| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lord Kreios
   |
Posted - 2009.08.01 22:49:00 -
[31]
NO support on this one. Who really wants more carebear stuff. fix the bugs plz.
|
Mr Opinions
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 11:10:00 -
[32]
Supported, but the only problem I see with this idea is that a lot of ships used in mining ops are very soft and can be picked off before the guns could lock and do enough damage to prevent it. Plus if the AI of the guns is like that of POS guns, then the guns would cycle too often.
Another idea I heard someone suggest once was having Rorquals be able to deploy a very weak POS-like forcefield within which the softer barges could mine with less fear of being instapopped, which might last for, say 1 minute or so before a small 3-4 BS gang could get it down. It would still be a big race to gtfo with the Rorqual itself also being at risk and you would still need proper pvp defense in the form of the proposed sentry guns and player pvp guards. 
|
Foulque
Divine Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 11:37:00 -
[33]
No in every possible way. I wrote a reply but there's just so many problems with this I can't be bothered.
________
|
Fille Balle
Dissolution Of Eternity
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 11:49:00 -
[34]
Sounds reasonable enough. Effort vs. gain basically. IMO that's what eve is all about. Saying that, I agree with Herschel: Mid range ores should be more valuable, however, that still wouldn't solve the problem with risk vs. reward in lowsec. This topic is a good step in the right direction.
/Support
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 18:10:00 -
[35]
There some stealth nerf to Outlaws using these?
'cause if these get added to the game we are going to turn Lowsec into a fortress
 Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep.
I am always here.
Watching.
Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
it does get progressively longer.
|
Aeron Thorn
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 18:54:00 -
[36]
NO to mobile mining guns. This is what sentries are for.
Yes to balancing low sec better. Right now there isn't any justifiable reason for going to low sec, since you are likely to get popped by a gate camp as soon as you go through.
If you're lucky enough to get through, you can be popped while mining or missioning, per game design.
I think that bubbles should not be allowed directly on the gates, which would help balance low-sec. You would have to place the bubble no closer than 10 km from the gate, meaning pirates would actually have to decide which entry vector they want to cover instead of blanketing all entry points. Creates a strategic requirement for these guys instead of letting them mindlessly drop a bubble where it covers all entry vectors. 
In 0-sec bubbles could still be allowed on gates, though, since that is a big part of nullspace tactics.
|
xena zena
Bannable Offense.
Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.08.04 04:53:00 -
[37]
Worst idea ever, and I'm a big time miner.. lol.
1) These can NEVER be in low-sec, they'd HAVE to be 0.0 only.
2) Miners will be in hulks, you expect hulks to assume control of these guns within the belt? Interceptors can fly faster then a POS gun can track them but can definitely kill a defenseless hulk. So whats the point? Even if you didn't have a gang of fast ships your guns couldn't track attacking you hulks have no defense, so any even crappy gang will be large enough to QUICKLY pop each hulk trying to assume control of guns before those guns could do much damage to a gang (specifically since any decent roaming gang will have logistics).
3) Mechanic wise this is a nightmare, you're turning a belt into a POS. By the time a miner chugs along over to get in range of a gun to control they'll be long dead, so they're still going to have to safe up and the mining op is disrupted.
So, in conclusion, since the idea is idiotic, it's also pointless and won't accomplish what the OP was wanting to do anyway.
The _SAD_ thing is a CSM actually thought this was a good idea and put it on a meeting agenda. There goes the last shred of respect I had for CSM's...  |
Hashin Kyojin
|
Posted - 2009.08.04 11:43:00 -
[38]
interesting idea 
|
watta loone
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 06:27:00 -
[39]
It's worth at least talking about
|
Tobruk
Black Omega Security
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 00:32:00 -
[40]
If the sproblem is really risk/benefit then the fix is not a mobile mining gun
the fix is to change loot tables/ refine to increase the value of highend minerals and change the distribution of said minerals.
However - if this idea goes ahead then I would propose that the gun MUST be tied to a ship. If that ship warps off or is destroyed than tht gun goes offline, that ship should have to target the enemy ship and order the gun to attack like a drone, and all guns should be too large for a hulk/exhumer to carry without expanders fit.
Mining is pretty fail right now and needs help but the last thing we need is to empower Macro miners more (as they are part of the reason mining is so damaged).
