EVE Search - Elite Indys have more armor/structure than heavy assaults?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Elite Indys have more armor/structure than heavy assaults?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ebedar	Posted - 2005.02.02 00:57:00 - [31] Am I right in thinking the elite indies have +2 WCS built in as standard? My life in pictures:
Mrissa Easeah	Posted - 2005.02.02 01:03:00 - [32] Edited by: Mrissa Easeah on 02/02/2005 01:03:15 No ... just half of them. Each race has a 'Deep Space' indy with generally good cargo, really slow speeds, more low spaces, and high resistances, shields and armor. Each race has a 'Blockade Runner' with slightly weaker enhanced resistances, missile launchers, puny cargo, high speed and the +2 WCS built in.
Val Amon	Posted - 2005.02.02 01:12:00 - [33] I have a feeling it will be soon called a name from the timber industry like the "The Loggable Hauler". _ _ How many pilots does it take to wire a Flux Capacitor? 3, 1 to wire it and 2 to talk about how the old one was better.
BigBadToughGuy	Posted - 2005.02.02 01:39:00 - [34] What is actually going on here and what is the complaint? Those of you that sit around popping indy's with frigates are complaining because there is a finally an option to buy a ship that can resist you long enough to escape? Imagine the horror that you might actually have to buy a bigger ship and bigger guns to kill this new ship. Carebears? Wouldn't you tough little pirates be asking for tougher ships if yours blew up after a couple of shots, could the indy drivers then call you carebear's? I wouldn't worry your little heads off or stress about actually having to buy bigger ships or use your head to create some tactics to counteract these new ships. The skill requirements and money needed to invest in one of these ships will leave you plenty of defenseless indy's to keep you busy. Can we stop shedding tears when they add new content to the game? I know its hard to imagine that this game actually evolves over time and requires you to adapt. Indy pilots have been getting killed by new classes of ships for close to 2 years now and you moan like little girls when they add a new class of indy that cruises at 80m/s? How about a little perspective please, the sky isn't falling in on you.
The Chef	Posted - 2005.02.02 01:57:00 - [35] I personally think the new ships look very well balanced. 1) A challenge to kill 2) Expensive (So when the pilot does get killed they won't have lost nothing ISK wise) 3) Useful What more do you want?!? ==================================== EVEkill Visit our homepage
MeGrand	Posted - 2005.02.02 02:02:00 - [36] And on the subject of thier cost - good! about 30 million would be fine by me, giving as a trader i hall cargos worth about 30 mill alot of the time would be nice to carry them in a ship worth more than 2 pence All the right letters - just not nessacarily in the right order
Ankanos	Posted - 2005.02.02 02:49:00 - [37] Edited by: Ankanos on 02/02/2005 02:56:18 /minor rant ON bah...listen to some of you.. "oh the horror, i wont be able to gank this guy in under a minute anymore" "...heavens to merkatroid, now logoff tactics will be used even more! ffs, you Chicken Little people make it sound like this one ship class will completly ruin the game.. how 'bout seeing it as a new challenge. i mean do you really enjoy 30 second battles that much? -personally, i find long 1 on 1 battles (ie 3-5min+) far more adrenaline pumping than some lame 30sec "pop" (i'm sure your all not saints when it comes to dirty tricks either, ie login traps etc) so someone wants to logoff to save his butt..big F'n deal. if you cant handle that, you really need to get out more.. one of the worst thing about all this PvP whining is that it results in changes that are slowly eroding the fun for the "straight players" and those of us who are mainly NPC hunters. (who occasionaly PvP) as well the ones who used to have fun experimenting or drag racing and the like. -trying to stuff 4 MWD's OR AB's on a hauler/frig/other just for hell of it etc..or any other "off balance" setups that are no longer possible that matter. -just to brag about it around the chat room. (or water cooler..?) keep it up, and they're just gonna bolt down the hood so we cant MODify anything..and this great game will be pasteurized & homogonized into another boring PC correct game with little or no contrast between anything..and end up in the $5 bin /minor rant OFF EDIT: (forgot) -personally, the new haulers look to be alot of fun and will open up all sorts of new possibilities, plus greatly enhance some of the more ludicrous trading routes and sub-professions.. this class may be spot on from the word "render" ;p -ank ---
RollinDutchMasters	Posted - 2005.02.02 02:50:00 - [38] Edited by: RollinDutchMasters on 02/02/2005 02:51:56 Originally by: BigBadToughGuy Imagine the horror that you might actually have to buy a bigger ship and bigger guns to kill this new ship. You do realize that these indys look like they'll be able to tank non-gank battleships long enough for the logout timer to expire, using at most 2 of their lowslots. Originally by: Ankanos how 'bout seeing it as a new challenge. i mean do you really enjoy 30 second battles that much? -personally, i find long 1 on 1 battles (ie 3-5min+) far more adrenaline pumping than some lame 30sec "pop" Explain to me how I can have a long 3-5m battle with someone if they use the game mechanics to have their ship vanish into thin air in under 2 minutes. Go on. I have all day. Originally by: Sochin CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
PASTOR TROY	Posted - 2005.02.02 03:52:00 - [39] The main purpose of these indies are to avoid ganks and run blockades. Mission accomplished
Admiral Seafort	Posted - 2005.02.02 06:15:00 - [40] Just because the new indies don't pop like bugs doesn't mean the old ones are going to go away. They still take tons of time to train for and cost quite a bit, so a lot of people will still use the old haulers. And is it a bad thing that now there are transport ships that can't be taken down by a single attacker? Somehow I fail to understand how it's bad that in order to take down an industrial freighter hauling presumably very valuable cargoes (after all, why else would you use such an expensive hauler), you need to have a little organization, or planning, or something like that. The whole game isn't about being able to take everything out by yourself; sometimes you need help. Would it not make sense that over the course of time, merchants who were constantly being waylaid by lone frigates DID something about it? Like, oh, get a better ship? And who cares if they use the logoff 'cheat'; if they didn't they'd go down eventually no matter what. This way, you still have a chance to kill them if you were prepared. Look at it as a challenge or something.
RollinDutchMasters	Posted - 2005.02.02 06:32:00 - [41] Edited by: RollinDutchMasters on 02/02/2005 06:34:46 Originally by: Admiral Seafort And who cares if they use the logoff 'cheat'; if they didn't they'd go down eventually no matter what. This way, you still have a chance to kill them if you were prepared. Look at it as a challenge or something. Who cares if people use the macro mine 'cheat'? If they didnt, they could mine eventually anyway. This way, you still have a chance to make some isk competing with the mass-macro miners if youre prepared. Look at it as a challrnge or something. Hey look, I can make up bull** justifications for what is an complete abuse of the game mechanics too. Every individual who complains about being ganked is being directly affected by the current rediculious state of logoffs. The only way to kill half the people in EVE is to bring enough firepower to drop them in a minute. This of course leaves them absolutely no capability of fighting back, but because of logoffs, if you dont have the firepower to kill something in around a minute, you dont have the firepower to kill it at all. Dont try to justify it just because it may save your ship from time to time. Its utterly absurd that some people can complain about getting ganked in one breath while defending logoffs as a 'combat tactic' in another. Originally by:** Sochin CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
Sergeant Spot	Posted - 2005.02.02 06:42:00 - [42] A comment on the Log Out Exploit/tactic. What "Should" happen: When a play logs off while in space, his ship will attempt to warp away NORMALLY. If it is not warp scrambled or caught up on a roid or something, it will warp normally and disappear from the game. If it IS warp scrambled, it will NOT disappear after one minute. In fact, if you have it warp scrambled, it will stay there, warp scrambled, as long as you keep it warp scrambled. If it is caught up on a roid, a timer would be good, but one set for something like 10 minutes. Also, if a ship had an agressive act made against it (the kind off act that activates Concord in 0.5+), and logs off while in space, and if it successfully warps, it will NOT immediately disappear after warping. There will be a 30 minute timer from the the time of the aggressive act. During that time the logged off ship will be parked at a safe spot, completely vulnerable to anyone who can find it. New aggressive acts restart the timer. If attacked at the safe spot, it will not warp away. Thus, if you successfully scramble a ship, it will not escape by log off. Also, if you successfully do ANY hostile act, the 30 minute timer starts for ship disappearance. Furthermore, if you destroy a logged off ship, it should generate a pod. The pod will be near impossible to kill without a smart bomb, but if you do have a smart bomb and are killing a logged off ship, then a pod kill is almost 100% certain. My 2 cents on what I'd like see.
Dau Imperius	Posted - 2005.02.02 07:14:00 - [43] Aside form all this needless bickering.. Everyone is missing a point: Where the heck are the transport ships?! There ere BPO's of the new Amarr tech I indy, but um...where's the Transports? All this talk is useless without even being able to own one.
Draxx	Posted - 2005.02.02 07:45:00 - [44] Originally by: Dau Imperius Aside form all this needless bickering.. Everyone is missing a point: Where the heck are the transport ships?! There ere BPO's of the new Amarr tech I indy, but um...where's the Transports? All this talk is useless without even being able to own one. They are tech II and as such will be distributed via the tech II "lottery", the same way that ALL OTHER TECH II SHIPS HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED. If it moves kill it. If it doesn't move, kill it. It might move later.
Draxx	Posted - 2005.02.02 08:04:00 - [45] Originally by: Dust Puppy Out of curiosity, I'm not wise in such matters , how much firepower would be needed to take down this hauler in under a minute? If we use a tanked Impel as an example. Skills: Transports at lvl4, Hull Upgrades 5, repair systems 4 That gives Armour of 3750. Assume we can tank to an average of 85% (using 6 Energised plates it is possible) With the above skills an Armour repair II will give 384 repaired in 7.6 secs (50.5/sec) To get through 3750 armour in 60 secs you need 62.5 dps before resists. After resists this becomes 62.5/(1-0.85) = 416.66 dps With the armour repair running you need 62.5+50.5 = 113dps After resists this becomes 753dps This is an average. This can obviously be tuned agains certain damage types. If it moves kill it. If it doesn't move, kill it. It might move later.
Majaraw Awalabas	Posted - 2005.02.02 08:24:00 - [46] Last night I created my first ever Sigil (new amarr t1 indy). I slapped on two 400mm nanofiber plates and my armor went up to 1836, add two hardeners and a small armor repairer and you are all set to have fun. Signal booster, webifier and a cap recharger, one beam in high slot and off I went in search of fun. After having frigs run away from my so good looking ship I was finally killed as I decided to not insta-jump but see if I could survive the boring sniper-tempest stuff. Took 3 volleys before I died from the 1400mm at 100km range, not bad.
Thyro	Posted - 2005.02.02 08:29:00 - [47] Originally by: Falzone Edited by: Falzone on 01/02/2005 21:42:19 What is up with this? why do the carebears get more armor and structure on an indy than a heavy assualt cruiser has? If anyone knows pls tell me YES ... these are the secret weapons of "the Carebears" to kick ur ass out from the gatecamps Ive you also noticed that the cargohold is small... but sufficient to carry AMMO, cap rechargers and NUKES Now you will see "The Carebears" kick the ars of those incompetent that do gatecamps... and "The Carebears" will mount a gatecamp with just these tanked indies to kick the ars of any pass by!
Dave10	Posted - 2005.02.02 08:34:00 - [48] Originally by: Thyro Originally by: Falzone Edited by: Falzone on 01/02/2005 21:42:19 What is up with this? why do the carebears get more armor and structure on an indy than a heavy assualt cruiser has? If anyone knows pls tell me YES ... these are the secret weapons of "the Carebears" to kick ur ass out from the gatecamps Ive you also noticed that the cargohold is small... but sufficient to carry AMMO, cap rechargers and NUKES Now you will see "The Carebears" kick the ars of those incompetent that do gatecamps... and "The Carebears" will mount a gatecamp with just these tanked indies to kick the ars of any pass by! I invite all the carebear indies filled with fun stuff to come to p3en-e
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.02.02 08:55:00 - [49] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 02/02/2005 08:58:12 The new ships are fine. So someone can log off before they die? When did that become news (or a non-lame tactic, for that matter)? Consider: as far as I know, these new haulers will need almost as much skills as a HAC(!) and will cost tons. In order for something to be worth that, it must be very very good. A HAC is almost impossible to take down in a cruiser, are people whining about that? No, they bring multiple cruisers/battleships. Same here. One of these will still die to a large gate camp or gank squad, but can pretty much laugh at most solo pirates and wannabe gate camps... which I think was precisely the intention. These are elite haulers. Personally, I hate flying indies. But these new ships are very cool for the people who are serious hauler pilots (mining ops, trading, etc). Deal with it. Oh, and I hate the log off tactic, it makes no amount of ingame sense. If someone catches me, I die or don't -- but I damn well don't log off, no matter what ship I'm flying.
Stront3h	Posted - 2005.02.02 09:30:00 - [50] Edited by: Stront3h on 02/02/2005 09:31:54 I don't know whats worse, so called carebears whining about ship being killed to quickly or so called pirates whining that they can't kill something fast enough (read: requires effort). You're just as bad as each other..... edit: Oh and it's greate to see pirates crying about others using lame tactics to avoide the 'Gank', after all pirates have never used lame tactics to get their jollies of. Bunch of bloody hypocrits....
