That's an improvement over the current situation, but still runs into the problem of one ship being effectively worthless. The Hulk would then be able to tank enough to remove any significant risk of suicide ganking, and the Skiff has the same cargo as the previous Cargo hulk while being nigh-invulnerable. So why would you ever use a Mackinaw.

I don't see any reason for the Hulk and Mack to have different tanks, nor do I see any reason for the Mack and Skiff to have different Yields, nor do I see any reason for the Hulk and Skiff to have different cargo bays.

Let each one have one pillar of the three useful ones where it flies high. Give the Skiff its current fantastic tank, but make it just as much effort to use as the Hulk (as far as hauling) so you have to pay attention to avoid waste. Give the Hulk its current great yield, but let it be vulnerable, so you have to pay attention to keep it safe. Give the Mack it's current fantastic Hold, so you don't need a hauler to support it, but let it be vulnerable, so you have to pay attention to keep it safe.


The problem with just changing the Mackinaw is that if you do it enough to make it require active safety measures to remain unprofitable to gank, the Skiff becomes purely dominant over it because of its 15k Ore bay.

Sounds like you don't understand what .jpgs are.

Bad Jorma. No Strawmen. Bad.

http://www.symantec.com/security_response/attacksignatures/detail.jsp?asid=21552



I thought you wanted easy targets.

No easy targets that have trouble affording the replacement ship.

So
1/3 the yield

Drop EHP to ~3k

Or CCP could expand crafting so that griefers could install bombs to those ships when they craft them. Those bombs would explode if pilot activates at least one strip miner.

Or ganking could be used as a method of killing people that did not reward the ganker, except in laughs.

Um, that is already the case.

But why shouldn't there be a reward if you do it well?

If it costs too much to gank (or requires too large a group of gankers in cheap destroyers) - in the end ganking is reduced.

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.

I love the carebears who justify this patch with, "It was too easy before, now they have work at it, hurrr."

Remember, gankers DID adjust and came up with 'new tactics' - Smodab and Herr Wilkus come to mind.
Both techniques were immediately patched out of the game after carebears' tears flooded the zone.

[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.

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.

I thought you wanted easy targets.

All the hard work goons put into making mining a worth while venture

ahhhh hahahahahahahaaaha hahahahahahahaa!

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.

If you are tired of gankers in Thrasers and Catalysts, you will need to get defensive upgrades instead of going full out for mining yield. Or just get a Skiff. This is what they are made for.

You would probably make more ISK with a Skiff then a Hulk, seeing that the Hulk is blown up everytime, making you farm more iskies again.

Somehow I see a balance in this.

Except that the Mackinaw tanks plenty to deal with any profit motivated ganks, and mines the same or better than the skiff while having double the cargo hold. So why use the Skiff?

Except that the Mackinaw tanks plenty to deal with any profit motivated ganks, and mines the same or better than the skiff while having double the cargo hold. So why use the Skiff?

I find it ironic how as part of their "teiricide" CCP took away the separate roles each exhumer filled and pretty much replaced it with a more or less tiered system.
Tank:
Skiff>Mackinaw>Hulk
Yield:
Hulk>Mackinaw>Skiff
Ore hold:
Mackinaw>Skiff>Hulk

I find it ironic how as part of their "teiricide" CCP took away the separate roles each exhumer filled and pretty much replaced it with a more or less tiered system.


Tank:
Skiff>Mackinaw>Hulk
Yield:
Hulk>Mackinaw>Skiff
Ore hold:
Mackinaw>Skiff>Hulk

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.

That won't happen as long as I'm around, btw.

Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted.

Backs up the first quote lol

Gone are the days when eve was dangerous..

O wait still is lol...

Miners dumb hard to gank...

Frighter... cake... 4b freighters are being ganked haha...

Don't see CCP doing anything because eve is now about most tears = change not anything else.

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.

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.