----------------------------------------------
Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
|
Misaniovent
Blood Phage Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.08.21 03:09:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Conspicio
For skilled PvP pilot in a single Cruiser it is pretty simple to
make a total havoc of a mining op in low sec without security.
Even if the miners have really nice outfitted ship.
Boo hoo. Get escorts and scouts that sit out of system. Problem solved.
|
Nova Sato
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 11:04:00 -
[42]
If they make the cost to construct these guns a bit expensive then they will not unbalance the game, they will be just another service a corp/alliance can offer to its mining divisions. (sort of like a temporary POS)
As for the pirates, they will have to adapt and travel in larger numbers and/or adopt new tactics, but they will be rewarded by having a large number of targets in one place that are taking advantage of the protection the guns offer. And once the guns are defeated or tanked then there will be enough rewards on hand to warrant attacks on fortified asteroid fields.
I am in favour of this idea.
_______________________________________________________________________
The limits of the possible can only be defined by going beyond them into the impossible. |
T'san Manaan
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 13:34:00 -
[43]
This could also provide a slight balance to the nerf Ice miners are getting from POS' not being needed for SOV anymore.
Some thought into balancing would be required but I like the basic Idea
|
Uronksur Suth
Sankkasen Mining Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 20:28:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Conspicio
Edited by: Conspicio on 27/07/2009 17:03:38
Edited by: Conspicio on 27/07/2009 17:03:29
So there is a need for some nice equipment for the miners to protect themself,
and still be a nice fight for the pirates.
In case you haven't noticed, Barges and Exhumers have drone bays.
And really, since barges shouldn't be a combat match for someone in a combat ship.... Security is necessary.
|
chopper14
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 02:40:00 -
[45]
How about a saftey in numbers/defensive only aproach.
For instance, make them so only one can be fitted per ship and only on mining vessels. This way only miners can use them. Make them high dps with bad tanks. Make them with disruptor so gank pilots might count them as high priority targets. Make them defensive only so they only fire if they or their flock are fired upon. Make them intelligent so they point seperate unprovoked aggresors to the maximum range possible but concentrate fire one by one starting with tackling vessels. Basically make them buy the miner enough time to escape and nothing else.
|
chopper14
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 02:56:00 -
[46]
Another aproach to feilding them could be to let mining vessels hold as many of these bulky contraptions as they can carry but still only allow them to field 1 per vessel at a time. Because other wise people would just hit them once and send them scurrying off through heavilly camped space. Give them a cargo vs saftey decission to make.
|
destinationunreachable
Hello Kitty Fanclub
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 11:32:00 -
[47]
I *would* support the general idea as it brings more people to lowsec, which is always good.
The downside is: I believe it will be hard to balance. To little effect and it will be a useless item. Too strong: it will convert lowsec into a fortress (citing someone from earlier in the thread).
I also see different needs for 0.0 (keep a 30 HAC sniper gang busy) and empirenear lowsec (1-2 lonely BCs pirating).
As others have stated: pos guns take forever to target and can be tanked. A sniper gang can easily kill some hulks before the need to warp out.
Summary:
good idea, but the implementation is flawed, back to the drawingboard with something easier to balance and you will have my support.
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari
The Confederate Navy
Forever Unbound
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 13:04:00 -
[48]
It's not a ******ed suggestion. It's actually pretty reasonable. The only problem I see with it is that it's easily exploitable.
Anchor 5 guns in a low sec belt, fly around and bait a few pirates in an "easy target" ship, and then warp to the belt. The pirates land in the middle of hell and gets blown to bits in a big "lulz" in local.
It's a very good suggestion, but I'm not so sure about it's actual implementation.
-----
Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting?
EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die. |
chopper14
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 14:08:00 -
[49]
Defensive only no need to hit snipers just the furthest tackler. If you are in a hostile fleet that warps in an attacks but you decide not to fire the guns should not attack you even if their owners decide to. as long as you don't draw first blood. As far as tracking just say it was donated by concord since the guns follow their ideals so closely. This idea gives miners time if a gang comes in miners warp out. It also would beef up security enough that a small defensive fleet which is ussually what there is to protect miners because the rest of them left their pvp ships to fly hulks would change it from purley escape oriented to you messed with the wrong miners with the addition of a ECM boat or a well tanked bs or son logistics ships for the guns longevity. But still defencive only
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |