste of time since the other two exhumers have sufficient tank anyway. "100k for notifications of stupidity, i love this bounty system." |
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting
202
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 10:43:00 -
[236] - Quote
Back in the day being AFK simply meant a toilet break. It took people to build an internet spaceships game with incredibly long cycles and lots of inherent risk to make a valid griefing method out of being AFK. |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
507
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 10:54:00 -
[237] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:ironically, the skiff is actually the most balanced exhumer we have. sadly, it is also the most useless since it's niche is a waste of time since the other two exhumers have sufficient tank anyway.
T1 Venture gets +2 warp stability. T2 Skiff gets none, and only has 2 low-slots even if you wanted to warp stabilize it. Sure it has x3 the ore hold as a Venture, but by that point why bother? A solo miner in low-sec only has one defense: Being able to warp stab away from pirates. Venture does the job better and for only 100th the cost.
Solution: Skiff needs build in warp stabilizer. Don't look at me like that, it's a T2 ship and costs a fortune. Perfectly justified I think. EvE Forum Bingo |
Kainotomiu Ronuken
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
531
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 10:56:00 -
[238] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Dave stark wrote:ironically, the skiff is actually the most balanced exhumer we have. sadly, it is also the most useless since it's niche is a waste of time since the other two exhumers have sufficient tank anyway. T1 Venture gets +2 warp stability. T2 Skiff gets none, and only has 2 low-slots even if you wanted to warp stabilize it. Sure it has x3 the ore hold as a Venture, but by that point why bother? A solo miner in low-sec only has one defense: Being able to warp stab away from pirates. Venture does the job better and for only 100th the cost. Solution: Skiff needs build in warp stabilizer. Don't look at me like that, it's a T2 ship and costs a fortune. Perfectly justified I think. Nonononono. Solution: Fit warp stabilisers yourself. Sacrifice something else in the name of survivablity. Do not get CCP to buff the ships so that you don't have to bother thinking for yourself.
|
Dave stark
1195
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 11:01:00 -
[239] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Dave stark wrote:ironically, the skiff is actually the most balanced exhumer we have. sadly, it is also the most useless since it's niche is a waste of time since the other two exhumers have sufficient tank anyway. T1 Venture gets +2 warp stability. T2 Skiff gets none, and only has 2 low-slots even if you wanted to warp stabilize it. Sure it has x3 the ore hold as a Venture, but by that point why bother? A solo miner in low-sec only has one defense: Being able to warp stab away from pirates. Venture does the job better and for only 100th the cost. Solution: Skiff needs build in warp stabilizer. Don't look at me like that, it's a T2 ship and costs a fortune. Perfectly justified I think.
a solo miner in low sec is a ******* moron. just so we're clear on that. that has everything to do with low sec and nothing to do with mining ships, it's a totally different discussion for another day.
the warp core bonus makes no sense on the current incarnation of the skiff. it's designed to be a brick, not a ninja like the venture.
if your logic is "it's t2 and costs a fortune" as justification, well... no, let's not even go there, it's terrible. "100k for notifications of stupidity, i love this bounty system." |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3530
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 11:04:00 -
[240] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Simetraz wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Hopefully we can get CCP to make another pass on the barges so we can get a balanced lineup this time around.
So what do you consider a balanced line up ? EHP nerf on the mack to the level of the hulk and a slight reduction in yeild for the skiff and mack. That way we get 3 ships for different jobs rather than the mack fits all.
Not going to work (again).
EHP nerf on Mack => everybody roll Retrievers since why have an easily popped, nerfed yield 200M ship when you can have a similar insurable throwaway other ship?
Also, "3 ships for different jobs" is an illusion and will stay an illusion till CCP will (ever) redo mining from scratch and make it worth actively playing. Till that day there's only 1 job and that's using the most AFK ship of all, period.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |