|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:So can somebody sum up all 130 pages?
Gankers don't think it's fair that mining ships get buffed, acting like they are unkillable even though they are not.
Personally would have rather had new higher end mining ships added instead of bothering with altering barges and exhumers. Game needs more than a whole 6 ships for miners. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Sentamon wrote:So can somebody sum up all 130 pages? Gankers don't think it's fair that mining ships get buffed, acting like they are unkillable even though they are not. Personally would have rather had new higher end mining ships added instead of bothering with altering barges and exhumers. Game needs more than a whole 6 ships for miners. Guess you've never heard of all the racial mining frigates, mining cruisers, and the orca/rorqual.
Orca and Rorqual don't mine. And I don't count the useless cruisers and frigates. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Sentamon wrote:So can somebody sum up all 130 pages? Gankers don't think it's fair that mining ships get buffed, acting like they are unkillable even though they are not. Personally would have rather had new higher end mining ships added instead of bothering with altering barges and exhumers. Game needs more than a whole 6 ships for miners. Guess you've never heard of all the racial mining frigates, mining cruisers, and the orca/rorqual. Orca and Rorqual don't mine. And I don't count the useless cruisers and frigates. Not every ship can be top dog.
No...not saying that either. Just seems the mining profession is a bit lacking. Can train 2 months and be in the best mining ship eve has to offer then what? You have nothing left to aim for lol. All I am saying is a little more variety for miners would be nice. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
No...not saying that either. Just seems the mining profession is a bit lacking. Can train 2 months and be in the best mining ship eve has to offer then what? You have nothing left to aim for lol. All I am saying is a little more variety for miners would be nice.
Good news, CCP has granted your request. What additional kind of variety do you suggest?
Larger mining ships and capital mining ships. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
No...not saying that either. Just seems the mining profession is a bit lacking. Can train 2 months and be in the best mining ship eve has to offer then what? You have nothing left to aim for lol. All I am saying is a little more variety for miners would be nice.
Good news, CCP has granted your request. What additional kind of variety do you suggest? Larger mining ships and capital mining ships. Yes please CCP, let the miners grind mineral costs into the ground so I can have 15m drakes.
Maybe then people in null would at least have some wars and fight each other if their ships were super cheap :) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Sentamon wrote:So can somebody sum up all 130 pages? Gankers don't think it's fair that mining ships get buffed, acting like they are unkillable even though they are not. Personally would have rather had new higher end mining ships added instead of bothering with altering barges and exhumers. Game needs more than a whole 6 ships for miners. As someone who's been lumped into "gankers" I think that it's fine that miners need their hands held, despite my (and others) attempts to show them how to fit their Hulks for safety. Gankers have never had a problem with the fact that Miners had the option to reduce their yield to gain safety. Miners have simply kept claiming that their Tank doesn't matter, that the gankers "will just bring more ships." All the while clamoring for just a little more tank to save them . Now that the new ships have stats, miners are annoyed that the tiericide isn't a straight buff to the Hulk, and are confused that the Hulk's gonna have to have some of its abilities reduced so that the other ships have a chance to shine. The new Hulk is not the Best mining ship. It is one of three best mining ships. All of them are supposed to be the best in their specialized situation. The Skiff is supposed to be best when you're concerned you might get shot at. The Mackinaw is supposed to be best when you're concerned that you have nobody to help you haul things. The Hulk is supposed to be best when both of the above have been taken care of. Right now the situation on SISI is as follows: The Skiff is worthless, because the Mackinaw has more than enough tank to dissuade gankers. The Mackinaw is best if you might get shot at or if you don't have haulers. The Hulk is best when the above have been taken care of, but apparantly the fact that it takes some care and feeding to keep it in mining crystals (someone claimed that they sometimes needed to make 4 crystal changes during the time the Orca takes to haul it's load to station) is too horrific to contemplate. By the way, having a New "Higher End" (I assume you mean "Higher Yield") mining ship, just means that after the 6 months it takes for everyone to train into it, mineral prices will fall, and you'll be making the same Isk/hr as you were with the Hulk, but you'll be doing proportionately more hauling to turn the minerals into ISK. At the same time, new players still in mining barges will be making a pittance and will have trouble saving up enough for Exhumers (price is largely independent of mineral prices) or the new ship (assuming it's T2). P.S. A Dedicated Gas Harvesting ship would be good. Drug Dealing needs some Dev love.
No, not just referring to higher yield. I just want more than 3barges/exhumers for mining. I don't care if their yield sucks... I don't mine to build things nor do I care about maximizing my yield. I do it because it's fun. I just think it's silly that you have so many combat ships in eve, and so few mining ships. I didn't mean to only comment on the gankers btw, so sorry for that :D I don't really have anything to say about the new changes to the barges, I do like that they all will be useful instead of just 1 being useful. But other than that, don't care ..would just like to see more to train for beyond exhumers somewhere in the future.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 03:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: No, not just referring to higher yield. I just want more than 3barges/exhumers for mining. I don't care if their yield sucks... I don't mine to build things nor do I care about maximizing my yield. I do it because it's fun. I just think it's silly that you have so many combat ships in eve, and so few mining ships. I didn't mean to only comment on the gankers btw, so sorry for that :D I don't really have anything to say about the new changes to the barges, I do like that they all will be useful instead of just 1 being useful. But other than that, don't care ..would just like to see more to train for beyond exhumers somewhere in the future.
Each mining ship has different advantages and disadvantages, and those cover all 3 of the things that matter to a mining ship: Tank, Cargo, and Yield. What purpose does a Fast mining ship serve? What purpose does a Long range mining ship serve? What purpose does a fast locking mining ship serve (what's with the Exhumer scan res, anyway?)? What purpose does a Drone focused mining ship serve? Give me an idea for a new mining ship that's focused on something other than Tank, Yield, or Cargo and actually has a useful purpose.
