Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:24:00 -
[61] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:PvP... fair?
I lolled.
This would be the equivalent of limiting the number of ships who can aggress a single target.
Read what I've been saying in the numerous posts I've made here. None of them are about being fair or honorable, but about common sense. I choose to play my game the "honorable way" , somewhat carebearish most of the time as well, but at the same time I'm not about to suggest taking away from any other type of players. You could still grief the other players for all I care, and like described in the above post, self destruction would still serve a purpose. Similar purpose that a real worl war might have, ie. defend this spot at any costs, if overwhelmed do everything you can to prevent the enemy from getting it. Thus boom, it doesn't exist, mission completed. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
672
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:39:00 -
[62] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:PvP... fair?
I lolled.
This would be the equivalent of limiting the number of ships who can aggress a single target. Read what I've been saying in the numerous posts I've made here. None of them are about being fair or honorable, but about common sense. I choose to play my game the "honorable way" , somewhat carebearish most of the time as well, but at the same time I'm not about to suggest taking away from any other type of players. You could still grief the other players for all I care, and like described in the above post, self destruction would still serve a purpose. Similar purpose that a real worl war might have, ie. defend this spot at any costs, if overwhelmed do everything you can to prevent the enemy from getting it. Thus boom, it doesn't exist, mission completed.
My post was aimed at the OP.
I don't have anything to add to what you've said numerous times. I'm of the same mind.
I would tho, take it further and give self destructs an AoE damage modifier based on the ship size. Got the ballz to gang up on something you can't take out fast enough, then you better have a good enough tank to withstand it taking you down with it. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:38:00 -
[63] - Quote
That would make sense, especially considering that one of the tutorial mission kind of hints that you can do that already. Would definitely support that |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:56:00 -
[64] - Quote
The entire point of EVE is to take things from other people. Wow, huge concept and hard to understand I know. Here is another one, humans don't like to loose...period. Nobody likes to loose (which is why this is turning into a threadnaught) but with the nerfing of cap ships and loss of drones they are now defensless vs smaller ships. They can't fight back without support, so if there is nothing to do but self destruct because they don't have support it ends in one situation: You try to take the cap ship from them, they try to take the cap ship kill mail from you and there is a 2 minute window to do it in. There is a 2 minute window to shoot that cap ship from the time it is started, if you don't have sufficient DPS you loose and if cap pilot doesn't have enough time he looses. Same result, which is why there is 2 minutes in the first place and not instant self destruct.
Why does everything they are obligated to earn a killmail by shooting something? There is no agreement in standard fights, you can attack at any time (non-consential PVP amirite?) and they can fight back, run, or self destruct but you have a 2 minute window. Its like "Soandso wants to shoot you!" and you click No, he tries again and you continue to click no. Where is this obligation to fight? There is none, cause you can attack at any time. So why do you think you deserve a record of your achievement that they choose to self destruct ? He is fighting back and shoving a **** pie in your face at the same time. They cannot logoffski and escape now that their buffers won't hold out, so in the end its comming down to ship destruction either by a gang or by self destruction (and post winter expansion, I bet there will be alot of self destruction which will reduce the number of cap ships to deny KM and later make it easier to invade because they won't have cap ships to replace in time). In the end, the ship is gone either way and KM does not need to be generated. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
673
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 19:04:00 -
[65] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:The entire point of EVE is to take things from other people. Wow, huge concept and hard to understand I know. Here is another one, humans don't like to loose...period. Nobody likes to loose (which is why this is turning into a threadnaught) but with the nerfing of cap ships and loss of drones they are now defensless vs smaller ships. They can't fight back without support, so if there is nothing to do but self destruct because they don't have support it ends in one situation: You try to take the cap ship from them, they try to take the cap ship kill mail from you and there is a 2 minute window to do it in. There is a 2 minute window to shoot that cap ship from the time it is started, if you don't have sufficient DPS you loose and if cap pilot doesn't have enough time he looses. Same result, which is why there is 2 minutes in the first place and not instant self destruct.