Loka	Posted - 2005.02.02 09:36:00 - [51] no turret/luncher slot will make them huge secure carog containers. They wont shoot back, but will take hell of impact till they would sink. _____________________________________ Dead or Alive
MinorFreak	Posted - 2005.02.02 11:43:00 - [52] Edited by: MinorFreak on 02/02/2005 11:46:53 Edited by: MinorFreak on 02/02/2005 11:45:12 Originally by: Ankanos so someone wants to logoff to save his butt..big F'n deal. if you cant handle that, you really need to get out more.. shrug Wish i could agree with you about the "big deal"...unfortunately, encouraging the use of 'metagaming' tactics is a slippery slop. Then again, i don't give a rat's ass about this particular "issue" in the dev to-do list. As far as i'm concerned it should be about 2nd to last, right after world peace. macro mining and other 'metagaming' "mechanics" should be bannable offense. Disco'ing to escape death is also cheesy, but i'll put it down to "ore thieving" on the scale of needed fixes to the game (ie. low priority) ______________________ Best darned links ingame and out (backup)
Malken	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:20:00 - [53] Originally by: Joshua Calvert Blame insta-ganking kestrel-alts. i remember seeing the thread starter doing that with his friends in MF so iguess he only got himself to blame. Originally by: Graelyn "We're at war with you, and you FIRED on us! I am so telling CONCORD!" Quote: [18:46:36] Weebear > WTS Electric Golf Cart, 1 careful owner. Phone Rome 555 6567
Thyro	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:29:00 - [54] Edited by: Thyro on 02/02/2005 12:30:25 Originally by: Dave10 Originally by: Thyro Originally by: Falzone Edited by: Falzone on 01/02/2005 21:42:19 What is up with this? why do the carebears get more armor and structure on an indy than a heavy assualt cruiser has? If anyone knows pls tell me YES ... these are the secret weapons of "the Carebears" to kick ur ass out from the gatecamps Ive you also noticed that the cargohold is small... but sufficient to carry AMMO, cap rechargers and NUKES Now you will see "The Carebears" kick the ars of those incompetent that do gatecamps... and "The Carebears" will mount a gatecamp with just these tanked indies to kick the ars of any pass by! I invite all the carebear indies filled with fun stuff to come to p3en-e Would be a very funny "Carebear" party Fireworks everywhere
Steini OFSI	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Dust Puppy Originally by: have2laugh I think the point here is not that they have good resistances, nor that they have good armour. I think the issue is more to do with the fact that they are more survivable than a ship that it takes (litterally) 2 months or so for the average year old character to train for. Not to mention the insane prices charged for heavy assaults. Takes quite a while to to train industrial to level 5 plus whatever secondary skill it requires. It takes well over a month to get Gallente Industrial lvl 5, besides why are you comparing them to heavy assaults? Anyway I like these indies, it is probably fun to tackle them, and... stasis, nosferatu or energy neutralizer plus few warp scramblers should take care of them if you see them running at the gate.
Matthew	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:43:00 - [56] Log-off tactics suck. But using the existence of them to justify an argument against a ship type also sucks. Or maybe we should just nerf every ship that has the capability to endure a battleship's fire long enough to log? The endurance of these new industrials is useful beyond the use of log-off tactics. Now it might actually be useful to escort them, unlike the old ones that were so fragile that it was trivial to mount a hit and run that took out the indy before the escort could do anything useful.
Rodj Blake	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:48:00 - [57] Tech 1 Indy => Transit van. Tech 2 Indy => Armoured Securior van. Nuff said. Dolce et decorum est pro imperator mori
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.02.02 12:55:00 - [58] Originally by: Rodj Blake Tech 1 Indy => Transit van. Tech 2 Indy => Armoured Securior van. Nuff said. ...think that sums it up in a shell ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.02.02 13:39:00 - [59] Originally by: Matthew Log-off tactics suck. But using the existence of them to justify an argument against a ship type also sucks. Or maybe we should just nerf every ship that has the capability to endure a battleship's fire long enough to log? The endurance of these new industrials is useful beyond the use of log-off tactics. Now it might actually be useful to escort them, unlike the old ones that were so fragile that it was trivial to mount a hit and run that took out the indy before the escort could do anything useful. Good point. If you need to transport something big and valuable, one of these and a small escort might make a lot of sense.
Eyeshadow	Posted - 2005.02.02 15:10:00 - [60] omg the whinage is incredible. These things are meant to run blockades, and in that i think they have been built to specification. No solo ceptor or cruiser or even BS is gonna take one of these out. Only a large gank squad will be able to do that. Using log off sploit as a reason why these ships are bad is ludicrous. I have never, and will never, log off in a battle, but i know some people do and until that gets fixed every1 will have to live with it. It is not a valid reason for these ships to be changed so they can be solo ganked, cos then there would be no point in spending 2 months training time and 50mil or so on one would there? Stock indys will still be around, just look how rare HAC are and theyve been out wot, 4-5 months? How many people have passed someone flying a HAC? not many im sure. PVPers complain that carebears moan about everything and get the game nerfed but all i see these days is PVPers whining about ceptor changes, hitpoint changes, MWD/AB changes just about EVERYTHING that is ever suggested get berated by the supposedly non whining PVPers FFS JUST STFU and play the game with what is given to you. If something is changed, it was changed for a reason Forums: Sharks - MC

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.