You named the things I would have named. They don't have to be something totally different than the 3 exhumers. Just slightly different styles of ships. Faster ships, super long range ships, doesn't matter...give them different looks, sizes, and slight changes from the pre existing exhumers and you at least give more variety and choices of ships to choose from. This could really apply to all categories of ships, I can't see more variety in the ways mentioned above being a bad thing. The universe is huge, I just think seeing the same handful of ships doing everything gets a little old. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 04:01:00 -
[8] - Quote
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:
And min maxers (most miners) will still only fly 1 ship.
Let em. I don't care about those people. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 13:11:00 -
[9] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Dave stark wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:A properly fit Tornado delivers a volley of at least 9000 damage, which was far enough to destroy an untanked Hulk before it could react. What's the problem? that bit, i'd imagine. that's how alpha works, hope this helps
Does indeed help. I had heard Goonswarm whined a lot, you helped confirm it for me. Thank you for putting the rumors to rest. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 13:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Pipa Porto wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:You named the things I would have named. They don't have to be something totally different than the 3 exhumers. Just slightly different styles of ships. Faster ships, super long range ships, doesn't matter...give them different looks, sizes, and slight changes from the pre existing exhumers and you at least give more variety and choices of ships to choose from. This could really apply to all categories of ships, I can't see more variety in the ways mentioned above being a bad thing. The universe is huge, I just think seeing the same handful of ships doing everything gets a little old. Except for the combat implications, I wouldn't care if all mining barges had unlimited lock ranges and could motor around at 100km/s. The reason there aren't variety is that 99% of miners will either pick a Tanky Mining ship, a Convenient Mining ship, or a high Yield Mining ship because there's no rational reason to care about any other stat. There's no reason to bother spending a huge amount of Dev and Art team time on ships that nobody's going to use. The bad thing is that variety takes an enormous amount of Dev and Art Dept time. If you want something other than the 6 mining barges, you've got plenty of choices. You can mine in any ship that can fit drones or has a turret slot. Since you don't care about Yield, they'll all work great and that gives you an enormous amount of variety.
But I like strip miners :( so choices are rather limited. |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
848
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 10:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Outside of goonswarm and their pets does anyone really ever go to themittani.com? Have you become a goon pet Herr Wilkus? Can we expect useless link spamming for them on top of your constant complaining? |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
869
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 16:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Look at all these suicide ganker tears because they can't fit up a T1 destroyer for little to no ISK and solo gank a ship that cost 200m+ for the hull. Absolutely pathetic.
You can still suicide gank that shinny, but you will need to bring a few friends (you know, the thing you keep telling everyone in high sec to get...) and you will need to pony up a bit of ISK to do it. So dry those eyes already. Well you know, miners that fit a good tank pre-patch couldn't be ganked by said solo ganker in a destroyer either.
No...it took a whole 2 cheap fit destroyers instead of 1. Barges/Exhumers needed this buff a long time ago. Still gankable, just not at the ridiculous low cost as it was pre patch. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
885
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 19:40:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Look at all these suicide ganker tears because they can't fit up a T1 destroyer for little to no ISK and solo gank a ship that cost 200m+ for the hull. Absolutely pathetic.
You can still suicide gank that shinny, but you will need to bring a few friends (you know, the thing you keep telling everyone in high sec to get...) and you will need to pony up a bit of ISK to do it. So dry those eyes already. Well you know, miners that fit a good tank pre-patch couldn't be ganked by said solo ganker in a destroyer either. No...it took a whole 2 cheap fit destroyers instead of 1. Only if the miner sacrificed the tank in favouring max yield/cargo. A good tank did not sacrifice itself for more yield & could not be profitably ganked.
No matter how you look at it, exhumers deserved better tank/ehp than they previously had. They are the highest end mining vessels you can fly, but they were far to weak even with tanks fit. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
894
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 23:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:
If you fit something besides cargo rigs and mining enhancers you can tank mutliple 0.0 BS's with no issue in a hulk. There was never a problem with the tank, people were to stupid to actually put the tank ON the hulk.
Tanking npc rats is nothing NOTHING like tanking to deal with suicide ganks.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1473
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 20:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Buck Futz wrote:
Of course mining ISK varies with mineral value. Removal of drones and ganking was having an upward impact on mineral prices. Miners who adjusted were earning the highest income rate ever due to high min/ice prices.
Turning around and rebalancing the new barges to be both highly gank-resistance AND bot friendly? Its almost like CCP wants miner income to be as low as possible by lowering the bar even further.
All the hard work goons put into making mining a worth while venture
ahhhh hahahahahahahaaaha hahahahahahahaa! |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1475
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 22:12:00 -
[16] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
ahhhh hahahahahahahaaaha hahahahahahahaa!
Go take a look peasent. My corp forced up Caldari ice value with just a month of bot hunting and its value stayed put right up untill the macks were buffed. Now we have AFK ice bot fleets back in the forge and the value is dropping like a rock and there is very little we can do to save the miners again. We want miners to make better isk.
I don't mine ice, so I don't care. And if you're going to call me a Peasant, at least spell it correctly. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1528
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 18:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Edit: You guys have the manpower and funds to keep ganking bots, don't let a little buff in hitpoints stop you. Use more ships.
Wrong. We only have so much in the budget, the reason it worked before was because the foolish untanked masses funded the flow of gankboats. If the mack had the same tank as a hulk then yes, we could pull it off so long as miners continued to be stupid and go untanked. This would also mean the skiff would be more wanted so in the end, good miners and industry players would be more rewarded.
Ok how bout looking at it this way. You have the manpower...use cheaper ships? It can't take that many destroyers to gank a mackinaw can it? Even tanked they only have around 30k ehp. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1537
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:23:00 -
[18] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:I like the carebear dynamic CCP is pushing here. Miners: "Mine all you want, you don't have to tank - or even pay attention anymore - here's your ISK." Gankers: "Under no circumstances will you be allowed to profit from ganking miners. Here's your nerf." Mining in highsec was already incredibly safe. Its just that miners are incredibly slow to learn and incredibly quick to fire-up the whine-tank. Plus we have DEVs who pop-off in the forums without even understanding the concept of 'profitable' ganking.
If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now" Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1537
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:34:00 -
[19] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Buck Futz wrote:I like the carebear dynamic CCP is pushing here. Miners: "Mine all you want, you don't have to tank - or even pay attention anymore - here's your ISK." Gankers: "Under no circumstances will you be allowed to profit from ganking miners. Here's your nerf." Mining in highsec was already incredibly safe. Its just that miners are incredibly slow to learn and incredibly quick to fire-up the whine-tank. Plus we have DEVs who pop-off in the forums without even understanding the concept of 'profitable' ganking. If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now" Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant. So then tank, don't be a ******* moron.
I do tank. But pre patch even a fully tanked hulk could be ganked by 2 low sp players in catalysts. It's a serious balancing issue which would easily drive players to quit. Not saying ganking shouldn't be possible...of course it should but not to the extent that it was. And now that griefers can't make any isk off of it...they are whining about it. Even if all it takes is a few more destroyers, it would seem most of them are to dumb to actually get a few more people together to do so. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1537
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:42:00 -
[20] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
It should have never been a possibility for a destroyer to solo gank an EXHUMER in the first place. Barge..maybe, but not a weak destroyer a week old character could get into ganking the highest tier mining ship you could possibly ever train for. It made zero sense.
It wouldn't have been possible if the miners didn't fly their ships with no defences at all. Even t3 cruisers can be blown up by a gank destroyers if the have zero tank mods fitted. The only thing that makes zero sense is the miners feeling entitaled to safety without putting any effort into it.
EVEN tanked, exhumers were too weak. They are not too strong now...the only reason anyone has an issue with it is because you can't make profit off it anymore. |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1537
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: If you don't tank, it's easy to kill an exhumer still. Friggin cry baby gankers man... you make me sick. I don't mind suicide ganking, part of the game...but you are the worst person to be talking on their behalf with your nonsense and your whining because "oh no, its harder to gank defenseless ships now" Don't like it? Go play a different game. Otherwise deal with the changes and stop crying like a goddamn infant.
Yes, because ships should be balanced based on what the dumbest pilots who fly them are capable of. Good plan. FFS. You people just don't know how to read. CCP said themselves that all the ships are being rebalanced... it was just the time for barges/exhumers. How do you all know when it comes time to redo destroyers or battlecruisers that they wont get a buff that makes them strong enough to gank miners the way you used to? And finally, you grifer/ganker/crybabies need to stop thinking you're entitled to have the game run the way YOU think it should, this isn't your game. HAHA, you aren't even defending the patch anymore. "Well, barges got a ridiculous buff - but who knows, maybe battlecruisers will get one too..." Sure thing buddy. Weak argument. I highly doubt the DEVs are sitting there saying: "Ok, battlecruiser 'rebalance' - Give Tornado/Tempest 25K Alpha. Check!" Really.
Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1537
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 20:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1538
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:01:00 -
[23] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Whatever you say Herr Wilkus, more of your nonsense. Keep crying over changes instead of maybe recommending changes in a positive way...it's sure to work eventually. Nonsense? Aren't you the one that said a prepatch 'fully tanked Hulk' dies to two low-skill Catalysts? Because I have a pretty firm grasp on the mechanics of ganking and tanking - I can recommend adjustments. You, obviously, do not when you make clearly false statements. Just another butthurt miner. Either way, its pretty clear that, on its face, that CCP botched the Aug 8 patch and massively overbuffed the Mack and the Retriever. Before Aug 8, we saw plenty of Hulks and Mackinaws in highsec. Two out of 3 ain't bad. Now? We almost exclusively find Mackinaws in the belts. GJ, CCP, nice 'balance'.
Where? I see plenty of Hulks, Covetors, Skiffs, Procurers... the only place I ever see giant groups of Mackinaws is in icefields still...just like pre patch. I didn't have any issues pre patch so no, I am not just another "butthurt" miner. I have a problem with the amount of whining you people produce over losing your easy targets. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1538
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 21:03:00 -
[24] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Only thing that will do is force botters into the skiff and make it even more hard for you to kill them. So you get back the easier targets of players who don't tank their exhumers, but force the botters into harder to kill ships. That makes a worse situation than the one that already exists. The skiff mines the least and the hold is rather small. The bots will either continue with macks, roll retriver fleets because of their ease. The only reason they swapped to the macks from hulks is because of the cargo hold change.
Has a 100k ehp if tanked, 15,000 ore hold and a 200% bonus to yield. Bots don't care if they lose a tiny bit of yield...they are not actually playing. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1549
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 22:35:00 -
[25] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:Buck Futz wrote:Giving the Mackinaw the lowest EHP of the three would force miners to make an actual decision. Sure... and while you're at it, rename it "Gankercandy"... you know, potentially the most ore in it's hold... most probably alone when encountered... AND lowest EHP, of course. Come on! Oh wait.... 1. Nothing drops from 'special' cargo bays. Code needs badly to be updated, just like the Orca Corp Hangar. But.....CCP tends to be lazy about fixing stuff that benefits 'the wrong customers'. You know, the people the game was originally marketed for...... 2. Tanking is something you can do by yourself, so being alone is hardly an issue. Being AFK, however - IS an issue. Certainly not something that CCP should be actively encouraging through lazy or indulgent ship design. Yet it is exactly this style of play that miners are defending most vigorously.....
You can only AFK mine in an industrial unless you're mining ICE. You can't AFK mine ore, the asteroids deplete too quickly for that. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1586
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 13:41:00 -
[26] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:Pipa Porto wrote:Why are you expecting the most convenient Exhumer (least hauling/attention needed) to also keep you safe while you're not looking at the computer? Out of the same reason why you expect your T2 combat ship to keep you save while you do PvP/run missions... it's my playstyle. I invested 60+ days to just efficiently fly and fit the ship, and I am still skilling to get better at everything else surrounding mining. So, please forgive me if I cannot have pitty on people whining because they can't simply gang gank me with characters/ships they didn't even invest half the time or money in, I did... You will still be able to do what you are doing now after the macks base tank gets brought in line with the hulks.
Id be ok with the hitpoints being brought down to that level if they gave us more CPU so we didn't need to waste a slot with a cpu upgrade or rig. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1586
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 13:51:00 -
[27] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:baltec1 wrote:You will still be able to do what you are doing now after the macks base tank gets brought in line with the hulks. What do you mean by "brought in line", exactly? The way I see it, the exhumers have already been balanced with all other T2(!) ships... bringing their tank down again would throw off that balance again... and all because of players barking that have little to nill understanding of mining. I didn't see miners complain... nor did I see CCP admit they did go overboard with the buff... or did I miss something there? Nope just gankers wishing for easy targets again
Thats pretty much all I see from them. I recently saw a few destroyers gank a mackinaw in an ice field, can't remember how many it was either 2 or 3 of them(he had no midslots) so it is still clearly easy enough to get the foolish ones who dont fit a tank, which is the ones they were going after anyway pre patch so Im not really seeing the issue. Our profession gives us a huge selection of 6 ships, we deserve higher ehp in my opinion. We are not invincible, but it makes sense for the highest end mining ships to have more hitpoints. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1586
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 13:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:baltec1 wrote:You will still be able to do what you are doing now after the macks base tank gets brought in line with the hulks. What do you mean by "brought in line", exactly? The way I see it, the exhumers have already been balanced with all other T2(!) ships... bringing their tank down again would throw off that balance again... and all because of players barking that have little to nill understanding of mining. I didn't see miners complain... nor did I see CCP admit they did go overboard with the buff... or did I miss something there? Of course you dont see miners complain. Why would they? The problem here is the mack is going the skiffs job as well as its own. Brining the base tank down to the level the hulk is on would mean the skiff gets to do its job. Bot the hulk and the mack would still have the same base tank as a heavy assault ship too.
You see what the problem is here? Heavy Assault ships need a buff...not nerfing mining ships. And since CCP are rebalancing ships, I am sure that will happen eventually :) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1592
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 14:03:00 -
[29] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:baltec1 wrote:You will still be able to do what you are doing now after the macks base tank gets brought in line with the hulks. What do you mean by "brought in line", exactly? The way I see it, the exhumers have already been balanced with all other T2(!) ships... bringing their tank down again would throw off that balance again... and all because of players barking that have little to nill understanding of mining. I didn't see miners complain... nor did I see CCP admit they did go overboard with the buff... or did I miss something there? Miners complained. A lot. mostly that the ships didn't get buffed enough. Or about crystals. As it is, there is no reason in HS to fly a Skiff (which was the whole point of the changes, to make each one useful). It is already not profitable to gank a 2MLU tanked Mack in a .5 system. In a 1.0, it takes more isk to kill the Mack than the Mack costs. The only people who will gank Macks will be those who don't care about isk (or those new to ganking who don't understand it yet). Little Edit: this of course assumes people aren't morons when fitting their Macks, which we know is not the case. But it is not CCP's job to try to patch stupid. If however, CCP brought the base HP of the Mack in line with the Hulk, then the Skiff would have its intended purpose. Those who wanted to be near AFK: Skiff. Those who wanted to mine solo: Mack. Me... I'll still be playing with my old Proc from 2 years ago. It looks nicer than all the others.
I keep seeing people saying things like that..."nobody uses anything but the Mackinaw" yet for the most part I only see them in ice belts which is no different than it was pre patch. I am still seeing plenty of hulks, covetors, and Ive seen a ton of skiffs. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1593
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 14:09:00 -
[30] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: You see what the problem is here?
Yep. Miners as a whole are the most useless people in the galaxy. They would rather have an imbalanced ship lineup that provides a ship that does it all than have to make choices on both what ship to pick and how to fit them. Hell, they didn't even bother the test these ships on sisi, that was left to the "evil gankers" who tried to get all barges to be equally usefull. CCP very nearly got it right, all they have to do is tone down the macks base HP to the level of the hulk and its more or less perfect.
So instead of doing it in a calm, positive way...the lot of you ***** and moan on the forums constantly only making yourself look like cry babies who are angry because they didn't get their way. I have no problem with people suicide ganking miners, you don't tank you deserve to lose your ship... but this is not the way to go about it. Not all of us want unbalanced gameplay. |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1597
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 14:16:00 -
[31] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote: I never said nobody flew anything but any ship. I said there is no reason to.
Other than PvP, there is no reason to use a Skiff over a Mack.
However, I am glad that people are using the Skiff despite this. It means the change was at least a partial success.
There is plenty of reason, I use a skiff because it lets me have 100k ehp, and 15k ore hold. It's a safe ship to mine in. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1623
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 16:47:00 -
[32] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: So instead of doing it in a calm, positive way...the lot of you ***** and moan on the forums constantly only making yourself look like cry babies who are angry because they didn't get their way. I have no problem with people suicide ganking miners, you don't tank you deserve to lose your ship... but this is not the way to go about it. Not all of us want unbalanced gameplay.
As opposed to the months of miners BAWing in the forums. While there might be some bad posters its doesn't change the fact that the mack is doing another ships job as well as its own.
Where? I see the occasional complaint about mining but nowhere have I ever seen the ungodly amount of complaining from miners that you guys keep saying happened. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1630
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 17:02:00 -
[33] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: So instead of doing it in a calm, positive way...the lot of you ***** and moan on the forums constantly only making yourself look like cry babies who are angry because they didn't get their way. I have no problem with people suicide ganking miners, you don't tank you deserve to lose your ship... but this is not the way to go about it. Not all of us want unbalanced gameplay.
As opposed to the months of miners BAWing in the forums. While there might be some bad posters its doesn't change the fact that the mack is doing another ships job as well as its own. Where? I see the occasional complaint about mining but nowhere have I ever seen the ungodly amount of complaining from miners that you guys keep saying happened. For a few weeks, there were at least 20 threads between S&M and GD, probably more in F&I and AH. All were the same annoying whining, which unfortunately overwhelmed the small bits of legitimacy they did have. Fortunately, CCP was able to see the small bits (Hulk and Mack being the only ones worth flying) and attempted to fix it. Good attempt, needs some work (as usual, nothing is perfect). Then, miners whined about a combination of lack of room for crystals, and the fact that their Cargo Rigged Hulk was no longer king.