Why does everything they are obligated to earn a killmail by shooting something? There is no agreement in standard fights, you can attack at any time (non-consential PVP amirite?) and they can fight back, run, or self destruct but you have a 2 minute window. Its like "Soandso wants to shoot you!" and you click No, he tries again and you continue to click no. Where is this obligation to fight? There is none, cause you can attack at any time. So why do you think you deserve a record of your achievement that they choose to self destruct ? He is fighting back and shoving a **** pie in your face at the same time. They cannot logoffski and escape now that their buffers won't hold out, so in the end its comming down to ship destruction either by a gang or by self destruction (and post winter expansion, I bet there will be alot of self destruction which will reduce the number of cap ships to deny KM and later make it easier to invade because they won't have cap ships to replace in time). In the end, the ship is gone either way and KM does not need to be generated.
Tears. Yum.
The whole point of Eve is to take things from other people. Give my carriers a 30 odd km AoE self destruct and I'll put that into practice for you with those crappy frigate pointer gangs and their cane blobs.
Non consensual ownage amirite? |
Evei Shard
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:14:00 -
[66] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Right now it's so that there's absolutely no drawbacks to self destructing a ship you're about to lose anyway and only something to gain
"Right now it's so that there is absolutely no drawbacks to ganking a miner sitting in a belt, and only something to gain"
My guess is that if someone made that statement in a thread complaining about buffing Hulks, that several of you would be in there telling them to "HTFU" and "quit whining, it's EVE" etc.
This **** works both ways. Sandbox is what it is, you just want to have CCP change the rules to force someone to play Eve the way *you* think it should be played.
SD should have a strong blast radius AoE so it becomes a valid blob tactic to fly a large ship in, draw them close, then SD to give a good number of them damage, at which point the rest of your fleet warps in.
|
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 05:50:00 -
[67] - Quote
Evei Shard wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote:Right now it's so that there's absolutely no drawbacks to self destructing a ship you're about to lose anyway and only something to gain "Right now it's so that there is absolutely no drawbacks to ganking a miner sitting in a belt, and only something to gain" My guess is that if someone made that statement in a thread complaining about buffing Hulks, that several of you would be in there telling them to "HTFU" and "quit whining, it's EVE" etc. This **** works both ways. Sandbox is what it is, you just want to have CCP change the rules to force someone to play Eve the way *you* think it should be played. SD should have a strong blast radius AoE so it becomes a valid blob tactic to fly a large ship in, draw them close, then SD to give a good number of them damage, at which point the rest of your fleet warps in.
There's that security loss and concording, even though it's not really going to prevent anyone from doing that. I'd be fine with some changes to that as well, but overall I'm fine with miners getting ganked for not paying attention as well. Why should any profession get a free pass from any and all danger.
Using self destruction against a blob wouldn't be that effective simply because of that timer. Assuming that AoE effect were put in the game, any FC with some common sense would realize what's going on once that neutral pilot sticks around inside the blob for any lenghts of time. Nevermind having a flashy inside the blob, not that it'd survive the required two minutes in the first place. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 10:12:00 -
[68] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote: There's that security loss and concording, even though it's not really going to prevent anyone from doing that. I'd be fine with some changes to that as well, but overall I'm fine with miners getting ganked for not paying attention as well. Why should any profession get a free pass from any and all danger.
CCP implemented security loss and concording in 0.0? Miner was not paying attention, and the gankers did not bring enough. Thats it, but stop talking about drawbacks in this regard. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 10:28:00 -
[69] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote: There's that security loss and concording, even though it's not really going to prevent anyone from doing that. I'd be fine with some changes to that as well, but overall I'm fine with miners getting ganked for not paying attention as well. Why should any profession get a free pass from any and all danger.
CCP implemented security loss and concording in 0.0? Miner was not paying attention, and the gankers did not bring enough. Thats it, but stop talking about drawbacks in this regard.
0.0 isn't the only area in the game, and pretty much by going out there is an automatic approval that you know what you're doing and should know how to take your losses. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 10:45:00 -
[70] - Quote
so yor reasoning why ganking a miner should have no drawbacks is he's knowing what he is doing. How is it different from your carrier ganker, who shoulb know that capitals can selfdestruct if you dont bring enough DPS? |
|
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:05:00 -
[71] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:so yor reasoning why ganking a miner should have no drawbacks is he's knowing what he is doing. How is it different from your carrier ganker, who shoulb know that capitals can selfdestruct if you dont bring enough DPS?
Are you intentionally trying to ignore the fact that if you choose to fly a non-combat ship in space unprotected, that it's your own choice? If you want to be able to fight back, get help. If you want to avoid getting ganked, watch the local, possible intel channels, use dscan as well as your brains. If at all viable, try mining aligned as well (it can work, just a pain in the rear end to do). A carrier getting ganked is completely different, you can fight back with one.
As it becomes more and more evident that you're replying just to try and troll me to reply more, I'll simply quit responding. Have better things to do with my time. I've made my opinion on the self destruct mechanisms known in this thread and that's what I came to do in this thread. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:21:00 -
[72] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote: Are you intentionally trying to ignore the fact that if you choose to fly a non-combat ship in space unprotected, that it's your own choice? If you want to be able to fight back, get help. If you want to avoid getting ganked, watch the local, possible intel channels, use dscan as well as your brains. If at all viable, try mining aligned as well (it can work, just a pain in the rear end to do). A carrier getting ganked is completely different, you can fight back with one.
we were talking about drawbacks, you have no consistent stance on that apart from simply wanting killmails - from what I conclude that was just another bullshitting attempt to back up your already weak argumentation.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:As it becomes more and more evident that you're replying just to try and troll me to reply more, I'll simply quit responding. Have better things to do with my time. I've made my opinion on the self destruct mechanisms known in this thread and that's what I came to do in this thread. yes please do this |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:25:00 -
[73] - Quote
If you want protection from getting ganked, stick with high sec space or get some friends. You seem to want a magical win button in self destruct. I wonder if all nullsec dwellers are as carebearish as you appear to be.
There's no drawbacks in me blowing up your combat fitted ship either, are you going to complain about that too? |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:31:00 -
[74] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:If you want protection from getting ganked, stick with high sec space or get some friends. You seem to want a magical win button in self destruct. I wonder if all nullsec dwellers are as carebearish as you appear to be. if you want killmail bring more friends.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:There's no drawbacks in me blowing up your combat fitted ship either, are you going to complain about that too? ok wonderful, you finally admitted there are no drawbacks in many parts of eve, no argument for anything at all. So selfdestructing in your face to deny you the killmail and **** you off is one of them, thats fine. Bring more friends. That silly "no drawback" thing is proven as invalid I assume... |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:37:00 -
[75] - Quote
Well whoop de doo, why should there be any drawbacks in winning a fight? Why should be there any benefits in losing a fight? I'm fine with a minor benefit of denying that loot from self destructed boats, like already said many times, anything more than that and it's too big of a reward for what can be looked as nothing more than losing the fight.
Like said the drawback of committing an illegal act in low or high sec is loss of security standing and possible concording. The drawback has nothing to with the fight itself, but the legality of the action. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:43:00 -
[76] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Well whoop de doo, why should there be any drawbacks in winning a fight? a "fight"? You call killing a defenseless ship a fight? Once you go that far, there should be no killmails for ganks at all, nothing to be rewarded actually.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Why should be there any benefits in losing a fight? benefit? What benefit? The guy just mitigated his loss, doesnt benefit at all.
