| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

baltec1
Bat Country
2470
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 00:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Not invulnerable, just not cheap to do. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2470
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 00:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote: No way man. I've been reading for days and days about "Eve is dying" because of the Mack buff. yaddy ya....
And if...errr... "not profitable".... what would be the errr..... reason..... for.... the.... errr... interdiction?
Lies. All lies.
You can thank the freighter pilots for the subsities
Also NC. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2470
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 00:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote: This.
After all the whinage and crying that suiciding miners is no longer profitable I find it hard to believe that miners are being suicided to increase... profits.
Whoever said anythng about making a profit? |

baltec1
Bat Country
2470
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 00:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote: So ganking Macks IS possible AND it's able to be done PROFITABLY.
No. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2471
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 01:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:baltec1 wrote:Touval Lysander wrote: So ganking Macks IS possible AND it's able to be done PROFITABLY.
No. So you are taking over NC. space because............
They attacked us. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2471
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 01:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote: I lolled.
So did we. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2481
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 15:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tarassse wrote:pussnheels wrote:some people never learn , as was predicted when the mining barges rebalance came out If people AFK mine in their unprotected mack , that is up to them , nobody is to blame only the AFK miner So let me get this straight. Before the mining barges' improvements, it was the miners' fault if they were suicide-ganked, because they did not tank their ship. I can understand that and agree. Now, after they had an improvement on their ships to tank better, and even if the rigs,low/med slots are used to tank, it is their fault if they die, because they mine AFK? Do note that whether their mackinaw is tanked or not, it still dies to 2 catalysts in 0.6. Have you ever mined? Even if you begin doing it while being completely awake, it is sooooo boring that you'll end up falling asleep anyway. The barge buff was not that necessary. The mining profession just needed to be less boring to entertain miners and force them to stay awake in front of their screen. Just pointing out. They still dont tank their ships. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2481
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 15:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sisohiv wrote:83, 447 EHP Skiff mining 30 Ice an hr says you might want to just enjoy the cheap fuel. They didnt tank their barges for 8 months. What makes think they would give up their ma efficienty ships now? |

baltec1
Bat Country
2482
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 04:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:baltec1 wrote: Just pointing out. They still dont tank their ships.
What I heard, they don't need to. CCP did it for them. You heard or read Baltec Zim and Darth too? But seems they can still gank ships. It's good news for them, bad for idiots.
We are teaching bad miners the difference between not profitable to gank and ungankable. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2483
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 07:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:
And no ganker rage??!! My dear fellow, where HAVE you been?
Pointing out imbalances is not whining. Crying untill CCP gives you a pre tanked ship that does it all however. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 13:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:baltec1 wrote: Pointing out imbalances is not whining. Crying untill CCP gives you a pre tanked ship that does it all however...
Please show me the ship which is "pre-tanked"
The mack comes with a base tank that makes it impossible to make a profit when its fitted with t2 mods and no tanking mods. It is one of the few subcaps that can do this and as a result invalidates one of the other barges which is specialised in tanking. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 13:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:
No you dont see a difference. CCP buffed their EHP because they were primitively cheap to gank. Even well fitted mackiaw was easily ganked by 2-3 catalysts and were profitable to gankers. What CCP did was just balance their EHP. They can be still profitable like some of l4 mission boats. You just have to search for expensive target.
They used to have a base EHP that put them in the same class as heavy assault ships. How exactly was that not balanced? |

baltec1
Bat Country
2484
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 14:10:00 -
[13] - Quote
TharOkha wrote:
I mentioned this a thousand times. Extremely low PowerGrid. While HAC could fit large tank extenders, miners couldnt.
Which is why we asked for more fitting room, not more base EHP. Right now the Mack is unbalanced because of its base EHP. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2485
|
Posted - 2012.10.16 16:14:00 -
[14] - Quote
Vanyr Andrard wrote:baltec1 wrote:TharOkha wrote:
I mentioned this a thousand times. Extremely low PowerGrid. While HAC could fit large tank extenders, miners couldnt.
Which is why we asked for more fitting room, not more base EHP. Right now the Mack is unbalanced because of its base EHP. If CCP had done this then a bunch of people would have posted various utility fits for the procurer and skiff and hurf-blurfed about combat barges. I understand that in your mind an intrinsic part of balance is maintaining a certain consistency in "ease to gank" a completely untanked ship of different types...but I question why you think anyone else, CCP or otherwise, would share that opinion. I certainly don't--noncombat ships are given less fitting flexibility to impede their ability to be fitted for combat, and therefore are 'balanced' with higher base EHP compared to combat ships. CCP has followed this plan for years--but for some reason intentionally made mining ships, compared to other industrials, extra fragile. I can guess that this reason was to make ganking mining bots easier, and have bots/afk miners be vulnerable. You guys started exploiting this fact to kill ATK miners, and CCP changed their philosophy, as one could have easily predicted. I certainly can't stop you from continuining to hurf-blurf about this fictitious brand of balance, but rest assured that CCP that whatever option they chose, a different subset of forum-posters would complain about it, and that they planned on ignoring this specific group of complaints years before you even made them. Its at this point I point out the the mack did get a buff to fitting room |

baltec1
Bat Country
2489
|
Posted - 2012.10.18 10:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote: I don't know, man. All I know is that Effective HP are not actual HP. And that the killmail says total damage taken. If that's not what actually happened, then boo on the killmail system.
Killmails are horrid for giving amounts tanked and damage delt. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2489
|
Posted - 2012.10.18 19:15:00 -
[16] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Being insta-targeted, scrammed into IMMOBILITY and popped within 10 seconds is 'dumb' ? How so ?
They did nothing to protect themselves. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2494
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 16:08:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ginger Barbarella wrote:It would be kinda hilarious if KB coders would write updates to their boards that went out to CCP hourly to download CONCORD kills and automatically update the killboards. :) See all those epic KB stats fall flat on their faces. 
Bat Country very proudly posted up all of our losses when we did our caldari ice interdiction 8 months ago. We have no problem with showing any of our losses. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2494
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 16:11:00 -
[18] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Like I said yesterday......most ganks are not survivable in mining ships no matter what is done. It's like asking the residents of Hiroshima in August 1945 to defend themselvs and 'be ready'.
Most ganks involve a handfull of destroyers. Tell me more about how a ship with a better tank than some heavy assault ships stands no chance... |

baltec1
Bat Country
2496
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:08:00 -
[19] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:Your Corp association tells me and everyone else here ALL we need to know. 
That we invented the mass ganking of miners with destroyers for profit and know exactly what barges can do?
|

baltec1
Bat Country
2497
|
Posted - 2012.10.20 06:50:00 -
[20] - Quote
qDoctor Strangelove wrote:
People STILL do dumb **** making them profitable to kill, and the new crime system will be awesome and make people able to make a living revenging the ganked
The macks are not profitable to kill dispite people still doing stupid things. |

baltec1
Bat Country
2497
|
Posted - 2012.10.20 07:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
S'Way wrote:baltec1 wrote: The macks are not profitable to kill dispite people still doing stupid things.
New crimewatch might change that a bit though ? I'm imagining mining corps competing over a systems belts (it happens often from what I've seen in some areas), then them putting bounties on each other for the gankers to cash in on.
You might get one or two doing this but the bulk will never bother. I doubt they will even put bounties on people who do bother to gank them. |
| |
|