The few forum complainers don't speak for the entire playerbase of miners. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1630
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 17:03:00 -
[34] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:stoicfaux wrote:baltec1 wrote:[quote=stoicfaux]I'll bite, why is it important for mining ships to be suicide-gankable in high sec?
Name the other risks high sec miners face. Its also important because its the only way we have to deal with bots who damage the game for other miners. Everyone else also faces the risk of being ganked if they do something silly like fit no tank so why should miners be exempt? CCP deals with bots. You can report bots to CCP, so there's no need for you to shoot them.
Botting should be less and less of an issue though, if I recall correctly CCP are now doing hardware bans...which is quite a good way to go about it. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1633
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 17:09:00 -
[35] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote: Of course not.
Just like Ank did not speak for the entirety of high sec. She still made us all look like morons.
Perception is key.
Also, the complaints were not just on the forums. Help channel was filled with whining.
Help channel is always full of that.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1657
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 01:10:00 -
[36] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Belshazzar Babylon wrote:
I'm not clueless I just recognize crying when I read it. Y'all think you're entitled to easy profitable targets and now you have to work harder and your profits are marginalised. Things change. Go buy the board game. The rules and stats will never change.
War dec mining corps, bump em if they are in NPC Corps like James does of you want to mess with bots. Or just change careers.
No you don't recognize crying when you see it, as you just demonstrated when you responed to Buck's post without reading it. We also dont have to work harder to kill miners and wardecs are still as broken as ever and useless for targeting miners. The mack is still doing the skiffs job which is the main argument here. The whole point of the skiff is to stop gankers but whats the point of the skiff if the mack does that job too as well as having the best hold and a yeild not too far from a hulk? If we just wanted easy kills why in the name of Odin would we want a ship like the skiff at all?
If we were all flying Skiffs, you'd just complain about getting that one nerfed though. You wont be happy with anything us miners do. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1661
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 02:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:baltec1 wrote:Belshazzar Babylon wrote:
I'm not clueless I just recognize crying when I read it. Y'all think you're entitled to easy profitable targets and now you have to work harder and your profits are marginalised. Things change. Go buy the board game. The rules and stats will never change.
War dec mining corps, bump em if they are in NPC Corps like James does of you want to mess with bots. Or just change careers.
No you don't recognize crying when you see it, as you just demonstrated when you responed to Buck's post without reading it. We also dont have to work harder to kill miners and wardecs are still as broken as ever and useless for targeting miners. The mack is still doing the skiffs job which is the main argument here. The whole point of the skiff is to stop gankers but whats the point of the skiff if the mack does that job too as well as having the best hold and a yeild not too far from a hulk? If we just wanted easy kills why in the name of Odin would we want a ship like the skiff at all? If we were all flying Skiffs, you'd just complain about getting that one nerfed though. You wont be happy with anything us miners do. No, we would chuckle and probably mention something about risk averse carebears. The Skiff is (IMO) fine as is with relation to the Hulk. However, because the Mack can get a great yield and still tank enough to dissuade a price based gank, there is no reason (other than paranoia and PvP) to fly a Skiff.
So because cheap destroyers can't gank Mackinaws is still the only argument any of you griefer/gankers can offer. The issue isn't the Mackinaw...it's you who expect to be able to gank expensive mining ships for little to no cost. It's an exhumer, top of the line mining ship...it SHOULD require more then a couple of destroyers to gank one in high sec. Or should we expect to be able to gank an orca with 3 or 4 destroyers in high sec? Or maybe Battleships? Command ships? |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1706
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 16:10:00 -
[38] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Shalua Rui wrote:What you and other here are proposing is not 1-2-3, it's 1-3-3 for every ship... just saying.
It already IS 1-2-3. If so, I don't think you will have trouble pointing out which category the Mackinaw is #3 in. Cargo? Tank? or Yield?
Ok, so slightly lower the yield but leave everything else alone. That will solve your precious "IT'S UNBALANCED!" issue without needlessly nerfing its ehp. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1715
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 17:21:00 -
[39] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Ok, so slightly lower the yield but leave everything else alone. That will solve your precious "IT'S UNBALANCED!" issue without needlessly nerfing its ehp. Only..the yield isn't that great unless you have mining bonuses and multiple mining laser upgrades. So to get better yield we have to sacrifice tank like it's supposed to be. So why are you still complaining?
Why are you so terrorfied of gankers being able to make a profit on the stupid?
Im not, untanked exhumers should be easy to gank...AND THEY ARE. There is nothing that needs fixing/nerfing/changing with the Mackinaw. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1715
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 17:25:00 -
[40] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Im not, untanked exhumers should be easy to gank...AND THEY ARE. There is nothing that needs fixing/nerfing/changing with the Mackinaw.
Apart from the ehp that makes the skiff redundent.
Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs. |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1715
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 17:33:00 -
[41] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Skiff can double the ehp of the mackinaw...and has a decent yield and good sized ore hold. There is plenty of reason to use Skiffs.
The mack will tank enough to deture gankers but gets a bigger ore bay and mines more. There is no reason to use the skiff.
Safer in a Skiff, much less likely to be the target of a suicide gank while only giving up a tiny bit of yield/ore space. I've seen lot's of Skiffs since the patch. Mackinaw tanks enough to avoid a few destroyers looking for an easy gank if he is tanked, Mackinaw can still be brought down easily if he has no tank. So the stupid miners will still be easy targets. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1742
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 01:03:00 -
[42] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Corina Jarr wrote:Right now the Mack can be tanked with 2MLUs to be nearly impossible to break even with a suicide (I think a few thousand newb ships can do it cheap enough).
So, unless the ganker is just doing it for the sake of ganking, a Mack is as safe as a Skiff, but gets better yield and cargo.
If the ganker is doing it for fun, the Skiff is no safer than any other ship. The only thing that might make the Skiff any safer is that it cost less and so may not generate the tears the ganker is looking for. Other than that, it is just as likely to be ganked for fun as a Mack.
