|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.31 16:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Wow, lots of folks failed critical thinking...
All Pipa is saying is that since the Mack can tank enough to survive a cost based gank (and is great all other ways), there is no reason to fly a Skiff for mining.
And he's right. The only people who fly Skiffs are those who are either: 1) foolish, 2) not mining with it, or 3) bored and like its colors better than the Mack...
Sure, the Skiff has a great tank. But because the Mack can tank very well, and will almost always (if not always) mine better than the Skiff, the Skiff has not been sufficiently balanced (or the Mack hasn't...).
I'd drop its price. It looks like its trading at about 3/4 of a Mack. Most people taking a barge into risky areas would probably want lower investment point. The tank beyond a certain point is rather pointless, but I wouldn't bother lowering it. I would instead make it either faster or cheaper or cloakier.
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
35
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 10:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Buck Futz wrote:[quote=Frying Doom] This is a bad thing because ganking was the ONLY threat miners had to deal with. Yes, I understand that miners want to farm AFK and get free ISK with zero effort or risk, doesn't mean it should happen.
ISK/risk/attention balance.
AFK missioning:
more ISK similar attention similar risk (after the barge buff)
I do think there should be some risk in mining, but to make out this is the worst offender is hilarious.
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
36
|
Posted - 2012.09.02 21:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yokai Mitsuhide wrote: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!
I'm training irony to level 5 next :-)
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
42
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 17:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:stoicfaux wrote: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?
They are still gankable, and they would still be gankable if you doubled their tanks again. |
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
42
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 17:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:betoli wrote:
They are still gankable, and they would still be gankable if you doubled their tanks again.
Ganking them isnt the problem, its just as simple, the problem is its not profitable to do so. Not being profitable to gank is the best tank of them all.
You said you were doing it for the good of humanity, to cripple the botting, and help educate the miners.... worth spending a few isk on if you ask me. Until your earlier post I was assuming it was all for the lulz!
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
42
|
Posted - 2012.09.04 19:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Naturally miners do not want to lose their one size fits all ship.
You can still tank a hulk to be gank proof from a cost effectiveness perspective as you always could no? So miners buying macks of hulks on account of the tank buff is speculation.
I would say many miners are solo, and they've made the obvious choice for the solo barge.... you havn't presented much evidence that its because of the tank.
BTW - are you allowed to bot on SiSi, I'm rather curious as to whether were allowed to test how good ccp is at detection... out of curiosity you understand. |
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
45
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 08:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:Buck Futz wrote:Yokai Mitsuhide wrote:
So nerf our yield but leave the hit points alone.
Unfortunately, that doesn't work. Obviously. Turn on your brain for a second. Why? With your half baked solution (AKA; take anything but AFK mode+EHP!!!) .....lower the Mack's yield and you end up with this: Yield: Hulk>Skiff>Mack Cargo: Mack>Skiff>Hulk EHP: Skiff>Mack>Hulk Hulk at 1-3-3. Mack is 1-2-3 and Skiff is 1-2-2. Hulk remains the worst in 2 of the 3 categories. The simplest way to do it is swap the EHP of the Hulk with the Mackinaw. Then each Exhumer is.... best in one category, 2nd in another, and worst in the last. Besides, its elegant: the 'easymode' temptation to AFK mine is balanced with higher vulnerability to ganking. Still, I'll give you credit, Yokai: Its clear you've accepted our premise that the Exhumers are badly balanced and need a revision. My recent experience was not at all favorable toward this plan. In the systems I normally mine in there have been lots of retrievers mining but they mostly just take what they need and leave. The belts always have the ore in them I need or I can find a belt in system that has what I need when I need it. But recent events a big mining corp moved in with mutiple Orca's and lots of Hulks. They strip mine every belt in system then move on to the next system and then the next. In 5 hours or so they clean out 4 + systems around me of every thing. These are not retrievers or Macks doing this. They are fleets of Hulks and Orca's. So if ever I wanted to gank a miner those Hulks have my vote as they are like a locust. By all means leave the Hulk as the easiest miner to gank. I admit I am looking at this from my perspective. But then so is everybody that posts. If they say different they are lying.
Most peoples perspective is that they want to discourage solo/afk, yours is to discourage teamplay. Sounds like the miners in your area are working as designed to the point where there is a resource contention.
You shouldn't gank them, just wardec them, they are clearly stealing YOUR ore :-)
I'm liking the 1-2-3 argument. probably the HP on on mack and hulk should be swapped. However the consequences of doing that are a buff to the yield of the high yield ship, which can now fit 2 MLU without need for a tank.
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
45
|
Posted - 2012.09.06 23:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
Corina Jarr wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Yes, because believe it or not we incur significantly more risk. I meant the part where you think miners print isk. Who in this thread said such a thing?
use crrl-f and type
"And let nullbears print ISK while logged off..."
|
betoli
Ketogenic Killzone
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.10 19:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: As baltec said, it was your choice then to limit yourself to those 6 ships. What role could more mining ships possibly fill?
Given that CCP are planning an ORE frig, one might conjecture an ORE frig
Also stealthy, speedy, ewar defended, armor tanky, ranged, t3/reconfigurable. In fact one could list all the things that make the combat ships diverse apart from the attack specialisations....
Did CCP post recently that 25% of people mine? As such a large profession its fantastically under represented in ships - but mainly its under represented in effort. I think they'd be better spending their time on the mining game mechanics to reduce the botability and boredom factors than making a dozen more barges - though a cloaky T3 indy/hybrid miner one would be fun.
|
|
|
|