| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
279
   |
Posted - 2012.08.29 00:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Andski wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:All those changes would do is make droves of players leave eve. And you know what? Once they leave, you cannot shoot them. If your goal is more layoffs at CCP, a fine plan. yeah suicide ganking has existed since the beginning and this game seems to be quite fine!
The proposed solutions that were being responded to would remove concord protections from anything actually doable in space save station hugging. Suicide ganking would be removed as the removal of sure death from concord wouldn't make it suicidal to gank. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
279
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 00:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:MIrple wrote:This right here is the point. You have people getting into exhumers that are unskilled to fly it properly. Its the same as getting into a battleship. You can do this is 15 days but you will not be able to do anything with it. Shield tanking skills are required to fly an Exhumer well but miners didnt train for it. If I sit AFK in an untanked Tech 3 ship and someone comes along and kills me should I demand a buff from CCP as the risk is not worth the reward for shooing an untanked ship?
Exhumers should have been changed but adding EHP should not have been done a simple addition of PG and CPU would have been enough. Exactly. Tank vs. efficiency should always be a choice. Players like Sabrina claim that the game is better off because miners were given the option to fly properly-tanked barges, but that isn't even half-true. The tanks were forced down their hungry gullets because they refused to fit their barges properly, but never refused to whine about getting killed. A proper Hulk can have about 35,000 EHP. Sure, you need good skills for that, otherwise it would be closer to 29,000-30,000 EHP, but guess what: you need good skills to have more EHP on pvp-fit ships too. Claiming that miners should be entitled to maximum possible defenses from the second they get into exhumers is absolutely absurd. Train for them, just like I trained to put T2 energized adaptive nanos and PG-hungry 1600mm plates on my T3s and command ships.
Prior to the nerf with good tanking skills I could only get ~29k EHP from a full tank fit hulk using T2 mods and T1 rigs. This was the tankiest of the line. Not exactly an invincible behemoth. Besides I find it odd that mining barges having a high EHP choice is a bad thing but having tankier choices in other classes is perfectly acceptable. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
279
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 01:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Besides I find it odd that mining barges having a high EHP choice is a bad thing but having tankier choices in other classes is perfectly acceptable. You're comparing industrial ships to warships. I'm sorry for going into real-life parallels, but there's a reason why fuel tankers have less armor and defenses than battleships. It has to do with efficiency, and is also the reason why the former are more likely to be escorted by the latter for protection, than welding steel plates to their hulls. It's the same reason why SUVs have less survivability than tanks, and why your local news station's eye-in-the-sky chopper has less defenses than an AH-64 Apache.
I must admit I know little of real life military craft or dealings, but I find it hard to believe that the design of a vehicle wouldn't take into account the possibility of encountering hostilities. This game, if all that is said about it's hostile nature is to be believed, seems like it would logically have no real place for completely defenseless ships save when purpose dictated it was necessary. I can't think of a reason a mining ship would need to be especially weak, so why should it be? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
280
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 21:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Agreh Tensenn wrote:
Think about every other mission ship for example. They rarely fit to counter suicide ganking, but they fit for the task at hand. If they fit standard modules like t2 or cheap deadspace/faction they will (with exceptions) not be worth suicide ganking, but if they fit expensive modules like high-grade deadspace modules for several billions, they will be. That is a clear offset.
That is a good example of consequences for fitting your ship poorly. For some reason though that is not to apply to miners.
I'm curious as to the number of ships whos base HP would allow them to be ganked for profit before even counting module drops. In the example above the mission ship has to add something to their ship to make it worth the gank, the exhumers on the other hand were stated as being profitable based on potential salvage alone with no tank before the changes.
Edit: Even the tankiest of them prebuff needed to devote all of it's slots to EHP increasing mods to be considered a decent tank while mission ships for the most part have no need to do anything near that to be undesirable for suicide ganking. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
281
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 22:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:^: other dude who made an actual thought out post, I'm on anterrible phone right now so I can't get you a source bu it was basically that CCP thought cost would balance and prevent supercap dominance/proliferation.they were terribly wrong and admitted it in a CSM minutes, thread or devblog. Tyberius Franklin wrote:La Nariz wrote:Agreh Tensenn wrote:
Think about every other mission ship for example. They rarely fit to counter suicide ganking, but they fit for the task at hand. If they fit standard modules like t2 or cheap deadspace/faction they will (with exceptions) not be worth suicide ganking, but if they fit expensive modules like high-grade deadspace modules for several billions, they will be. That is a clear offset.
That is a good example of consequences for fitting your ship poorly. For some reason though that is not to apply to miners. I'm curious as to the number of ships whose base HP would allow them to be ganked for profit before even counting module drops. In the example above the mission ship has to add something to their ship to make it worth the gank, the exhumers on the other hand were stated as being profitable based on potential salvage alone with no tank before the changes. Edit: Even the tankiest of them prebuff needed to devote all of it's slots to EHP increasing mods to be considered a decent tank while mission ships for the most part have no need to do anything near that to be undesirable for suicide ganking. It was the salvage and the modules that dropped which paid out. Any Unfitted hull would be gank for profit immune.
2 things:
1. That ignores potential T2 salvage drops, which is why I asked. I'm not sure of really any hulls how possible salvage values compares to base EHP.
2. Doesn't address the fact that in the example that basic T2 mods on the mining ship make it a target while in the example of the missions ship it would take deadspace/faction mods of reasonable value to make it target worthy for suicide ganking. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
281
|
Posted - 2012.08.29 23:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:
It most certainly does not ignore potential T2 salvag drops. Combat ships require more EhP to be used in combat. Asteroids don't shoot back when you shoot them maybe asteroids should be buffed. Basically the hulk is a specialized mining ship it's a noncombat ship so it is much less durable than a combat ship. Industrial ship=!combat ship. Exhumers also did not require total dedication to tank for gank prevention, all but 1 mid, a low slot, two rigs for a reall good tank.
You may want to review the idea of a decent tank with those holding that position. In many of the threads on this topic kills of hulks fitting partial tanks have been posted (2 mids, 1 low, 2 rigs) and decried as being poor attempts and utterly insufficient.
Those things aside, the idea of a craft that needs no protective ability due to not being a combat vessel seems to contradict the idea of fitting a tank being a viable course of action. If combat situations shouldn't be figured into ship design then considering it in the fitting process is equally unneeded. It also ignores the reality of the game. Industrial ships don't live in a bubble that makes the somehow harder to aggress in a suicide gank than any other ship. Given that all space is inherently hostile and these ships operate in that space why would there be no idea of protection worked into hull options? |
| |
|