Now, the Skiff may survive that for fun gank better, but that only tends to lead to more of them showing up. - Risk vs. reward - 1-2-3 Mack gets worst tank. Ok, that means it should have best yield. Now we get to important part. What it needs so that 1-2-3 would happen? Yes, ore bay from Skiff. Do you know where that would lead to? It's bloody obvious: one ship to rule them all. No, if the Mack has the worst tank, it doesn't need the 'best yield' because it already has, by far, the biggest cargo bay. Cargo, not yield is the most desired characteristic for Exhumers, based on how miners used to fit them. See? Easy.
So nerf our yield but leave the hit points alone. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1803
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 20:00:00 -
[43] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
So nerf our yield but leave the hit points alone.
Then the skiff would still be a pointless ship.
I agree. I will admit after arguing with you guys you've helped me see the issue I was blind to. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1931
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 14:23:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ok so if you bring down the Mackinaws base hitpoints to that of the Hulks of close to it, what about giving the Mackinaw say 40 more CPU to make up for it. Would that be an even trade off? |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1933
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 14:41:00 -
[45] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Why? The Mack already has plenty of CPU to fit a tank.
To fit all tank, you need a cpu upgrade or rig, so a slot is wasted on that. I just think an even tradeoff if you're going to drop the base hp down would be more cpu so those of us who want to fit the extra tank have the option. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1933
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 14:44:00 -
[46] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Why? The Mack already has plenty of CPU to fit a tank. To fit all tank, you need a cpu upgrade or rig. You mean those two free rig spots you have now that the cargo expanders are useless?
I use them for tanking. But if I don't put a cpu rig on there, I have to use a cpu upgrade on one of my low slows instead of my reinforced bulkhead II's |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1934
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 14:52:00 -
[47] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Why? The Mack already has plenty of CPU to fit a tank. To fit all tank, you need a cpu upgrade or rig. You mean those two free rig spots you have now that the cargo expanders are useless? I use them for tanking. But if I don't put a cpu rig on there, I have to use a cpu upgrade on one of my low slows instead of my reinforced bulkhead II's Why are you putting reinforced bulkhead IIs on a shield tanked ship?
Because with my dmg control 2, it adds a lot of extra ehp. Nothing else to put down there, I don't care about my yield when mining since I do it for fun so no point in Mining Upgrades. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1943
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 16:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1965
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 17:45:00 -
[49] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu. Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp. I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses.
But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1965
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 17:47:00 -
[50] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu. Oh, I just want miners to scratch their heads a little bit about which Exhumer to use.... ....and then scratch their head again when they figure out how to fit it. Some will do fine, others will fail. Gankers want to be able to kill the failures without spending a fortune to do it. I also want miners to have some options. How would you like a Mack that could be Cargo expanded/rigged up to say, 40 or even 50K? (even if the base size is lower)I'm sure a lot of miners would like that. And with the EHP penalty, gankers would too. Too bad that CCP doesn't allow those kinds of choices anymore. Today its "How many MLU II do you want?" For combat ships, it would be as if CCP just decided to remove all speed mods, and then gave some types of ships built-in MWDs. Thats what they did here, for Exhumers. Tiericide shouldn't mean 'dumbing down'.Also, I the 'special rigs' for Ice or Merx concept was a slapped on, rushed fail-job. Goes a long way to illustrate how little thought or effort they put into the Aug. 8 Patch. It was simply a reactive lurch to get it done ASAP, rather than doing it properly in the winter expansion. At minimum there should have been a 3rd rig for 'standard Ore'. Why should miners be punished for mining Ice or Merx? Why not just get rid of them entirely?
Can't believe it but, I am agreeing with you more and more...lol :p |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
1967
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 18:00:00 -
[51] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Easy to suggest all these changes when you're not the one who uses that ship. It's not so easy to get onboard with those changes when you're strictly a miner. Our amount of choices already sucks, having to worry about the best one we got getting nerfed sucks too. Though I do agree it does need some changes, but to the base hp only...I don't see a point in changing anything else about it minus adding more cpu. Mack got a CPU buff with the update. You can tank them very well even with a hulks base ehp. I might be part of the corp who brought about the gank destroyers but I also gave miners the supertank barges. We know how to make these things fortresses. But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way. And a Navy Apoc can't fit all Tachyon Beams without a powergrid upgrade. So?
Oh so you're totally fine with nerfing our ship...but if we want a tiny increase in cpu so we have better options when fitting it..thats just out of the question. If you want more use out of these ships or more options for miners...we need the ability to be able to fit the entire 6 ship lineup we have. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2010
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 19:20:00 -
[52] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:I did find my CPU lacking for my Mack (2 IMU2s a DC and some meta 4 invultns with T2 icers) and had to use CPU rigs. But my shields skills, including the one that reduces CPU cost, are crap. So I may be able to get it down to one CPU rig later.
Strangely, the hulk was much easier to fit, though got a little less EHP since I expect bonuses and support from an Orca.
With all 5's related to fitting, you can get it down to 1 cpu rig but id really like to be able to not need even that. I think the fact that miners only have such a small handful of ships...the 3 exhumers should get a little extra cpu/pg |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2027
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 19:49:00 -
[53] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Again, since you seem incapable of comprehending: many PVP ships have to use fitting mods and/or rigs as well. Why should the exhumers be any different?
Because miners have 6 ships (barges/exhumers) Barges should be the harder ones to fit cpu/pg wise, not exhumers...but you have hundreds of ships outside of the mining profession. Not everyone will use the extra cpu to fit tank but whats wrong with giving the 3 exhumers more cpu to give us more fitting options? It's not like we can pick a different race or line of ships to fit...we are stuck with 3 exhumers. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2037
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:32:00 -
[54] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Again, since you seem incapable of comprehending: many PVP ships have to use fitting mods and/or rigs as well. Why should the exhumers be any different? Because miners have 6 ships (barges/exhumers) Barges should be the harder ones to fit cpu/pg wise, not exhumers...but you have hundreds of ships outside of the mining profession. Not everyone will use the extra cpu to fit tank but whats wrong with giving the 3 exhumers more cpu to give us more fitting options? It's not like we can pick a different race or line of ships to fit...we are stuck with 3 exhumers. Miners are grouped with industrialists, so we also have all the Indies, plus the Orca and for non HS ops, the Rorq.
Mining ships, Rorq/Orca can't mine(Minus drones) and really...industrial ships are very stupid for mining in. It's not like im asking for a game breaking change, I just think a slight buff to the CPU output of the mackinaw and in return you lower the base HP. That way we could easily fit all of our slots for tanking if we so choose without the need of a cpu upgrade/rig or implants. It wouldn't create an imbalance at all, and I still think exhumers deserve it for being the top tier mining ship you can get. Ill stop complaining if they say create Tech 3 mining barges for us to customize ourselves or create higher end mining vessels. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2037
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:57:00 -
[55] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, you don't deserve anything. You have enough CPU to fit a decent tank along with mining lasers. Why do you want more?
I don't want more...unless they nerf the hitpoints. If it stays the way it is now, I'm fine the way it is...but if it gets nerfed...we deserve more cpu. It deserves more than a "decent" tank...you can't train any higher mining ships than exhumers. Would be like me complaining that Titans have too much ehp and do to much dps. Why should they get both huge tanks and high dps? Shouldn't that have to pick? No..they shouldn't because thats what they are designed for...just like exhumers are the best line of ships for miners..they should at least feel like they are. So I think they should be left alone until CCP designs a new line of higher end mining ships. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2037
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:58:00 -
[56] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
But current Mackinaws can't fit all tank without a cpu upgrade or cpu rig included. Or at least I haven't found a way.
You simply haven't found the way to do it. The old mack could be made gank proof so the new one is even easyer. I'll see about posting some fits when I get access to my PC.
Nothing is Gank proof dude, you know this.
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2037
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 20:59:00 -
[57] - Quote
MIrple wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, you don't deserve anything. You have enough CPU to fit a decent tank along with mining lasers. Why do you want more? Pretty sure its so he can fit 3MLU's and a Ice rig. Greedy pigs are greedy pigs
I like your reading abilities. I said previously that I don't care about yield or isk/hr so I don't fit any mining upgrades...I fit all tank. Learn to read before making stupid comments. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2037
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:04:00 -
[58] - Quote
MIrple wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, you don't deserve anything. You have enough CPU to fit a decent tank along with mining lasers. Why do you want more? I don't want more...unless they nerf the hitpoints. If it stays the way it is now, I'm fine the way it is...but if it gets nerfed...we deserve more cpu. It deserves more than a "decent" tank...you can't train any higher mining ships than exhumers. Would be like me complaining that Titans have too much ehp and do to much dps. Why should they get both huge tanks and high dps? Shouldn't that have to pick? No..they shouldn't because thats what they are designed for...just like exhumers are the best line of ships for miners..they should at least feel like they are. So I think they should be left alone until CCP designs a new line of higher end mining ships. And here is where you show you don't know anything about the game. The Titan can either do High DPS or have a Huge Tank it can not do both at the same time.
Nice way to deflect your inability to read :) You're right, the fact that I'm not a pro on Titans means I don't know anything about EVE at all :) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2038
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:14:00 -
[59] - Quote
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Really, because if you are mining aligned to safe spots, you can warp out before they can lock...how do they gank you if they can't lock?...hmmm? You simply need a little prep in the system you are in and to be there paying attention so you can warp when they hit grid. And if you are using DScan defensively, you should see them while they are warping in, to be ready for it.
But I guess that is probably asking for too much active play...
If you're aligned and moving sure...its hard to stop you. But if you're aligned and moving you're constantly out of range of your asteriods so thats just not gonna happen and would make mining even less desirable. If you're aligned but not moving...no, they will lock you before you can warp. I feel like none of you have ever mined before...you should try being on both sides before arguing about it. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2039
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:22:00 -
[60] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Because getting a corp frigate to web you is too much ******* work to make sure your precious exhumer can warp out at the first sign of trouble.
We've listed literally dozens of ways in this thread you can keep yourself safe, but the fact that you refuse to do these, got the buff, and still feel entitled to more protection from CCP infuriates me and anybody else who understands this game.
It's not ganker tears, it's "our favorite gaming company is selling out to the lowest common denominator" tears.
I don't think I am entitled to anything, you could remove exhumers tomorrow I would find something else to do in EVE. I am just trying to figure out with you guys who want the Mackinaw nerfed...something that would still keep miners happy without keeping things unbalanced. |
|
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2039
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:26:00 -
[61] - Quote
Abel Merkabah wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Abel Merkabah wrote:
Really, because if you are mining aligned to safe spots, you can warp out before they can lock...how do they gank you if they can't lock?...hmmm? You simply need a little prep in the system you are in and to be there paying attention so you can warp when they hit grid. And if you are using DScan defensively, you should see them while they are warping in, to be ready for it.
But I guess that is probably asking for too much active play...
If you're aligned and moving sure...its hard to stop you. But if you're aligned and moving you're constantly out of range of your asteriods so thats just not gonna happen and would make mining even less desirable. If you're aligned but not moving...no, they will lock you before you can warp. I feel like none of you have ever mined before...you should try being on both sides before arguing about it. There are methods of doing exactly that. Setup book marks around the belts over 150km away, then you can switch alignment to different bookmarks as you need to stay in range effectively forcing an orbit around the roid constantly aligned; even better if you can mine with someone else and web each other. Also better to have your bookmarks off grid, the more distance, the more variation in bearing is allowed while still staying "aligned". Just because you don't know doesn't mean it is not possible.
Honestly you expect to much from the dullest profession in EVE. You expect miners to do too much while having low hit point ships, while Gankers literally just have to warp in, target, press f1. You are only thinking of yourselves... |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2039
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:27:00 -
[62] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Because getting a corp frigate to web you is too much ******* work to make sure your precious exhumer can warp out at the first sign of trouble.
We've listed literally dozens of ways in this thread you can keep yourself safe, but the fact that you refuse to do these, got the buff, and still feel entitled to more protection from CCP infuriates me and anybody else who understands this game.
It's not ganker tears, it's "our favorite gaming company is selling out to the lowest common denominator" tears. I don't think I am entitled to anything, you could remove exhumers tomorrow I would find something else to do in EVE. I am just trying to figure out with you guys who want the Mackinaw nerfed...something that would still keep miners happy without keeping things unbalanced. You do realize what we're suggesting is also a buff to the Hulk, right? All this would mean is that the Mackinaw isn't the end all be all ship of choice, be it solo play or fleet. The Hulk will be the definitive fleet option, and the Mackinaw will still be a solo option but you'll simply be required to pay more attention to your ship instead of going semi-AFK.
I am completely fine with that too! But I still think you guys want to nerf the Mackinaw just a little too much. The small added CPU inplace of downgrading the hitpoints would be a fair tradeoff in my opinion. Or am I missing something that would create a larger issue here? |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2039
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:34:00 -
[63] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:Honestly you expect to much from the dullest profession in EVE. You expect miners to do too much while having low hit point ships, while Gankers literally just have to warp in, target, press f1. You are only thinking of yourselves... If a ganker actually has an objective other than simply destroying your ship, it's a bit more complicated than that. If they want to make it cost-effective for example, the ganker has to pre-scout and scan the exhumers to find the untanked ones, and gank those. See, the thing about tank is it's supposed to discourage ganks from happening in the first place, not because the tank will help all that much if they really want to break your tank. Gankers are lazy, and 9/10 times they'll only target you if you make yourself an easy target. So don't.
You're right. As long as the nerfing to the mackinaw doesn't make it easy to kill while tanked I guess I have nothing to really complain about. Perhaps I was expecting a little to much :) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2039
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 21:37:00 -
[64] - Quote
Abel Merkabah wrote:
2. I have never once ganked a miner; I just do not care for scrubs; whine for mechanics changes when they really need to just learn 2 play. How does it make you feel that I apparently know more about protecting yourself as a miner then you, and I have not mined since the tutorial. Classic case of scrub behavior coming from this thread.
I underlined the part I find hilarious as you have one currently in your signature. You don't care for those who whine for mechanics changes yet that is all James 315 does...lol. But lets get back on topic.
There is no need to get hostile, its just a game :)
Edit: although...you're whining about changing the Mackinaw....so, you're a hypocrite. :) |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2100
|
Posted - 2012.09.08 14:39:00 -
[65] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Again, since you seem incapable of comprehending: many PVP ships have to use fitting mods and/or rigs as well. Why should the exhumers be any different? Because miners have 6 ships (barges/exhumers) Barges should be the harder ones to fit cpu/pg wise, not exhumers...but you have hundreds of ships outside of the mining profession. Not everyone will use the extra cpu to fit tank but whats wrong with giving the 3 exhumers more cpu to give us more fitting options? It's not like we can pick a different race or line of ships to fit...we are stuck with 3 exhumers. Black ops have a choice of 4 ships. Bombers have a choice of 4 ships. Logistics have a choice of 2 ships.
But overall hundreds of ships that are combat based....mining still only has the 3 barges and 3 exhumers. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2177
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 13:48:00 -
[66] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: But overall hundreds of ships that are combat based....mining still only has the 3 barges and 3 exhumers.
Miners can use all of those combat ships too... Logistic pilots still only have a choice of two ships.
Yeah...but nobody specialized in logistic ships and nothing else unless it's an alt with that purpose...and in that case they have nothing to complain about since that was what they were created for. Just sayin...we have so few ships for our profession...sucks to not have any cool high end tough ships like you combat pilots have : \ But than again, it's mining...perhaps I am expecting a little too much out of it. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2181
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 17:07:00 -
[67] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote: Are we complaining about not enough mining ships now? Six different barges/Exhumers, a new mining frigate on the way. Not to mention 4 different mining cruisers and some battleships are well suited to mining.
And the Orca. (Yes, its a mining ship, CCP said when it was stealth patched "it wasn't intended to be used by ninjas") And the Rorq.
Cruisers are only used for mining until you're able to fly a barge. Which takes what? A week? There are years of combat related things to train for... after 3 months you're not able to train for a better mining ship because there isn't anything to train for.
The new mining frigate is useless to anyone who plans on a mining profession in eve...because a barge will be better and a week into playing you can be in one. Orca and Rorqual are mining ships sure...but they don't mine, so....they don't count. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2181
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 17:35:00 -
[68] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:Well, I'd wait to see the stats on the Frigate, one point of 'tiericide' is that ships are no longer brutally obsolete after a week - but to a point I agree, it isn't going to replace an Exhumer in 'safe' highsec.
Still, six barges, the Rohk and the Apoc isn't bad, plus the auxiliary ships.
I mean, how many different flavors of mining barge do you really need?
What is the point of recommending a battleship for mining when a retriever is something you can fly a week into playing?
You're not seeing it from a miners perspective. People just expect mining to be a side profession you do when you're not off doing combat related things. Miners gather the resources to build everything, and we have a handful of ships that are even worth flying...and usually only half of that handful is worth flying lol. Could have racial exhumers for instance, each races versions would have different looks obviously, and be better at different aspect of mining/tanking/ect... That would create more variety for us, give us more to do, more to train for, more options. Instead we are getting an ORE Frigate... lol.
Sorry we are going a little off topic now.
TL;DR version More variety would be nice, and I don't think it would be terribly difficult to do.
OT: I've nothing left to say about the Mackinaw changes, I actually agree with you guys about the changes. |
Yokai Mitsuhide
Exiled Mining
2314
|
Posted - 2012.09.09 20:19:00 -
[69] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
Yeah...but nobody specialized in logistic ships and nothing else unless it's an alt with that purpose...and in that case they have nothing to complain about since that was what they were created for. Just sayin...we have so few ships for our profession...sucks to not have any cool high end tough ships like you combat pilots have : \ But than again, it's mining...perhaps I am expecting a little too much out of it.
nobody specialized in mining ships and nothing else unless it's an alt with that purpose...and in that case they have nothing to complain about since that was what they were created for. Just sayin. It works both ways although you have three times more options than logistic pilots.
I only mine... |
|
|
|