Borlag Crendraven wrote:Like said the drawback of committing an illegal act in low or high sec is loss of security standing and possible concording. The drawback has nothing to with the fight itself, but the legality of the action. blablab post more text there are no drawbacks in many things, thats eve. And the last thing which should have any is selfdestructing HIS OWN STUFF!
stop trying to pick selective things which fit your crappy scenario, talk about the game as whole. and security status as drawback?? trolololol, nobody is playing pvp in lowsec anyways (not even mentioning high sec), so its pretty irrelevant here and laughable anyways, go kill a rat in belt to level out your sec loss. |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:48:00 -
[77] - Quote
And you claim I'm inconsistent? First saying how everything is fair in a war, then thinking that industrial ship kills aren't fair? Now which one is it? |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:51:00 -
[78] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote:And you claim I'm inconsistent? First saying how everything is fair in a war, then thinking that industrial ship kills aren't fair? Now which one is it?
yeah, everything including selfdestruct. In the same time I dont call ganks as "fights" and requesting "proper reward" for that laughable kills and I dont p*ss myself if someone was able to grief me back and selfdestrict in front of me, so what... Sad but happens, keep trying. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
674
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:21:00 -
[79] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote:Why should be there any benefits in losing a fight? benefit? What benefit? The guy just mitigated his loss, doesnt benefit at all.
Seriously... self destructing and LOSING a ship is mitigating his loss?
Logic... you haz none.
The benefit of losing the fight and going into self destruct before you can kill my ship, is to deny you what you seek. If I could take you down with me... I would. Out of spite.
Bring on AoE SDs!
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:00:00 -
[80] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote: Seriously... self destructing and LOSING a ship is mitigating his loss?
Logic... you haz none.
not giving away the loot and KM is a kind of, I would say... otherwise, noone would SD, would they?? |
|
Skippidipp
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:34:00 -
[81] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Asuka Solo wrote: Seriously... self destructing and LOSING a ship is mitigating his loss?
Logic... you haz none.
not giving away the loot and KM is a kind of, I would say... otherwise, noone would SD, would they??
Thats the point. No one should be able to SD in a fight/gank call it what you will. Only when stuck in a WH and you need to take the pod express, or when wanting to fast travel your clone.
Stop giving us the bullshit statement of bring a blob. Cause thats what you are saying! Do the math and see what it takes to bring down a capital in 2 min, and don't forget to add the fact that you need logi pilots as well. Now not all of us have the luxury of being in a 2k+ blob alliance like you seam to be. Funny thing is, I cant find your corp anywhere.... Afraid of using main?
We rarely get a KM on capitals, cause as soon as your scout decloakes and points. The capital pilot knows whats going to happen. If he hasn't been able to log of before taking aggression, he knows he is not getting away. So he just starts SD. That leaves our fleet at best 1.5 - 2 min. And usually there is more than 1 cap. They are popular in WH to do sites. Still we don't get any loot "and thats actually more annoying than the KM" for our trouble.
Seeing as the SD never was intended to be used in PVP "at least I hope so". They should change it with the times. In 2003-2004 there were no capitals, or ships with 1M EHP or more. So 2 min seamed reasonable. Now it dos not!
|
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
679
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:07:00 -
[82] - Quote
Skippidipp wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:Asuka Solo wrote: Seriously... self destructing and LOSING a ship is mitigating his loss?
Logic... you haz none.
not giving away the loot and KM is a kind of, I would say... otherwise, noone would SD, would they?? Thats the point. No one should be able to SD in a fight/gank call it what you will. Only when stuck in a WH and you need to take the pod express, or when wanting to fast travel your clone. Stop giving us the bullshit statement of bring a blob. Cause thats what you are saying! Do the math and see what it takes to bring down a capital in 2 min, and don't forget to add the fact that you need logi pilots as well. Now not all of us have the luxury of being in a 2k+ blob alliance like you seam to be. Funny thing is, I cant find your corp anywhere.... Afraid of using main? We rarely get a KM on capitals, cause as soon as your scout decloakes and points. The capital pilot knows whats going to happen. If he hasn't been able to log of before taking aggression, he knows he is not getting away. So he just starts SD. That leaves our fleet at best 1.5 - 2 min. And usually there is more than 1 cap. They are popular in WH to do sites. Still we don't get any loot "and thats actually more annoying than the KM" for our trouble. Seeing as the SD never was intended to be used in PVP "at least I hope so". They should change it with the times. In 2003-2004 there were no capitals, or ships with 1M EHP or more. So 2 min seamed reasonable. Now it dos not!
As you so eloquently put it, stop with the whole "you should not SD in a pvp scenario" bullcrap excuses. That ship has sailed ages ago.
Eve isn't supposed to be fair. Your non consensually attempting to kill a player in a big ship with lots of friends helping you.
He's trying to non consensually deny you that killmail by blowing up his own stuff before you and your brosefs can.
Seems fair to me.
If you bring enough DPS, you get loot. If you don't, you wont. Now stop forcing people to go down with e-honour and give you a long hard one the way you like it. Cuz eve has no rules... just some guidelines called concord and a EULA.
You mad bro. And sad too. Can't hack not getting that KM or loot? Kitty island adventure is that way -> |
Lex69v
Royal Skiff Blades DarkSide.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 08:43:00 -
[83] - Quote
Quote:As you so eloquently put it, stop with the whole "you should not SD in a pvp scenario" bullcrap excuses. That ship has sailed ages ago. Everything is described in previous pages.
Quote:Eve isn't supposed to be fair. Your non consensually attempting to kill a player in a big ship with lots of friends helping you. Its usually fleet vs fleet, not gang vs one ship.
Quote:He's trying to non consensually deny you that killmail by blowing up his own stuff before you and your brosefs can.
Seems fair to me. Again. If people wanna their ass be 99% safe, they dont go to WH, low or null sec. If they do they will not care about denying km and loot if the mechanics will change. If you want to survive you and your friends should bring more efforts to save this ship. NOt just "one-button-click".
Quote:If you bring enough DPS, you get loot. If you don't, you wont. Now stop forcing people to go down with e-honour and give you a long hard one the way you like it. Cuz eve has no rules... just some guidelines called concord and a EULA.
You mad bro. And sad too. Can't hack not getting that KM or loot? Kitty island adventure is that way ->
Lets calculate. Let it be a Thanatos with fittings below:
Quote:[Thanatos, WH t1] Capital Armor Repairer I Capital Armor Repairer I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Capacitor Power Relay II Capacitor Power Relay II
Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II True Sansha Cap Recharger
Triage Module I Capital Shield Transporter I Capital Shield Transporter I Capital Shield Transporter I [empty high slot]
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
1 028 903 EHP 7932 tank 1 028 903 / 120 (seconds) + 7932 = 16 506 DPS ypu need to kill t2 ****** fitted thanatos, or like 45+ drakes 41+ zealot 35+ arty tempests 23+ pulse geddons plus logistics and support Why should we bring so much people to be able to kill just one guy? |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:07:00 -
[84] - Quote
[qqqquote=Skippidipp] Thats the point. No one should be able to SD in a fight/gank call it what you will.[/quote]
why not?? which important code of fairness of eve would prohibit selfdestructing in pvp? I mean, you consider ganking a single helpless dude in a gang of 10 as fair and expect fairness of getting a KM for reward of such a fair and honourable activity?? What the f*ck is wrong with you?
[qqqquote=Skippidipp] Stop giving us the bullshit statement of bring a blob. Cause thats what you are saying! Do the math and see what it takes to bring down a capital in 2 min, and don't forget to add the fact that you need logi pilots as well. Now not all of us have the luxury of being in a 2k+ blob alliance like you seam to be. Funny thing is, I cant find your corp anywhere.... Afraid of using main?
We rarely get a KM on capitals, cause as soon as your scout decloakes and points. The capital pilot knows whats going to happen. If he hasn't been able to log of before taking aggression, he knows he is not getting away. So he just starts SD. That leaves our fleet at best 1.5 - 2 min. And usually there is more than 1 cap. They are popular in WH to do sites. Still we don't get any loot "and thats actually more annoying than the KM" for our trouble.[/quote]
so what?? You say because you arent willing to gather enough fireower for a KM, your griefing possibilities should be extended to capital ships? For which single reason are you supposed to get a guaranteed killmail?
[qqqquote=Skippidipp] Seeing as the SD never was intended to be used in PVP "at least I hope so". They should change it with the times. In 2003-2004 there were no capitals, or ships with 1M EHP or more. So 2 min seamed reasonable. Now it dos not! [/quote]
nothing we can argue about, noone knows what the intended purpose of SD was, eve is a sandbox.
[qqqquote=Lex69v]Everything is described in previous pages. [/quote]
nothing was "described". There is no reason why one should not SD in pvp.
[qqqquote=Lex69v]Again. If people wanna their ass be 99% safe, they dont go to WH, low or null sec.
If they do they will not care about denying km and loot if the mechanics will change. If you want to survive you and your friends should bring more efforts to save this ship. NOt just "one-button-click".[/quote]
another fa**ot assuming SD = safe. Whats safe at losing a ship with everything what was in it? Its not about saving something but about giving you less.
[qqqquote=Lex69v]Lets calculate. Let it be a Thanatos with fittings below:
Quote:[Thanatos, WH t1] Capital Armor Repairer I Capital Armor Repairer I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Capacitor Power Relay II Capacitor Power Relay II
Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II True Sansha Cap Recharger
Triage Module I Capital Shield Transporter I Capital Shield Transporter I Capital Shield Transporter I [empty high slot]
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
1 028 903 EHP 7932 tank 1 028 903 / 120 (seconds) + 7932 = 16 506 DPS ypu need to kill t2 ****** fitted thanatos, or like 45+ drakes 41+ zealot 35+ arty tempests 23+ pulse geddons plus logistics and support [/quote]
1) you dont need logistics to kill a carrier, warp out and back in if he locks you and deals too much damage. 2) you need much less than that, an armageddon deals roughly 1000 DPS, so bring 16 of them, each with a neutralizer and you got your 16k DPS.
[qqqquote=Lex69v]Why should we bring so much people to be able to kill just one guy?[/quote]
one guy in a CAPITAL ship. For one guy in a SUPERCAPITAL ship you would need even much much more.
But, as you say they all selfdestruct if tackled, you actually need to bring ONE tackler in order to KILL him. You simply wont have a killmail for that.
PS: thanks CCP for this stupid limitation of 5 quotes, forcing us to fake quotes to be able to post at all!!!! |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
683
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:45:00 -
[85] - Quote
Lex69v wrote:
1 028 903 EHP 7932 tank 1 028 903 / 120 (seconds) + 7932 = 16 506 DPS ypu need to kill t2 ****** fitted thanatos, or like 45+ drakes 41+ zealot 35+ arty tempests 23+ pulse geddons plus logistics and support Why should we bring so much people to be able to kill just one guy?
Your math fails as much as this fit does, if not more so.
29 ships. Total. less than 2 minutes to gank. I still had about 20 seconds left on the SD timer.
I've fitted dual reppers on a thanny as well and gotten into trouble with it helping out some station camped brosefs. If it wasn't for divine intervention from friendly spider tanking carriers in the 11th hour, I would have lost that one in a similar time frame to a 35 man gang of cruisers, recons and inties after getting bumped off station.
So spare me you magical numbers. Pics, kms or gtfo. |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc W-Space
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:50:00 -
[86] - Quote
1st - you don't often have such numbers in WH-space, that is intended for small ganks. 2nd - wormhole mass is limited. 3. All 4 proposed options (drakes, zealots, tempests and geddons) will die really fast under sleepers. You often catch farmers on site. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |