Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 07:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
I get that no where in EVE is it truely safe and all that crap bla bla bla
but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m? I have read posts about people losing their orcas to ganks in high sec by several people all combined maybe flying ships that total 80-100 million (8-10 ships) or even less taking out a ship worth well over 1 bill full fitted? WTF?!?!
So i mean what defense is there? when orcas are dropped by a few well organized pilots flying cheap ships? I guess you could tank up your mackinaw but it only means what.... the ganker gets 2 of his friends to take out your 200mil ship by risking 10 mill a pilot?
I am all for ganks in high sec but the the cost to gank somoene is pennies on the dollar compared to what the ganked loses its just not fair at all.
This game just seems to be going down the toilet rapidly in the latest years. New players dont stand a chance agianst the EVE lifers that run multiple accounts and throw 10's of millions away on catalyst losses just to destroy people.
Let me say agian im not trying to complain about getting ganked rather i guess im complaining at the huge unfair cost diff of ships.
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
Even aligning to gate, mining in .7 and above, being at the computer, D-scanning constantly you still run a better chance of dieing than not if you find your self chosen by a ganker.
I know many trolls are gunna just tear this post a new one with the "eve isnt supposed be safe crap" but the fact that people create accounts just to gank ships with tech I ships that cost 5-10 times less then what it costs the person getting ganked. doesnt seem fair to me at all. and I feel it has caused many players to leave and will continue to do so. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5944
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
A vast amount of miners fit no tank at all and make themselves profitable to gank. Chances are this ganker didn't bother to scan you and got lucky with the kill. Now you did fit a tank, however you made a mistake and left a big kinetic hole which is what allowed that destroyer (the most popular gankboat) to get through.
In short you got unlucky. |
Prince Kobol
692
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I get that no where in EVE is it truely safe and all that crap bla bla bla
but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m? I have read posts about people losing their orcas to ganks in high sec by several people all combined maybe flying ships that total 80-100 million (8-10 ships) or even less taking out a ship worth well over 1 bill full fitted? WTF?!?!
So i mean what defense is there? when orcas are dropped by a few well organized pilots flying cheap ships? I guess you could tank up your mackinaw but it only means what.... the ganker gets 2 of his friends to take out your 200mil ship by risking 10 mill a pilot?
I am all for ganks in high sec but the the cost to gank somoene is pennies on the dollar compared to what the ganked loses its just not fair at all.
This game just seems to be going down the toilet rapidly in the latest years. New players dont stand a chance agianst the EVE lifers that run multiple accounts and throw 10's of millions away on catalyst losses just to destroy people.
Let me say agian im not trying to complain about getting ganked rather i guess im complaining at the huge unfair cost diff of ships.
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
Even aligning to gate, mining in .7 and above, being at the computer, D-scanning constantly you still run a better chance of dieing than not if you find your self chosen by a ganker.
I know many trolls are gunna just tear this post a new one with the "eve isnt supposed be safe crap" but the fact that people create accounts just to gank ships with tech I ships that cost 5-10 times less then what it costs the person getting ganked. doesnt seem fair to me at all. and I feel it has caused many players to leave and will continue to do so.
So your argument is that you shouldn't be able to kill a ship if it costs more then yours?
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1276
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
There will come the day when miners realize that having a logistic ship in their mining fleet actually adds to the profits. Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
Cartoondog
Randy Lobsters In Space
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:09:00 -
[5] - Quote
You can still be ganked, but it's as hard/harder than it's ever been.
To kill an Orca that has some kind of tank (I mean noone would fly one without at least a damage control on it, right?) with ganky Catalysts, you're looking at around 15 of the little buggers. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5944
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:There will come the day when miners realize that having a logistic ship in their mining fleet actually adds to the profits.
I doubt it |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7439
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
eve isn't fair, deal with it mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Robus Muvila
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
200
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:There will come the day when miners realize that having a logistic ship in their mining fleet actually adds to the profits.
This. This a million times this.
Look at a mining company today. Does the staff consist entirely of miners? No there's on site security, or a medic. It's not rocket science people. http://themittani.com - Because EvE has needed a proper news site for ages |
Akinesis
CRIMSON ASSAULT Brotherhood of the Kebab
21
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 08:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
The Mining Barges and Exhumers just got a massive overhaul!!! Fly a Skiff and tank that bad-boy up (it can have a tank compare able to a battleship!). Even the Mack can have a decent tank if fitted right. |
Haedonism Bot
Revolutionary Front New Creation Collective
272
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote: but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec?
Yo must be new here. Highsec started out as a ganker's paradise way back in the day. Today, nerf after nerf has made it more and more difficult to gank successfully. You have to be pretty well organized to pull off really high value ganks.
How do you protect yourself against ganks? Everybody else will tell you how. I'm not going to. Basically you have to be as well organized and aware as the gankers. That means not being AFK, of course. Join the Revolutionary Front and liberate New Eden from it's stuff.
|
|
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
449
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Why are you whining about a ganking paradise? Now when we do something bad, EVERYBODY can attack us as we become suspect, that INCLUDES being podded and losing a clone and implants.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7439
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:16:00 -
[12] - Quote
Miilla wrote:Why are you whining about a ganking paradise? Now when we do something bad, EVERYBODY can attack us as we become suspect, that INCLUDES being podded and losing a clone and implants.
Ganking is anything but a pradise in Empire, infact it is even more riskier and higher penalty now in Retribution, in fact some would say it went too far on making Empire TOO SAFE.
Don't worry they'll nerf it more because the problem for the worthless bears isn't that ganking is too easy, it's that ganking is possible mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
449
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:18:00 -
[13] - Quote
Andski wrote:Miilla wrote:Why are you whining about a ganking paradise? Now when we do something bad, EVERYBODY can attack us as we become suspect, that INCLUDES being podded and losing a clone and implants.
Ganking is anything but a pradise in Empire, infact it is even more riskier and higher penalty now in Retribution, in fact some would say it went too far on making Empire TOO SAFE. Don't worry they'll nerf it more because the problem for the worthless bears isn't that ganking is too easy, it's that ganking is possible
I know, and CCP's business plan seems to be based on a Whine-O-Meter, because they need money, badly.
I am ok with 1.0 designated new rookie spawn systems being 100% safe, anything system lower, NOPE. Never. |
Dave Stark
2560
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:25:00 -
[14] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:There will come the day when miners realize that having a logistic ship in their mining fleet actually adds to the profits.
so wrong it's painful. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1713
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
For those that don't follow the news, Exhumers are getting an EHP nerf. Sort of the exact opposite reason for them existing. |
Dave Stark
2560
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:29:00 -
[16] - Quote
hear that thud?
it was the last nail finding it's way to the hulk's coffin.
all hail, king retriever! |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
441
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:33:00 -
[17] - Quote
I don't see how you even manage to get ganked. If a cheap warship enters the belt and begins closing the distance to you then you could just warp to that safe you were aligned to. As you where paying attention while mining and not alt tabbed on the forums when it happened. We miss you Saede. |
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:34:00 -
[18] - Quote
OP: Think of a mining barge or exhumer like you would think of a strip mining crystal: They provide you with isk but eventually are destroyed.
With luck and some sensible actions on your part such as choosing a ship and fit for durability rather than yield, sticking with platinum insured T1 ships to reduce isk losses, staying well clear of systems with ice belts because they draw bots and gankers and being ready to hit warp when a suspicious ship enters the belt you are mining you can make being ganked almost irrelevant because the isk you make between ganks easily covers any losses. Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them. |
Ersahi Kir
Freelance Mining Company
126
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:(a lot of stuff)
I have two equally viable pieces of advise for you. 1. a) Buy a procurer and tank it up b) mine to your hearts content c) profit
2. a)Buy a skiff and tank it up b) mine to your hearts content c) profit
As long as these two tools exist for miners they really have no room to complain. Unless you are particularly obnoxious gankers won't bother you. If you need some fits feel free to message me, but honestly they're not that hard to figure out.
Or continue mining in other barges and accept the higher risk of getting blown up.
/you can fit max yield in a skiff or procurer and still fit a sick tank //procurers are stupid cheap, can be fit with tech I mods and no rigs, and still have more EHP than any other ship except the skiff |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
322
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I get that no where in EVE is it truely safe and all that crap bla bla bla
If you think this game is crap, then why are you playing it? Remove insurance. |
|
Dave Stark
2560
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:45:00 -
[21] - Quote
Mara Pahrdi wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I get that no where in EVE is it truely safe and all that crap bla bla bla
If you think this game is crap, then why are you playing it?
he didn't say it was, at least not in that quote. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3196
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 09:48:00 -
[22] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec?
Umm.... Beta?
When EVE was released, there was no CONCORD. Then there was Tankable CONCORD. Then Untankable CONCORD but Insurance payouts for gank ships remained. And now there's No insurance and the fastest responding, untankable, undelayable CONCORD EVE's ever seen.
If you're saying that these changes turned EVE into a ganker's paradise, maybe you want them rolled back?
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:Even aligning to gate, mining in .7 and above, being at the computer, D-scanning constantly you still run a better chance of dieing than not if you find your self chosen by a ganker.
Being aligned means that you will be in warp to the destination you were aligned to the server tick after you press the button. You don't have to be watching d-scan, just the overview to be safe because no matter what method, it takes longer than that to tackle or bump you. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:00:00 -
[23] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:I don't see how you even manage to get ganked. If a cheap warship enters the belt and begins closing the distance to you then you could just warp to that safe you were aligned to. As you where paying attention while mining and not alt tabbed on the forums when it happened.
This isn't what being aligned means, since you aren't travelling at warping speed and practically all of the align time in a barge or exhumer is in acceleration not turning. it won't help you.
On a general point, advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. really if you're in a populous system you will need to fly something cheap like a retriever and play the odds or if you wish to fly something expensive then get the hell away from everyone. I mined for months in a yield maxed mackinaw by finding the least populated systems (usually without stations) with a decent refinery in range. one jump is quite bearable when you have a 35K ore bay. then just courier contract the ore to a hub for next to nothing. plus you get largely untouched belts this way.
this is working from the basic theory that the wolves stay close to the sheep and it's true. freelance space bum |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
441
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:10:00 -
[24] - Quote
Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless.
Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp.
I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis.
They are skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant.
And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV. We miss you Saede. |
Dave Stark
2560
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:13:00 -
[25] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp. I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis. They are skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant. And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV.
fact: sitting at the keyboard instead of making breafkast doesn't make you accelerate to warp faster. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
441
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:25:00 -
[26] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp. I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis. They are skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant. And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV. fact: sitting at the keyboard instead of making breafkast doesn't make you accelerate to warp faster.
No but it lets you warp off before the gankers reach you as you had the sense to not sit on the warp in point.
We miss you Saede. |
Dave Stark
2561
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:30:00 -
[27] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:No but it lets you warp off before the gankers reach you as you had the sense to not sit on the warp in point.
i feel we could go back and forth all day with you making terrible points and me pointing out how terrible they are, but i can't be bothered. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1713
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:30:00 -
[28] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:fact: sitting at the keyboard instead of making breafkast doesn't make you accelerate to warp faster. Fact: if you try to warp away when gankers land on grid, it is already too late [unless you insta-warp because you are aligned and webbed].
For reference, my Hulks take 17 seconds to warp without outside assistance / interference. |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp. I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis. They are skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant. And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV.
get a stop watch and try it out. align times are comparable with CONCORD response times in 0.5 space whatever way you're pointing, but you don't mine so you don't know that, as i said.
also the fact that I can AFK quite safely in high with my advice should tell you that your plucky, non perverted miners are either enjoying their roleplay or wasting their time. the risk/reward and logistics difficulties make it unworthwhile. freelance space bum |
Xen Solarus
Inner 5phere
365
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:33:00 -
[30] - Quote
Ganking is basicly EvE with Easy-mode on. Why actually go looking for actual PvP targets elsewhere in the game, when you've got yourself unlimited risk-free targets floating around highsec, that don't shoot back? Better still, most of their targets are unwilling and/or uninterested in PvP, and thus are completely unprepaired for sudden ganking. As long as these gankers make sure their target is worth more than the cost of the ships used, they win. Then again, some of them do it just for the hell of it, or to make their pathetic killboards increase.
Worst of all, they all rant their highsec-hating rhetoric to justify their position. They've already made lowsec into a wasteland, and taught new players and carebears alike that traveling there is a death-sentence, and so now they've moved to highsec. As far as their concerned, their gameplay is the only gameplay, and everyone should conform to their opinion.
Though i won't go as far as saying that ganking should be impossible in highsec, i definately think it should be made harder and/or less profitable. Cause lets face it, these L33T PvPers wouldn't know real PvP if it came up and smacked them in the face with a fish. And ultimately their selfish actions prevent players natural progression out of highsec to other areas Post with your main, like a BOSS! |
|
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
136
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:35:00 -
[31] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? 2006 I think; might have been 2007. It was when the can flagging system was introduced. Up until that point Ore Theft (using a heavily expanded hauler) was the primary "danger" which miners had to deal with, suicide ganking was rare and generally focussed against known ore thieves or macro groups... That's right, the majority of suicide ganks (at least within the sphere I was aware of at the time) were defending the miners and their profits. Can flagging changed the dynamic however, and do you know who drove the development of that feature?
It was the miners.
Over the years since then the gankers have refined their techniques, developed new strategies and made it into a career. They've been "nerfed" several times (but have received buffs too).
Personally I feel that the barge buff went in the wrong direction, the tank levels are about right IMHO but the redesign should have enabled the fitting of tanks of that scale rather than building them into the hull - the gankers have always said "fit a tank" and most of those who listened to that sentiment (but not the specifics of deadspace boosters in highsec) seem to have fared relatively well out of it. |
Dave Stark
2561
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:36:00 -
[32] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:And ultimately their selfish actions prevent players natural progression out of highsec to other areas
do... do you actually believe this kind of nonsense, or are you trolling? |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
441
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 10:44:00 -
[33] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:Though i won't go as far as saying that ganking should be impossible in highsec, i definately think it should be made harder and/or less profitable.
It's already not profitable. They do it because it's fun. They spend their own ISK on their cheap gank ships to blow you up for a laugh.
You remember fun, right? It's what we used to have before we made MMOs a second job that we have to pay to perform.
If you want CCP to make ganking less fun then you're in for a rude awakening.
We miss you Saede. |
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? 2006 I think; might have been 2007. It was when the can flagging system was introduced. Up until that point Ore Theft (using a heavily expanded hauler) was the primary "danger" which miners had to deal with, suicide ganking was rare and generally focussed against known ore thieves or macro groups... That's right, the majority of suicide ganks (at least within the sphere I was aware of at the time) were defending the miners and their profits. Can flagging changed the dynamic however, and do you know who drove the development of that feature? It was the miners.Over the years since then the gankers have refined their techniques, developed new strategies and made it into a career. They've been "nerfed" several times (but have received buffs too). Personally I feel that the barge buff went in the wrong direction, the tank levels are about right IMHO but the redesign should have enabled the fitting of tanks of that scale rather than building them into the hull - the gankers have always said "fit a tank" and most of those who listened to that sentiment (but not the specifics of deadspace boosters in highsec) seem to have fared relatively well out of it.
I was around mining when they made that change, it was NOT the change miners were asking for. They wanted a way to protect their ore that they had mined from ore thieves so what did ccp do? introduce the flagging system so that unarmed mining vessels could shoot at ore thieves that made the whole situation worse. The only players on the forums that praised that new system were the ore thieves themselves because now they had a way of ganking miners without concord getting involved.
All they had to do was make secure anchorable containers capable of holding more than a packet of peanuts and the problem would have been solved. Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them. |
Sentamon
815
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:19:00 -
[35] - Quote
OP needs some cheeze with his whine. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:26:00 -
[36] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:Personally I feel that the barge buff went in the wrong direction, the tank levels are about right IMHO but the redesign should have enabled the fitting of tanks of that scale rather than building them into the hull - the gankers have always said "fit a tank" and most of those who listened to that sentiment (but not the specifics of deadspace boosters in highsec) seem to have fared relatively well out of it.
what i found is that gankers shifted to ship scanning more after the changes and use multiple alts if required. Tanking may help if other players in system are untanked but if they want to get you they will because gankers aren't necessarily rational (in the sense that they're calculating profit). I've had a close call in a fairly well tanked Mackinaw versus two catalysts so while the tank obviously saved me it was no deterrent and I only survived because of the ganker's miscalculation (he tried to warp his third alt in but CONCORD popped him on arrival) freelance space bum |
Felicity Love
STARKRAFT Joint Venture Conglomerate
435
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:28:00 -
[37] - Quote
Get logi support, learn how to tank, stop farting around AFK ... imagine that.
Proud Beta Tester for "Bumping Uglies for Dummies" |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1130
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
OP is a troll, and a poor one at that. This is not a signature. |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1130
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:35:00 -
[39] - Quote
Andski wrote:eve isn't fair, deal with it
So you no longer want production facilities in null to be as good as, or better than those in hi-sec, as 'eve isn't fair, deal with it'? This is not a signature. |
Dave Stark
2564
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:44:00 -
[40] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Andski wrote:eve isn't fair, deal with it So you no longer want production facilities in null to be as good as, or better than those in hi-sec, as 'eve isn't fair, deal with it'?
there's a difference between fair, and balanced. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7440
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Andski wrote:eve isn't fair, deal with it So you no longer want production facilities in null to be as good as, or better than those in hi-sec, as 'eve isn't fair, deal with it'?
go pound sand while your exhumers get popped mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1217
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I get that no where in EVE is it truely safe and all that crap bla bla bla
but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m? I have read posts about people losing their orcas to ganks in high sec by several people all combined maybe flying ships that total 80-100 million (8-10 ships) or even less taking out a ship worth well over 1 bill full fitted? WTF?!?!
So i mean what defense is there? when orcas are dropped by a few well organized pilots flying cheap ships? I guess you could tank up your mackinaw but it only means what.... the ganker gets 2 of his friends to take out your 200mil ship by risking 10 mill a pilot?
I am all for ganks in high sec but the the cost to gank somoene is pennies on the dollar compared to what the ganked loses its just not fair at all.
This game just seems to be going down the toilet rapidly in the latest years. New players dont stand a chance agianst the EVE lifers that run multiple accounts and throw 10's of millions away on catalyst losses just to destroy people.
Let me say agian im not trying to complain about getting ganked rather i guess im complaining at the huge unfair cost diff of ships.
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
Even aligning to gate, mining in .7 and above, being at the computer, D-scanning constantly you still run a better chance of dieing than not if you find your self chosen by a ganker.
I know many trolls are gunna just tear this post a new one with the "eve isnt supposed be safe crap" but the fact that people create accounts just to gank ships with tech I ships that cost 5-10 times less then what it costs the person getting ganked. doesnt seem fair to me at all. and I feel it has caused many players to leave and will continue to do so.
"gankers paradise"? Uh maybe you need a reality check mate, because ganking is literally at an all time low thanks to the nerfs it's got over the last year or so
|
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
84
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:49:00 -
[43] - Quote
A thread I can be useful in, finally!
I'm a hardcore miner on an alt. We're talking, fly a makinaw, mining skills to 5, refinery skills to five, the whole nine yards. I also gank. Here is the ultimate solo guide to avoiding ganking in highspace.
Land on belt. Evaluate mineral that run across 28 meter wide "corridors" across the belt. Typically, you'll find yourself three lines, one up each arm of the belt, then one across the base (belts are "U" shaped). From those three straight lines, from off-grid bookmarks at the end of each line.
Now, for the complex part, miners! Form a second set of warp-ins on those lines, 12 meters from the beginning and end of that line you drew. Start mining at that warp-in, and slowboat across that line to your warp-out point. Stop, relock, and recycle onto new roids as they drop out of range. When you reach the end of the line, turn around and head back if it's safe. If not, warp out. continue watching Dscan.
Included is a crudely drawn MSpaint to show how.
crudely drawn MSpaint.
Since you're going at +75% speed for the vast majority of your runs, you will warp out instantly the second gankers hit grid. This is, if you are ATK. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help! If you care about making EVE better, you'll vote Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Harbonah
A-OK Logistics and Fabrication StoneGuard Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:50:00 -
[44] - Quote
I was going to offer to help the OP. Until I realized he had a CSP fee in the hundreds of millions of Isk for private communications. I find that morally offensive. *shrug*. I guess he doesn't want to socialize with people. |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Now, for the complex part, miners!
uh, yeah, very. I mean, well done for figuring this out but there are much easier and AFK friendly solutions. freelance space bum |
Dave Stark
2564
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 11:58:00 -
[46] - Quote
Skeln Thargensen wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Now, for the complex part, miners! uh, yeah, very. I mean, well done for figuring this out but there are much easier and AFK friendly solutions.
we call it; the retriever. |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
84
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:05:00 -
[47] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Now, for the complex part, miners! uh, yeah, very. I mean, well done for figuring this out but there are much easier and AFK friendly solutions. we call it; the retriever.
We call those targets! Don't worry miners, I'm here to help! If you care about making EVE better, you'll vote Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Dave Stark
2564
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:13:00 -
[48] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Now, for the complex part, miners! uh, yeah, very. I mean, well done for figuring this out but there are much easier and AFK friendly solutions. we call it; the retriever. We call those targets!
you guys actually undock and do stuff? i thought you all spent your time docked in station fondling each other? |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
84
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:20:00 -
[49] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote: you guys actually undock and do stuff? i thought you all spent your time docked in station fondling each other?
Tell me more, I'm getting all hot and bothered here... Don't worry miners, I'm here to help! If you care about making EVE better, you'll vote Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
Dave Stark
2564
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:22:00 -
[50] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Dave Stark wrote: you guys actually undock and do stuff? i thought you all spent your time docked in station fondling each other?
Tell me more, I'm getting all hot and bothered here...
no, i naturally assumed that's what you guys did since like... well... i don't know, i just assumed it was. *shrug* |
|
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:24:00 -
[51] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Now, for the complex part, miners! uh, yeah, very. I mean, well done for figuring this out but there are much easier and AFK friendly solutions. we call it; the retriever.
that is one yes. the other is not huddling up tot he other targets. freelance space bum |
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 12:47:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ya this thread delivers.
If you want to mine in highsec get a skiff and tank the crap out of it. Even a Mack can have EHP of over 30k. If you make yourself more costly to gank than it takes to gank you then you won't be ganked. Tank your ship up and stop AFK mining and undoubtable you are alot less likely to get ganked.
That means D-SCAN and pay attention to local. I have no sympathy for anyone who AFK mines and fits no tank on his barge, they deserve to be ganked. CCP can't fix stupid and you guys are asking them to do just that. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
444
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:00:00 -
[53] - Quote
Skeln Thargensen wrote:what i found is that gankers shifted to ship scanning more after the changes and use multiple alts if required. Tanking may help if other players in system are untanked but if they want to get you they will because gankers aren't necessarily rational (in the sense that they're calculating profit). I've had a close call in a fairly well tanked Mackinaw versus two catalysts so while the tank obviously saved me it was no deterrent and I only survived because of the ganker's miscalculation (he tried to warp his third alt in but CONCORD popped him on arrival)
Eh... High sec miners story of heroic survival in the face of adversity...
Does not deliver... We miss you Saede. |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:03:00 -
[54] - Quote
Thorleifer wrote:Ya this thread delivers.
If you want to mine in highsec get a skiff and tank the crap out of it. Even a Mack can have EHP of over 30k. If you make yourself more costly to gank than it takes to gank you then you won't be ganked. Tank your ship up and stop AFK mining and undoubtable you are alot less likely to get ganked.
That means D-SCAN and pay attention to local. I have no sympathy for anyone who AFK mines and fits no tank on his barge, they deserve to be ganked. CCP can't fix stupid and you guys are asking them to do just that.
I've succesfully AFK mined for months on end in multiple locations with maxed out yield without issue. I've talked to other miners who've done this too.
gankers are as lazy as miners. they aren't going to roam all over high sec looking for you when there are plenty of easy targets who haven't yet learned to move. putting the effort into scouting out safer systems means you don't have to waste attention, or develop elaborate solutions to what is an uninvolving and boring activity.
I mean unless you really want to. freelance space bum |
Skeln Thargensen
Filthy Carebear Tax Avoidance Shell Corp
97
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:05:00 -
[55] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:what i found is that gankers shifted to ship scanning more after the changes and use multiple alts if required. Tanking may help if other players in system are untanked but if they want to get you they will because gankers aren't necessarily rational (in the sense that they're calculating profit). I've had a close call in a fairly well tanked Mackinaw versus two catalysts so while the tank obviously saved me it was no deterrent and I only survived because of the ganker's miscalculation (he tried to warp his third alt in but CONCORD popped him on arrival) Eh... High sec miners story of heroic survival in the face of adversity... Does not deliver...
oh it did. i picked up the killmail lol. freelance space bum |
Akiyo Mayaki
160
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:13:00 -
[56] - Quote
Miners can defend themselves. They choose not to.
But they'll come and whine to EVE-O nonetheless. No |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1130
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:32:00 -
[57] - Quote
Andski wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Andski wrote:eve isn't fair, deal with it So you no longer want production facilities in null to be as good as, or better than those in hi-sec, as 'eve isn't fair, deal with it'? go pound sand while your exhumers get popped
I do not mine.
Does that help? This is not a signature. |
Corey Fumimasa
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
261
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 13:39:00 -
[58] - Quote
Maybe CCP could make an Ore that isn't worth anything on the market, but that makes the miner immune to PVP. So If a barge is mining in a "xero ore" belt then it is invulnerable
This way miners could mine all they wanted with no risk. -áCorebloodbrothers & Ali Aras for CSM: Ring mining & bottom up income, new player balance, NRDS
|
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:23:00 -
[59] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote:Maybe CCP could make an Ore that isn't worth anything on the market, but that makes the miner immune to PVP. So If a barge is mining in a "xero ore" belt then it is invulnerable
This way miners could mine all they wanted with no risk.
it's called spodumain. |
Daimon Kaiera
179
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:27:00 -
[60] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote:Maybe CCP could make an Ore that isn't worth anything on the market, but that makes the miner immune to PVP. So If a barge is mining in a "xero ore" belt then it is invulnerable
This way miners could mine all they wanted with no risk.
I'd do it if 1000 m^3 of Xero ore refined into 1 trit. Here by talk start if go able? |
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
986
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:43:00 -
[61] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank ....
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:44:00 -
[62] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank ....
which is now being removed \o/ |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
986
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:55:00 -
[63] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank .... which is now being removed \o/
I was all for some tank buff on mining ships but CCP took it a step too far if you ask me
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 15:57:00 -
[64] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank .... which is now being removed \o/ I was all for some tank buff on mining ships but CCP took it a step too far if you ask me
with the mackinaw, yes. with the hulk, i think it was roughly right where it was.
that guy from bat country who posts a lot (and who's name i can never remember how to spell) said a hulk with 16k ehp or more was unprofitable to gank. i could fit a max yield hulk with 16k ehp therefore i felt the hulk was spot on. mackinaw, not so much.
i feel all this change will do is push mining ships in to the situation we were in pre barge change, and back in to the situation the changes were introduced to try and move away from. |
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:24:00 -
[65] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank .... which is now being removed \o/ I was all for some tank buff on mining ships but CCP took it a step too far if you ask me with the mackinaw, yes. with the hulk, i think it was roughly right where it was. that guy from bat country who posts a lot (and who's name i can never remember how to spell) said a hulk with 16k ehp or more was unprofitable to gank. i could fit a max yield hulk with 16k ehp therefore i felt the hulk was spot on. mackinaw, not so much. i feel all this change will do is push mining ships in to the situation we were in pre barge change, and back in to the situation the changes were introduced to try and move away from.
meh every barge should be able to fit to 20k-30k ehp if they fit it right which none wants to do(those who say different just want easy kills and ganks and fail at ganking). The grief I saw coming was from the changes to dedicated ore holds being so hugely varied. I think if they want to mine like that they should have to sacrifice some of that tank thus making them more easily ganked. You should not get a 35k m3 ore hold and also hold a 30k+ ehp tank (mackinaw) where as the hulk gets a 8k ore hold and has roughly the same tank give or take. yes I know they may serve 2 different purposes (solo vs fleet) but the balance structure lately seems waaaaay out of wack in alot of regards. |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:27:00 -
[66] - Quote
Thorleifer wrote:meh every barge should be able to fit to 20k-30k ehp if they fit it right which none wants to do(those who say different just want easy kills and ganks and fail at ganking). The grief I saw coming was from the changes to dedicated ore holds being so hugely varied. I think if they want to mine like that they should have to sacrifice some of that tank thus making them more easily ganked. You should not get a 35k m3 ore hold and also hold a 30k+ ehp tank (mackinaw) where as the hulk gets a 8k ore hold and has roughly the same tank give or take. yes I know they may serve 2 different purposes (solo vs fleet) but the balance structure lately seems waaaaay out of wack in alot of regards.
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Khalkotauroi Defence Labs
8031
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:36:00 -
[67] - Quote
It's not particularly hard to avoid a gank when you're mining.
Don't mine from the warpin, pre-bookmark the belts with 3 or 4 bookmarks that allow you to cover the whole belt, especially in systems you often mine, less time spent moving from one end of the belt to another, more time mining. Lady Fappingtons suggestion is also good, especially with huge belts.
Don't warpin, drop your drones, select a roid and hit the lasers and then bugger off, with ore mining you should be watching your cycles anyway, a roid without a full cycle in it isn't worth mining, if you strip mine it leaves nothing for the newish guys who are mining in ventures, you should feel bad about it. Ice miners are the guiltiest of being AFK, because they can and do hit the lasers and disappear for a minimum of 15 minutes, hence they die in their droves.
Most gankers are outlaws, they show up in local and on your overview as such, if you see them in local, be prepared, align to a celestial at 1/2 to 3/4 speed, if you see them on grid, take advantage of already being aligned, and moving to rapidly enter warp.
Fit a tank, possibly drop a MLU and replace it with a damage control, a shield booster is not a tank, shield extenders or resists are what you need, rig for EHP if you can, core defence field extenders would be my choice, and a resist rig if you need it to fill a hole. Downside you may sacrifice a small % of yield, upside you probably won't be replacing your mackinaw or hulk next week because of it
Know your enemy, catalysts are your main predator, there are plenty of resources that show what fits the gankers use, look at them, notice the ammo they use, tank appropriately (hint it's nearly always kinetic and thermal). Thrashers are also used, but they're nowhere near as common.
If you're really paranoid, use a Procuror or a Skiff, fitted properly they're basically impossible to suicide gank without spending a shitton of isk to do it.
It's not hard, you only have to survive for a little longer than it takes Concord to turn up and deal out their retribution. It just takes some preparation and effort to avoid them, gankers put preparation and effort into the way they play, in the form of organisation, their social network, pre-bookmarked spots, scouts etc; why should mining be any different? A war hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, High Chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside. |
Vyanr
SKORPION LEGION
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:53:00 -
[68] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:55:00 -
[69] - Quote
Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object.
your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive.
you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tier one counterpart. |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
986
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 16:59:00 -
[70] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:that guy from bat country who posts a lot (and who's name i can never remember how to spell) said a hulk with 16k ehp or more was unprofitable to gank.
balsack ?
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
|
Vyanr
SKORPION LEGION
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:00:00 -
[71] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart.
I'm sorry that you don't care about your 150m isk, T2 ship enough to protect it. It seems to me that your loss of mat+¬riel is a valid effect from your lack of respect.
Have fun replacing them. |
Daimon Kaiera
179
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:04:00 -
[72] - Quote
Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart. I'm sorry that you don't care about your 150m isk, T2 ship enough to protect it. It seems to me that your loss of mat+¬riel is a valid effect from your lack of respect. Have fun replacing them.
I never spent even 0.1 isk tanking my Retreiever or Procurer. No one ever ganked me.
Seriously guys, it's kind of old. Pop into Kino and shoot at me. Please. I'm begging you. Mining is so boring I....just...need....something to....UNDULL THE TEDIUM. Here by talk start if go able? |
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:04:00 -
[73] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Thorleifer wrote:meh every barge should be able to fit to 20k-30k ehp if they fit it right which none wants to do(those who say different just want easy kills and ganks and fail at ganking). The grief I saw coming was from the changes to dedicated ore holds being so hugely varied. I think if they want to mine like that they should have to sacrifice some of that tank thus making them more easily ganked. You should not get a 35k m3 ore hold and also hold a 30k+ ehp tank (mackinaw) where as the hulk gets a 8k ore hold and has roughly the same tank give or take. yes I know they may serve 2 different purposes (solo vs fleet) but the balance structure lately seems waaaaay out of wack in alot of regards. define "fit it right" please. if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
well there is alot of variances invuln II's shield rigs and dc II can pop a mack to 32k EHP or more. Even though there is the variances having a DC II is better then the idiots out afk mining with nothing but the highs filled for strip miners. You can choose to fit your ship in any fashion but putting on a shield booster is simply dumb as heck, cause the alpha strike alone and possibly a second hit will blow your ship to dust before that booster even cycles.
My point is simple, atleast try to put forth an effort at tanking your 200+ mill barge or don't cry when you are ganked. |
Selene Nask
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:06:00 -
[74] - Quote
I'm newish to the game so my mining alt is just in a retriever or procurer. When I mine, and yes I semi afk when I mine, usually on my main I use a lot of the safety points. Don't stay at warp, align etc. I carry a couple of ecm drones. I don't bother with mining drones. One of the best things that happened in EVE was surviving a highsec gank, while being semi afk when it started. My tank allowed me enough time to hear what was happening and by the time I tabbed in to start trying some ecm stuff Concord "Boom"
I use a procurer for WH mining, tank and with ecm. Was able to break a lock once and another time lasted so long that my corpies had enough time to get to me. And this is with only T2 fittings. That thing will be a rock when I eventually get to TII shields. I'd use it in highsec but I'd rather take the higher risk for the bigger ore hold.
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
998
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:07:00 -
[75] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Fit a tank, possibly drop a MLU and replace it with a damage control, a shield booster is not a tank, shield extenders or resists are what you need, rig for EHP if you can, core defence field extenders would be my choice, and a resist rig if you need it to fill a hole. Downside you may sacrifice a small % of yield, upside you probably won't be replacing your mackinaw or hulk next week because of it [Mackinaw, Tank] Internal Force Field Array I Micro Auxiliary Power Core I Mining Laser Upgrade II
Medium Shield Extender II Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I Thermic Dissipation Amplifier II
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
engineering, shield upgrades, mining upgrades IV; electronics V 35-40k ehp average 38-44 vs antimatter
you could drop the thermic amp for a scanner if you really wanted to i suppose
[Hulk, New Setup 1] Micro B66 Core Augmentation Damage Control II
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Upgraded EM Ward Amplifier I
Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Ancillary Current Router I
shield upgrades IV; electronics, engineering V 27-30k ehp average 27-29 vs antimatter
do i win something |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:07:00 -
[76] - Quote
Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart. I'm sorry that you don't care about your 150m isk, T2 ship enough to protect it. It seems to me that your loss of mat+¬riel is a valid effect from your lack of respect. Have fun replacing them.
it's not that i don't care, it simply isn't economical to do so. a ship should never be made inferior to it's t1 counterpart by fitting a tank. as far as i'm aware nowhere else in the game does this happen except maybe with amour tanked DSTs.
|
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:09:00 -
[77] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:do i win something
you win a quote from me telling you how a retriever mines more than your mackinaw for a fraction of the price. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
998
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:09:00 -
[78] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart. are you comparing the yield of the tanked exhumer with a max yield barge or a tanked barge
because i must be looking at different numbers :( |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
998
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:12:00 -
[79] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:do i win something you win a quote from me telling you how a retriever mines more than your mackinaw for a fraction of the price. please post the tanked retriever fit for comparison |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:12:00 -
[80] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart. are you comparing the yield of the tanked exhumer with a max yield barge or a tanked barge because i must be looking at different numbers :(
max yield barge, since barges lack the slots to fit a meaningful tank even if you sacrificed all the yield bonuses. |
|
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:13:00 -
[81] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Fit a tank, possibly drop a MLU and replace it with a damage control, a shield booster is not a tank, shield extenders or resists are what you need, rig for EHP if you can, core defence field extenders would be my choice, and a resist rig if you need it to fill a hole. Downside you may sacrifice a small % of yield, upside you probably won't be replacing your mackinaw or hulk next week because of it [Mackinaw, Tank] Internal Force Field Array I Micro Auxiliary Power Core I Mining Laser Upgrade II Medium Shield Extender II Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I Thermic Dissipation Amplifier II Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I engineering, shield upgrades, mining upgrades IV; electronics V 35-40k ehp average 38-44 vs antimatter you could drop the thermic amp for a scanner if you really wanted to i suppose [Hulk, New Setup 1] Micro B66 Core Augmentation Damage Control II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Upgraded EM Ward Amplifier I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar Mining Crystal I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Ancillary Current Router I shield upgrades IV; electronics, engineering V 27-30k ehp average 27-29 vs antimatter do i win something
My alt's mack fit is similiar except I have 2 of those invuln II's and a scanner. same rigs too but I have to make up yield with 5 mining drone II's or I get outmined. |
Vyanr
SKORPION LEGION
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:16:00 -
[82] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Vyanr wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
define "fit it right" please.
if you dare say "damage control II" at any point, i am going to reach through my screen and slap you for gross stupidity.
a DCII is a valid form of tanking. Your ignorance of PVP warfare is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically discount 60% instant, minuet power draw resistance bonuses as a stupid object. your ignorance of the very fact that fitting a DCU II makes a 150m exhumer inferior to it's t1 counterpart at it's primary purpose is stiflingly repulsive. you cannot logically sit and argue for a ship to be used it must be inferior to it's cheaper tech one counterpart. I'm sorry that you don't care about your 150m isk, T2 ship enough to protect it. It seems to me that your loss of mat+¬riel is a valid effect from your lack of respect. Have fun replacing them. it's not that i don't care, it simply isn't economical to do so. a ship should never be made inferior to it's t1 counterpart by fitting a tank. as far as i'm aware nowhere else in the game does this happen except maybe with amour tanked DSTs.
I dunno, constantly replacing 150m isk ships +fittings verses 35m isk ships + fittings for about the same mining output per/hr is pretty obvious which one I would care more about protecting.
But it's cool if you don't want to protect your assets, it just means you can't really whine about it when you lose it, because you didn't bother to protect it. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Khalkotauroi Defence Labs
8031
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:17:00 -
[83] - Quote
Benny Ohu gets it, you have to get a good balance between efficiency and survivability.
A war hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, High Chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside. |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:19:00 -
[84] - Quote
Vyanr wrote:I dunno, constantly replacing 150m isk ships +fittings verses 35m isk ships + fittings for about the same mining output per/hr is pretty obvious which one I would care more about protecting.
But it's cool if you don't want to protect your assets, it just means you can't really whine about it when you lose it, because you didn't bother to protect it.
if they provide the same mining output per hour, why would you buy a 150m isk ship to begin with? hence, my point.
i didn't say i didn't want to protect my assets; i just pointed out a damage control isn't the way to do that unless you want a 200m isk pinata that's inferior at it's intended purpose than it's t1 counterpart. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
3949
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:19:00 -
[85] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank .... which is now being removed \o/ No, Dave, it's not. You're losing at most 5% of your resistance bonus. That's hardly taking your huge buff away.
But you knew that... To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Dave Stark
2565
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:22:00 -
[86] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Dave Stark wrote:flakeys wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless?
.
Uhm , yeah the barge buff was only a few percent extra tank .... which is now being removed \o/ No, Dave, it's not. You're losing at most 5% of your resistance bonus. That's hardly taking your huge buff away. But you knew that...
but i read it on evenews24, it must be true.
all in all though, the only ship the resistance changes will hurt is the hulk. *shrug* |
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:23:00 -
[87] - Quote
solve all your problems, fly a skiff, tank that pig, have a 15k m3 ore hold and be happy. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:28:00 -
[88] - Quote
Thorleifer wrote:solve all your problems, fly a skiff, tank that pig, have a 15k m3 ore hold and be happy.
i'm almost certain there's a reason why the skiff and procurer combined mine less than 10% of all the non-mercoxit ore mined in the game.
oh yeah, it's because they suck. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1000
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:31:00 -
[89] - Quote
i'm trying to fit a retriever in EFT
when fitted with an adaptive invuln II i don't need a MAPC in the lows so it mines the same as the Mack. the disadvantage is the retriever will have to stagger the strip miner activations. with an MSE2 it'll mine less than the mack but doesn't worry about capacitor
in both cases the flight of mining drones on the mack takes its yield way above the retriever. the mack's EHP is higher and there's a bigger ore bay
about 18-20k EHP on the retriever fit |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1282
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:35:00 -
[90] - Quote
So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
|
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:35:00 -
[91] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i'm trying to fit a retriever in EFT
when fitted with an adaptive invuln II i don't need a MAPC in the lows so it mines the same as the Mack. the disadvantage is the retriever will have to stagger the strip miner activations. with an MSE2 it'll mine less than the mack but doesn't worry about capacitor
in both cases the flight of mining drones on the mack takes its yield way above the retriever. the mack's EHP is higher and there's a bigger ore bay
about 18-20k EHP on the retriever fit
both ships can fit mining drones. also a retriever will never mine the same as a mac at max skills, one will always mine more than the other. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:37:00 -
[92] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw?
retriever mines 23.3% more than the mackinaw.
simple fact is t1 mining barges are too close to their t2 counterparts. if you could sacrifice yield for tank on an exhumer, and not have it's yield dwarfed by that of it's t1 counterpart i wouldn't even entertain this discussion. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1001
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:39:00 -
[93] - Quote
i wouldn't take out the retriever or the mack without combat drones is why i didn't count them. if you took the mining drones, the retriever would mine about the same as the mack, but without the ore bay, the extra EHP or the hobgobs the mack can carry in addition |
Vyanr
SKORPION LEGION
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:40:00 -
[94] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: [Mackinaw, Tank] (tanking fit)
MLU II / Ice buff DCII Co-processor I (or II)
AIF II x 2 Medium Ancillary Shield booster
x2 Modulated Strip/Ice Miner IIs
x2 Medium CDFE Is
33.6k EHP, ~260 active DPS tank against AM.
more than long enough to survive long enough for Concord support.
You don't really need a scanner for a mining barge. you |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:41:00 -
[95] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i wouldn't take out the retriever or the mack without combat drones is why i didn't count them. if you took the mining drones, the retriever would mine about the same as the mack, but without the ore bay, the extra EHP or the hobgobs the mack can carry in addition
you can, a retriever has sufficient tank to tank 0.7 belt rats until full [unsure if that holds true in 0.5, though]. in addition belt rats will always target an orca first if one is present. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1001
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:44:00 -
[96] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? about 120 yield per minute (no implants/boosts) in favour of the retriever vs. my mack fit, but that requires mining drones and without tank or hobgobs you might die to belt rats :(
i'm no ~fitting expert~ mind |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:46:00 -
[97] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? about 120 yield per minute (no implants/boosts) in favour of the retriever vs. my mack fit, but that requires mining drones and without tank or hobgobs you might die to belt rats :( i'm no ~fitting expert~ mind
try 241m3 per min. although we are talking 0 mlu mack vs 3mlu ret. |
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:47:00 -
[98] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? retriever mines 23.3% more than the mackinaw. simple fact is t1 mining barges are too close to their t2 counterparts. if you could sacrifice yield for tank on an exhumer, and not have it's yield dwarfed by that of it's t1 counterpart i wouldn't even entertain this discussion.
I would be interested to see what fits you are comparing that show the yield that different. My alt has both those ships and with a good tank and yield the difference is more around 10% if that. Now if we go solo mining with no Orca the Mack out mines the retriever on sheer ore hold size since it does not need so many trips to station to dump (unless you are dumb enough to jetcan mine). The Mack can also take 5 t2 combat drones and 5 mining 2 drones so it can fend off any rats with ease. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:49:00 -
[99] - Quote
Thorleifer wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? retriever mines 23.3% more than the mackinaw. simple fact is t1 mining barges are too close to their t2 counterparts. if you could sacrifice yield for tank on an exhumer, and not have it's yield dwarfed by that of it's t1 counterpart i wouldn't even entertain this discussion. I would be interested to see what fits you are comparing that show the yield that different. My alt has both those ships and with a good tank and yield the difference is more around 10% if that. Now if we go solo mining with no Orca the Mack out mines the retriever on sheer ore hold size since it does not need so many trips to station to dump (unless you are dumb enough to jetcan mine). The Mack can also take 5 t2 combat drones and 5 mining 2 drones so it can fend off any rats with ease.
0 mlu mackinaw, vs 3 mlu retriever. i was asked for max tanked mackinaw (as in, every slot for tank) vs a full yield ret. so a ret with 3 mlus. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1001
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:49:00 -
[100] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? about 120 yield per minute (no implants/boosts) in favour of the retriever vs. my mack fit, but that requires mining drones and without tank or hobgobs you might die to belt rats :( i'm no ~fitting expert~ mind try 241m3 per min. although we are talking 0 mlu mack vs 3mlu ret. nah i had room for an MLU2 on the tanked mack. i'm looking at all V characters with the t1 veld crystals in the lasers, both ships with drones
e: mining drones* |
|
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:50:00 -
[101] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? about 120 yield per minute (no implants/boosts) in favour of the retriever vs. my mack fit, but that requires mining drones and without tank or hobgobs you might die to belt rats :( i'm no ~fitting expert~ mind try 241m3 per min. although we are talking 0 mlu mack vs 3mlu ret.
wait, so your comparison is dumb. 0 MLU Mack vs a 3 MLU Ret? That is a good comparison for you?
This thread does deliver. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:52:00 -
[102] - Quote
Thorleifer wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar wrote:So, what's the difference in yield between a full yield Retriever and a max tank Mackinaw? about 120 yield per minute (no implants/boosts) in favour of the retriever vs. my mack fit, but that requires mining drones and without tank or hobgobs you might die to belt rats :( i'm no ~fitting expert~ mind try 241m3 per min. although we are talking 0 mlu mack vs 3mlu ret. wait, so your comparison is dumb. 0 MLU Mack vs a 3 MLU Ret? That is a good comparison for you? This thread does deliver.
it's not my comparison. some one asked for it, i delivered. so yes, this thread does deliver. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1282
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:55:00 -
[103] - Quote
Either way, with so little difference in effective yield, there is little reason to use a Mackinaw over a Retriever in public high-sec. Not worth the investment. Unless you are mining on your own often in mission locations or gravimetric sites, the Retriever is the ship to fly.
Considering the amount of Retrievers I can see in belts compared to Mackinaws, the miners are agreeing. Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8665
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:56:00 -
[104] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:Ganking is basicly EvE with Easy-mode on.
True enough. Leaving your poorly tanked ship AFK at a celestial is about as easy as you can make it for people to gank you, short of actually activating self destruct yourself.
That only leaves the mystery of why anyone would think that it's surprising that other players will pick up easy wins and profits in a competitive PvP game.
Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:59:00 -
[105] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Either way, with so little difference in effective yield, there is little reason to use a Mackinaw over a Retriever in public high-sec. Not worth the investment. Unless you are mining on your own often in mission locations or gravimetric sites, the Retriever is the ship to fly.
Considering the amount of Retrievers I can see in belts compared to Mackinaws, the miners are agreeing.
fun fact.
retrievers account for more volume mined than mackinaws when looking at high sec ores. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1001
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 17:59:00 -
[106] - Quote
Abrazzar asked for that comparison, I assume it was just out of interest
I'm more interested in the comparison between a practically gank-tanked mack between a practically gank-tanked retriever, and I believe the tanked mack comes out on top with a respectable yield, more ehp, more cargo and a flight of drones
even versus the max yield retriever, though, the mack's yield is comparable |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1001
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:02:00 -
[107] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Either way, with so little difference in effective yield, there is little reason to use a Mackinaw over a Retriever in public high-sec. Not worth the investment. Unless you are mining on your own often in mission locations or gravimetric sites, the Retriever is the ship to fly.
Considering the amount of Retrievers I can see in belts compared to Mackinaws, the miners are agreeing. fun fact. retrievers account for more volume mined than mackinaws when looking at high sec ores. (faster training time for alts/bots i reckon but i won't say for sure because i don't know) |
baltec1
Bat Country
5954
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:03:00 -
[108] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar asked for that comparison, I assume it was just out of interest
I'm more interested in the comparison between a practically gank-tanked mack between a practically gank-tanked retriever, and I believe the tanked mack comes out on top with a respectable yield, more ehp, more cargo and a flight of drones
even versus the max yield retriever, though, the mack's yield is comparable
Miners will pick the single worst tanked ship with the highest chance of getting ganked. Its not known why they do this. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:03:00 -
[109] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar asked for that comparison, I assume it was just out of interest
I'm more interested in the comparison between a practically gank-tanked mack between a practically gank-tanked retriever, and I believe the tanked mack comes out on top with a respectable yield, more ehp, more cargo and a flight of drones
even versus the max yield retriever, though, the mack's yield is comparable
the difference is, when people choose to fly a retriever they don't tank it with modules and ehp, they tank with isk.
it's not unreasonable to assume that in any scenario, the retriever will always be fit for max yield. |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:05:00 -
[110] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Abrazzar asked for that comparison, I assume it was just out of interest
I'm more interested in the comparison between a practically gank-tanked mack between a practically gank-tanked retriever, and I believe the tanked mack comes out on top with a respectable yield, more ehp, more cargo and a flight of drones
even versus the max yield retriever, though, the mack's yield is comparable Miners will pick the single worst tanked ship with the highest chance of getting ganked. Its not known why they do this.
worst tanked ship mines most. |
|
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:07:00 -
[111] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Either way, with so little difference in effective yield, there is little reason to use a Mackinaw over a Retriever in public high-sec. Not worth the investment. Unless you are mining on your own often in mission locations or gravimetric sites, the Retriever is the ship to fly.
Considering the amount of Retrievers I can see in belts compared to Mackinaws, the miners are agreeing. fun fact. retrievers account for more volume mined than mackinaws when looking at high sec ores. (faster training time for alts/bots i reckon but i won't say for sure because i don't know)
my alt can fly a mackinaw, it's still sitting in a retriever.
i would however, be VERY interested in seeing an updated set of data. i'm using old dev blog data. the difference would be interesting. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13585
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:19:00 -
[112] - Quote
Just to answer the questionsGǪGallamoth Sickle wrote:but can someone explain to me how/when eve became a gankers paradise in high sec? 2002 or so. It's been constantly nerfed for that putpose ever since, though, which is why it's an ultra-rare and ridiculously easily avoided event these days.
Quote: I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m? Because ISK is not a balancing factor. So in fact, you're asking the exact wrong question. Really, it should be GÇ£why do you need as much as 8GÇô10M worth of ship to kill 50M GÇö it shouldn't even be a 1/100th of thatGÇ¥.
Quote:So i mean what defense is there? A tank, some support, and paying attention goes a very very long way.
Quote:Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless? Because destroyers were horribly underpowered and because the ganked are utterly and completely irrelevant when doing that, since none of their multitudinous defensive options were affected. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5954
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:20:00 -
[113] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
worst tanked ship mines most.
Isn't it great how a miners mind works? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3199
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:22:00 -
[114] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote:Maybe CCP could make an Ore that isn't worth anything on the market, but that makes the miner immune to PVP. So If a barge is mining in a "xero ore" belt then it is invulnerable
This way miners could mine all they wanted with no risk.
Already exists.
Dave Stark wrote:with the mackinaw, yes. with the hulk, i think it was roughly right where it was.
that guy from bat country who posts a lot (and who's name i can never remember how to spell) said a hulk with 16k ehp or more was unprofitable to gank. i could fit a max yield hulk with 16k ehp therefore i felt the hulk was spot on. mackinaw, not so much.
i feel all this change will do is push mining ships in to the situation we were in pre barge change, and back in to the situation the changes were introduced to try and move away from.
Just to mention, because the Mack uses one less expensive Strip Miner, it doesn't need quite as much tank to protect its fittings, because there's a lower value of fittings available to drop. That's part of its tank as well. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Dave Stark
2566
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:29:00 -
[115] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dave Stark wrote:
worst tanked ship mines most.
Isn't it great how a miners mind works?
and CCP's
*points at the hulk* |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3199
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 18:33:00 -
[116] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless? Because destroyers were horribly underpowered and because the ganked are utterly and completely irrelevant when doing that, since none of their multitudinous defensive options were affected.
Also, due to the simultaneous insurance nerf to ganking, it costs more in destroyers to gank a mining barge than it used to in Cruisers. The size of the gank ship is irrelevant, the cost to gank is the relevant part and Crucible increased that cost (same thing with ABCs vs insured BSes for freighters). This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Call Rollard
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:41:00 -
[117] - Quote
Even if you tanked out a Hulk or Mackinaw.
You can have 20 Catalysts suicide gank fitted for a total of 200 million which is the equivalent of a mining barge
Try fitting a Hulk or Mackinaw that can tank 18 Catalysts suicide ganking it, It won't be possible. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5957
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:52:00 -
[118] - Quote
Call Rollard wrote:Even if you tanked out a Hulk or Mackinaw. You can have 20 Catalysts suicide gank fitted for a total of 200 million which is the equivalent of a mining barge Try fitting a Hulk or Mackinaw that can tank 18 Catalysts suicide ganking it, It won't be possible.
Fit said hulk in a way that would provide a profit for said 18 catalysts. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3994
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:54:00 -
[119] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp. I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis. They are a skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant. And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV.
These inhuman miners are called "bots" and can be setup to insta-warp to safe or POS in a variety of potentially dangerous situations.
If humans do what you say and they mine, then they are sorry morons.
In fact they are playing the least paid and least satisfying profession in game with the concentration and energy consumption that deserve other professions a multiple if not an order of magnitude better of such income.
Current mining is done AFK because it's such a sorry and poor excuse of a mechanic that it does not deserve any better than to be performed while AFK. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Call Rollard
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:55:00 -
[120] - Quote
Call Rollard wrote:Even if you tanked out a Hulk or Mackinaw. You can have 20 Catalysts suicide gank fitted for a total of 200 million which is the equivalent of a mining barge Try fitting a Hulk or Mackinaw that can tank 18 Catalysts suicide ganking it, It won't be possible.
I meant Exhumer lol |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3994
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:56:00 -
[121] - Quote
Can't edit posting from satelite but I want to add:
don't mistake the above with an unneeded defense for max yield dumbies. They deserve to pop as much as mining deserves to be done AFK. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
baltec1
Bat Country
5957
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 19:57:00 -
[122] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Can't edit posting from satelite but I want to add:
My imagination probably just made this seem a lot better than it really is. |
ctx2007
Wychwood and Wells Beer needs you
283
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 20:11:00 -
[123] - Quote
I've seen them miners ganking those defenceless roids ... totally unfair. You only-árealise you life has been a waste of time, when you wake up dead. |
March rabbit
epTa Team Inc.
621
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 20:26:00 -
[124] - Quote
Miilla wrote:Why are you whining about a ganking paradise? Now when we do something bad, EVERYBODY can attack us as we become suspect, that INCLUDES being podded and losing a clone and implants.
Ganking is anything but a pradise in Empire, infact it is even more riskier and higher penalty now in Retribution, in fact some would say it went too far on making Empire TOO SAFE. i see something strange here |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3994
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 20:28:00 -
[125] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Can't edit posting from satelite but I want to add:
My imagination probably just made this seem a lot better than it really is.
Hehe I am not on Mars (yet!), just in the middle of the ocean, (ab)using the ship's satelite comms. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3199
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 21:21:00 -
[126] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Hehe I am not on Mars (yet!), just in the middle of the ocean, (ab)using the ship's satelite comms.
On the Ocean on your way to Mars?
I know EVE's tolerant of latency, but the 30 minute ping might be a little much. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
baltec1
Bat Country
5960
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 21:23:00 -
[127] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Hehe I am not on Mars (yet!), just in the middle of the ocean, (ab)using the ship's satelite comms. On the Ocean on your way to Mars? I know EVE's tolerant of latency, but the 30 minute ping might be a little much.
Good enough for ice mining. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime Kraken.
452
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 21:48:00 -
[128] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:Skeln Thargensen wrote:advice given to miners by people who don't mine is pretty worthless. Hey now let's not confuse the perverted activities you people do in high sec to actual mining. What you people do have about as much to do with mining as ratting has to do with pvp. I have worked with actual miners and I guard miners on a weekly basis. They are a skittish race of critters that pack tank and they dock when going to the bathroom. They are so focused on their surroundings that they can barely pay attention to the mining itself. A sudden move or loud noise and they are gone in an instant. And do not give me that bull about miners time to accelerate to warp speed. You do not get ganked because they catch you before reaching warp speed. They catch you because you activate the mining lasers and then go make breakfast or alt tab or watch TV. These inhuman miners are called "bots" and can be setup to insta-warp to safe or POS in a variety of potentially dangerous situations. If humans do what you say and they mine, then they are sorry morons. In fact they are playing the least paid and least satisfying profession in game with the concentration and energy consumption that deserve other professions a multiple if not an order of magnitude better of such income. Current mining is done AFK because it's such a sorry and poor excuse of a mechanic that it does not deserve any better than to be performed while AFK.
I disagree. If mining was ten times more profitable I have no doubt that people would bot even more due to the increased incentive. People mine using bots simply because its possible. The same reason people run pvp bots in battlegrounds in WoW. If it can be botted then someone will do it just for the rewards. We miss you Saede. |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 22:56:00 -
[129] - Quote
well this post turned into exactly what i thought it would.....
which is 50 people giving their opinion on how to avoid being ganked (what tank to use what ship to fly) and or people giving their version of why they support ganks. I love the posts about getting logi pilots to sit next to you when your mining. The post where the guy goes "maybe one day miners will learn to use logi pilots" yea thats real realistic that your going to find people literally willing to sit next to you glued to their computer doing nothing for hours on end. As if mining wasnt boring enough for self benefit you think you are going to find (on a regular basis) people insane enough to attentively watch their screen for hours of mindless mining just on the off chance you might get ganked at little to no profit for themselves?
This post was about destroyers costing next to nothing compared to what they can bring down in a gank thats it. It was NOT about complaining about the gank, how to stop a gank, or that high sec should be safe, yet the mindless drones just take the EASY road and go off talking about the fact that ganking is harder and ganking should be allowed and bla bla bla it goes on like this in ever response.
Why shouldn't destroyers just cost 2 mill to outfit or maybe 500k? where does it end? when would you the public consider it too cheap to fit a destroyer that can take out a 50 or 200 mill ship? Is there any limit in price difference that EVE players would object too? I swear posts like this are just excuses for fan boys to take up arms for CCP and admit no fault. I just wonder if the cost of a destroyer load out was 200k would you care? From the tone o f responses the community would probably defend that as well.
And of course when you say "i think destroyers are too cheap for what they can do" the mindless rebuttal response is "so what? you think only ships of equal value should be able to kill each other?" No....obviously that is not what i think although it would make trolling this OP so much easier for you. Im saying that when you consider all things such as High sec, a mining ship with no real tank either ( i said this already that mackinaws and skifs are nice tank but the macks can still be killed with cheap hardware such as multiple gankers in cheap ships), how horribly boring it is to mine that you expect entire groups of people to be glued to their screen working in some kind of team on Team speak ready to move at a moments notice isjust stupidity and un realistic.
I simply dont think the price difference is fair when you have 50-200 million mining vessels taken down by cheap throw away ships that a player could care less about losing to concord because it is literally throw away money that is a problem. I mean why not just have tech I frigates with 500k fittings killing mining vessels? is 8-10 million that much different? Its just ******** the ganker stands to lose nothing, infact they can nearly break even or make money in some cases by ganking a high sec miner.
ITs just my opinion i know but its just stupid and i guess no one agrees with it and thats fine but at least when you post stay on topic instead of twisting it into some easy to argue topic like ganking in high sec vs not ganking in high sec or how to avoid getting ganked all of which has nothing to do with his post
|
Dave Stark
2569
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:02:00 -
[130] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:infact they can nearly break even or make money in some cases by ganking a high sec miner.
even fitting a basic tank makes this impossible. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5962
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:05:00 -
[131] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
This post was about destroyers costing next to nothing compared to what they can bring down in a gank thats it.
If tanking was based upon isk price then the federate issue megathron would have a base tank 11 times greater than a titan. Thats how stupid an idea tanking based upon the cost of a ships hull is.
|
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:07:00 -
[132] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:infact they can nearly break even or make money in some cases by ganking a high sec miner.
even fitting a basic tank makes this impossible.
this is completely untrue as i personaly have lost minign vessels with all tank built on them. And if you happen to have a ship that one destroyer cant bring down they simply bring 2 or 3 its not uncommon for them to group up and even bringing 3 friends to help you the cost of your losses are so minimal and so srpead out no one cares.
So the simple mindless "just tank your mining ship and dont go for max yeild" argument breaks way the FK down when you consider more than one ganker......which like i already said IS NOT UNCO |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:10:00 -
[133] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
This post was about destroyers costing next to nothing compared to what they can bring down in a gank thats it.
If tanking was based upon isk price then the federate issue megathron would have a base tank 11 times greater than a titan. Thats how stupid an idea tanking based upon the cost of a ships hull is.
once agian you take what i say and try to twist it into the easiest to troll stance you can imagine
I NEVER SAID TANK SHOUDL BE BASED ON COST OF SHIPS? I simply said that mining ships are just getting ganked way to easy. All i hear is fly a mackinaw fly a skiff....well i do belive in my OP i was defending newer players i even said that in my post. NEWER PLAYERS CANT FLY MACKINAWS AND SKIFFS so its kina a mute point when you tell people to just sit on their hands till they can fly the tech 2 ship that allows you not to be blow the F up in 2 seconds in order to mine. |
Dave Stark
2569
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:14:00 -
[134] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:infact they can nearly break even or make money in some cases by ganking a high sec miner.
even fitting a basic tank makes this impossible. this is completely untrue as i personaly have lost minign vessels with all tank built on them. And if you happen to have a ship that one destroyer cant bring down they simply bring 2 or 3 its not uncommon for them to group up and even bringing 3 friends to help you the cost of your losses are so minimal and so srpead out no one cares. So the simple mindless "just tank your mining ship and dont go for max yeild" argument breaks way the FK down when you consider more than one ganker......which like i already said IS NOT UNCO
except if there's more than one ganker, they're obviously not making any profit.... as i said, impossible. even a rack of meta 4 guns, at jita price, is arguably going to cost you about the same as your potential profit from ganking a mackinaw. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5962
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:15:00 -
[135] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
once agian you take what i say and try to twist it into the easiest to troll stance you can imagine
I NEVER SAID TANK SHOUDL BE BASED ON COST OF SHIPS? I simply said that mining ships are just getting ganked way to easy. All i hear is fly a mackinaw fly a skiff....well i do belive in my OP i was defending newer players i even said that in my post. NEWER PLAYERS CANT FLY MACKINAWS AND SKIFFS so its kina a mute point when you tell people to just sit on their hands till they can fly the tech 2 ship that allows you not to be blow the F up in 2 seconds in order to mine.
Look at this
Can you see the problem?
No tank fitted at all. THAT is why they die so easily, they make it easy to kill them by fitting no defences at all. |
Dave Stark
2569
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:19:00 -
[136] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
once agian you take what i say and try to twist it into the easiest to troll stance you can imagine
I NEVER SAID TANK SHOUDL BE BASED ON COST OF SHIPS? I simply said that mining ships are just getting ganked way to easy. All i hear is fly a mackinaw fly a skiff....well i do belive in my OP i was defending newer players i even said that in my post. NEWER PLAYERS CANT FLY MACKINAWS AND SKIFFS so its kina a mute point when you tell people to just sit on their hands till they can fly the tech 2 ship that allows you not to be blow the F up in 2 seconds in order to mine.
Look at thisCan you see the problem? No tank fitted at all. THAT is why they die so easily, they make it easy to kill them by fitting no defences at all.
yes, he was flying a covetor. |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:19:00 -
[137] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
once agian you take what i say and try to twist it into the easiest to troll stance you can imagine
I NEVER SAID TANK SHOUDL BE BASED ON COST OF SHIPS? I simply said that mining ships are just getting ganked way to easy. All i hear is fly a mackinaw fly a skiff....well i do belive in my OP i was defending newer players i even said that in my post. NEWER PLAYERS CANT FLY MACKINAWS AND SKIFFS so its kina a mute point when you tell people to just sit on their hands till they can fly the tech 2 ship that allows you not to be blow the F up in 2 seconds in order to mine.
Look at thisCan you see the problem? No tank fitted at all. THAT is why they die so easily, they make it easy to kill them by fitting no defences at all.
as i already said in previous post i have fit tanked retrivers that get popped easy by one guy |
baltec1
Bat Country
5962
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:21:00 -
[138] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
as i already said in previous post i have fit tanked retrivers that get popped easy by one guy
Then you are either fitting them wrong or going into lower sec space.
Infact I have already pointed out the mistakes you made in the very first responce to this thread.. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3242
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:21:00 -
[139] - Quote
I will add to this thread that while I have lost exhumers to opportunistic ganks (seriously, the one time I take a leak while mining, a bunch of cruisers and destroyers suicide gank me), I have never lost a combat ship in the same way. This is despite having on many occasions leaving a Tengu flying away from station for half an hour, having forgotten to turn on the autopilot.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
1196
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:35:00 -
[140] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:So i mean what defense is there? Did you consider actually taking any action whatsoever to defend yourself?
Seriously, miners have been granted every conceivable concession regarding suicide ganking bar it being made outright impossible, if at this point you're still unable to defend your mining barge then you probably should find a different game to play. There are innumerable things you can do to mitigate the risk of suicide ganking but clearly you're not doing any of them and the repercussions for unlawful aggression in empire space are more severe than they have ever been.
It's always "Please CCP just one more nerf" with you people. |
|
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:36:00 -
[141] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
as i already said in previous post i have fit tanked retrivers that get popped easy by one guy
Then you are either fitting them wrong or going into lower sec space. Infact I have already pointed out the mistakes you made in the very first responce to this thread.. You had a Kinetic hole and were in 0.5 space. Use a procurer for that area anf plug up that hole.
yes you pointed out that i had a kenetic hole but failed to mention they guy ganking me used only thermal damage...... so yea |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13588
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:yes you pointed out that i had a kenetic hole but failed to mention they guy ganking me used only thermal damage...... so yea Unless they were using missiles or drones (both utterly horrid ganking weapons, which would require you to be horribly fitted to die to them), they most certainly did not do only thermal damage.
So yeah, no.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5963
|
Posted - 2013.04.14 23:39:00 -
[143] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
yes you pointed out that i had a kenetic hole but failed to mention they guy ganking me used only thermal damage...... so yea
Blasters, using void...
The Void Xenon charge is a high-powered blaster charge that delivers an extremely powerful blast of kinetic energy. |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 00:17:00 -
[144] - Quote
that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13588
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 00:26:00 -
[145] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair Of course it's fair. That's the whole point.
It means you can't just throw money on a problem GÇö something that would make the game horribly unfair if it was the case. Cost is not a balancing factor, and as soon as you fall into the GÇ£more ISK, must be betterGÇ¥ trap, you're running head-long into allowing over-powered things to exist and screwing over everyone who don't want to grind for them.
It's actually the other way around: since you've spent that much money on the ship, you should probably think about trying to protect it so that someone can't come along and blow it up in some cheap throw-away ship. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Dave Stark
2572
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 00:34:00 -
[146] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair
wait, who said this game had to be fair? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3200
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 00:40:00 -
[147] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair
So... you're saying that ships should not die to ships that cost less than them?
Should that be true of all ships, or just yours? All areas of the game, or just the ones you prefer? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
1196
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 00:54:00 -
[148] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair If I lose my 2.5 billion isk pod to a 2 million isk slasher is that unfair?
The cost of something has no bearing on how survivable it should be under conditions it's not intended for. Industrial ships are just that, industrial ships, combat ships beat them at combat, typically very quickly.
However, if you desperately need more tank why don't you just fly one of the mining ships designed to withstand much greater punishment?
Oh that's right you don't actually want to take any action yourself, you want CCP to spoon feed you everything. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2209
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 01:22:00 -
[149] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair A 30 million ISK interceptor can warp disrupt a 2.2 billion ISK carrier or dred indefinitely (with little to no way for the capital to escape). A 13 million ISK Incursus (standard dual rep fit) can potentially kill a 160 million ISK Zealot... provided it gets the proper warp in.
Are these two situations unfair due to the gargantuan gap betweenthe prices? Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13592
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 01:24:00 -
[150] - Quote
GǪand while we're at it, fun fact: a T1 frigate can kill a Titan in roughly 3-+ hours. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts Hegemonous Pandorum
142
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 01:42:00 -
[151] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:that may be true but still off topic. The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair i dont care what anyone says its just too big a spread for it to be fair
Don't let any super capital or titan pilots see your post. They get all hot and bothered when someone mentions that isk tanking should be a thing. |
Gallamoth Sickle
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 03:29:00 -
[152] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote:The fact that i may or may not survive based on wether or not i have top of the line maxed tank on my 50m retriever to die to a 8m catalyst is not fair Of course it's fair. That's the whole point. It means you can't just throw money on a problem GÇö something that would make the game horribly unfair if it was the case. Cost is not a balancing factor, and as soon as you fall into the GÇ£more ISK, must be betterGÇ¥ trap, you're running head-long into allowing over-powered things to exist and screwing over everyone who don't want to grind for them. It's actually the other way around: since you've spent that much money on the ship, you should probably think about trying to protect it so that someone can't come along and blow it up in some cheap throw-away ship.
wow its almost pointless to even post things because i seem to constantly have to be re posting things i already said becasue people joinin the conv way late after not knowing all the facts.
im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it.
the only answer is to simply fly a better higher skill ship such as a mackinaw. all this talk about tank is just bull . Because it simply doesnt stop the ganking you people act as though all miners put max yeild builds on then complain when they get ganked but that is simply un true. Even if you tank up a retriever i still dies no matter what you do it dies. Even a tanked mackinaw can die to only 2 or 3 catalysts.
My complaint is that ganking is so out of control that people make accounts just to destroy other people because the cost to do so is worthless. My point is that maybe if it didnt cost a worthless amount of money to blow up miners flying stuff that is so outragiously more expensive the game would be more friendly to people that dont have the skills to fly a mackinaw or the 150-200 million to buy one. Not everyone can just grab the best tech 2 gear and ships for every situation and fly them. Not everyone can afford to lose 200m in ship and equipment just cause 2 people feel like wasting a worthless 20 mill between the 2 of them.
I dont think thats fair i think if your rational you would not think its fair either. If a mining ship is gunna cost 50 mill i t should have some basic ability to resist the bull crap that is going on in high sec. Im not talking about null sec or other ships im talking about High sec its freaking ******** unless your an already established player you cant do anything to defend your self agianst it and that is stupid to me |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1546
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 03:41:00 -
[153] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it. Nonsense. You could, for instance, actually pay attention to the game and formulate strategies based on your newfound perception of things happening around you. Professional bad guys were unfortunately not available so instead they sent me. Voter response is quite good this time around: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qCaz2OlMecY/UWhTTh_NfFI/AAAAAAAAPOE/ryjfQkApycs/s1600/05.jpg |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3203
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 03:58:00 -
[154] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it.
The problem is that "Can this be ganked" is not the appropriate question. The appropriate question is "Can this be ganked profitably." And there are plenty of Retriever fits that are unprofitable to gank.
You can also use a Procurer which is unprofitable to gank with virtually any fit.
Or, you can use any number of tactics to stay alive that happen to require being at the keyboard and alert but don't rely on tank.(Bonus: these also protect you from unprofitable ganks)
Saying "This is bad because my AFK ship can be ganked" is ridiculous. Any ship can be ganked, no matter the fitting. That's the inevitable result of illegal agression being possible. The balance issue is what ships with what fittings should be profitable to gank. I happen to think that most fitted, untanked ships should be profitable to gank, and guess what. Most are. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
ZAKURELL0 LINDA
Arkhon Industries Solarmark Coalition
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 04:09:00 -
[155] - Quote
a normal player should actually google for mining tips / mining 101 / blah blah blah BEFORE actually jump into mining, it is not rocket science that one shall read and know more about wt u r jumping into. ANY mining survival guide would tell you to arm urself, expecially in systems below 0.6. lossing a barge / exhumer to a ganker is ALWAYS ur own fault.
but one should understand that ship will explode some day (better not today ). I did lost a barge for a pee, but so what, **** happens. stop complaining and start mining RIP Iron Lady |
Rhedea
Rhedea Corp Of Mordor
14
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 04:17:00 -
[156] - Quote
I mine, there is nothing wrong with the ganking that goes on. Can mining be any more of a snooze fest if ganking wasn't allowed? Being pester by 'skeaders just makes my day. I mine in two accounts in hulks, no armour, no insurance, jet canning in a bridge system surrounded by low sec. (not a bitter vet) |
Raiz Nhell
Kangaroo Ate my baby Orchestrated Alliance
255
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 04:32:00 -
[157] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it.
This goes for any ship... not just mining barges/industrials...
Any ship can be ganked regardless of tank... that is the way it should be...
Everything is a trade off and everything has its role... YOU have a mining/industrial YOU should avoid being shot at YOU can do that by using Dscan, staying aligned and watching the omnipotent Local window.
Once the shooting starts you have bought a shovel to a gunfight... your going to die.
Losing a ship is your fault... no one elses... you have the tools to survive, use them or die in a fire There is no such thing as a fair fight...
If your fighting fair you have automatically put yourself at a disadvantage. |
DelBoy Trades
Trotter Independent Traders.
527
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 05:30:00 -
[158] - Quote
I couldn't care less about gankers ganking miners in hisec, doesn't bother me, but one must pose the question, if someone is so intent on killing people, why not just move to low/null?
inb4 James315 bullshit. Damn nature, you scary! |
Frying Doom
2335
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 05:33:00 -
[159] - Quote
DelBoy Trades wrote:I couldn't care less about gankers ganking miners in hisec, doesn't bother me, but one must pose the question, if someone is so intent on killing people, why not just move to low/null?
inb4 James315 bullshit. Because people in Lo-sec and Null have guns.
Haven't you noticed the patern, mining barges, exhumers and freighters, all ships you cannot fit a gun too.
In more dangerous areas of space people might shoot at them first. Vote Now! My recommendations are:-á 1.James Arget 2.Ayeson 3.Nathan Jameson 4.Cipreh 5.Chitsa Jason 6. Malcanis 7. Mike Azariah 8. Ripard Teg 9. Mangala Solaris 10. Ali Aras 11. Roc Wieler And remember not voting is the same as voting for Null. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2210
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:10:00 -
[160] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it. Protecting yourself is more than just tanking damage. And even if you do see it as such, you do have options.
You can: - probe down and mine in gravametric belts. Your average suicide ganker isn't going to spend time probing down one or two barges when there are other systems with other belts with other miners in them.
- mine in missions. There are often asteroids that can be found in missions. Not the best quality of rocks around mind you... but as with gravametric belts, finding you requires probes and effort. And you have the added bonus of seeing them on D-scan well ahead of time if there are acceleration gates they have to navigate.
- if applying effort in the above two isn't to your liking, you can always fall back on the Procurer. With little effort you can make it such that it requires way more suicide gankers to kill you than they have the numbers for. Sure, you lose out on that big ore hold and you won't be mining fast... but that's the price you pay for "safety."
tl;dr... make it harder for gankers and you'll be passed over in favor of targets that are "squishier" and easier to find.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:Even a tanked mackinaw can die to only 2 or 3 catalysts. A well tanked Mackinaw in 0.7 space takes a minimum of 5 or 6... more if the Exhumer has siege warfare links applied... and even more if a logistics ship or Orca is providing remote repairs.
Believe me... I know. I've failed to gank barges because of those things.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:My complaint is that ganking is so out of control Citation please. Because most of the killboard numbers run by people much smarter and more well informed than me suggest ganking of barges is at all time lows.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:My point is that maybe if it didnt cost a worthless amount of money to blow up miners flying stuff that is so outragiously more expensive the game would be more friendly to people that dont have the skills to fly a mackinaw or the 150-200 million to buy one. Not everyone can just grab the best tech 2 gear and ships for every situation and fly them. Not everyone can afford to lose 200m in ship and equipment just cause 2 people feel like wasting a worthless 20 mill between the 2 of them. Oh ffs...
If you can't afford to potentially lose it... don't buy it and don't fly it. You HAVE other options (*cough*the Procurer*cough*).
I have the capacity to fly any Tech 2 sub-capital combat ship I desire... I even have the ISK to do so. But I don't. Because there are other and often cheaper options for me to choose from that can accomplish the same goals, or close to.
The price you pay for Tech 2 ships is in the EDGE they provide within a specialty... not overall better effectiveness.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I dont think thats fair i think if your rational you would not think its fair either. If a mining ship is gunna cost 50 mill i t should have some basic ability to resist the bull crap that is going on in high sec. Im not talking about null sec or other ships im talking about High sec its freaking ******** unless your an already established player you cant do anything to defend your self agianst it and that is stupid to me Is there an echo in the room?
- A Retriever is designed to hold a large amount of ore at the cost of yield and tank. - A Coveter is designed for maximum yield at the cost of ore hold and tank. - A Procurer is designed to tank large amounts of damage at the cost of ore hold and yield. Noticing a theme here? Choose the ship that bests suits your circumstances rather than whine about why one ship can't do everything you want it to. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3204
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:11:00 -
[161] - Quote
DelBoy Trades wrote:I couldn't care less about gankers ganking miners in hisec, doesn't bother me, but one must pose the question, if someone is so intent on killing people, why not just move to low/null?
inb4 James315 bullshit.
Why not gank in HS?
Why not go where the targets are?
Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not?
Why do you have an unspoken assumption that shooting people doesn't belong in HS? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
2210
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:18:00 -
[162] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it. Protecting yourself is more than just tanking damage. And even if you do see it as such, you do have options.
You can: - probe down and mine in gravametric belts. Your average suicide ganker isn't going to spend time probing down one or two barges when there are other systems with other belts with other miners in them.
- mine in missions. There are often asteroids that can be found in missions. Not the best quality of rocks around mind you... but as with gravametric belts, finding you requires probes and effort. And you have the added bonus of seeing them on D-scan well ahead of time if there are acceleration gates they have to navigate.
- if applying effort in the above two isn't to your liking, you can always fall back on the Procurer. With little effort you can make it such that it requires way more suicide gankers to kill you than they have the numbers for. Sure, you lose out on that big ore hold and you won't be mining fast... but that's the price you pay for "safety."
tl;dr... make it harder for gankers and you'll be passed over in favor of targets that are "squishier" and easier to find.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:Even a tanked mackinaw can die to only 2 or 3 catalysts. A well tanked Mackinaw in 0.7 space takes a minimum of 5 or 6... more if the Exhumer has siege warfare links applied... and even more if a logistics ship or Orca is providing remote repairs.
Believe me... I know. I've failed to gank barges because of those things.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:My complaint is that ganking is so out of control Citation please. Because most of the killboard numbers run by people much smarter and more well informed than me suggest ganking of barges is at all time lows.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:My point is that maybe if it didnt cost a worthless amount of money to blow up miners flying stuff that is so outragiously more expensive the game would be more friendly to people that dont have the skills to fly a mackinaw or the 150-200 million to buy one. Not everyone can just grab the best tech 2 gear and ships for every situation and fly them. Not everyone can afford to lose 200m in ship and equipment just cause 2 people feel like wasting a worthless 20 mill between the 2 of them. Oh ffs...
If you can't afford to potentially lose it... don't buy it and don't fly it. You HAVE other options (*cough*the Procurer*cough*).
I have the capacity to fly any Tech 2 sub-capital combat ship I desire... I even have the ISK to do so. But I don't. Because there are other and often cheaper options for me to choose from that can accomplish the same goals, or close to.
The price you pay for Tech 2 ships is in the EDGE they provide within a specialty... not overall better effectiveness.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I dont think thats fair i think if your rational you would not think its fair either. If a mining ship is gunna cost 50 mill i t should have some basic ability to resist the bull crap that is going on in high sec. Im not talking about null sec or other ships im talking about High sec its freaking ******** unless your an already established player you cant do anything to defend your self agianst it and that is stupid to me Is there an echo in the room?
- A Retriever is designed to hold a large amount of ore at the cost of yield and tank. - A Coveter is designed for maximum yield at the cost of ore hold and tank. - A Procurer is designed to tank large amounts of damage at the cost of ore hold and yield. Noticing a theme here? Choose the ship that bests suits your circumstances rather than whine about why one ship can't do everything you want it to. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
March rabbit
epTa Team Inc.
624
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:26:00 -
[163] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:DelBoy Trades wrote:I couldn't care less about gankers ganking miners in hisec, doesn't bother me, but one must pose the question, if someone is so intent on killing people, why not just move to low/null?
inb4 James315 bullshit. Why not gank in HS? Why not go where the targets are? Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not? Why do you have an unspoken assumption that shooting people doesn't belong in HS? Why not gank in HS? I dunno. Just few ideas: - it's boring like mission running - it's repetitive like mission running - it doesn't give anything thrilling after 10 first ganks (unless you like to do repetitive tasks but then you better run missions for better reward) - it's doesn't make ganker any more experienced in PvP (because they mostly deal with defenseless targets and invulnerable CONCORD) - ...
Why not go where the targets are? - Because targets are everywhere? And the only difference between untanked miners and targets in low/WH/0.0 is: defence and effort? And skills needed?
Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not? - Because Eve Online is a game and not first/second job? Spending time in Eve to make ISK is just pity. Game is for fun and not for grinding stuff.
Why do you have an unspoken assumption that shooting people doesn't belong in HS? - Because this is what forums say about high-sec "carebears": they evade PvP at all cost! Move lvl4s to low, do whatever to move them to low/0.0! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3204
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:39:00 -
[164] - Quote
March rabbit wrote: Why not gank in HS? I dunno. Just few ideas: - it's boring like mission running - it's repetitive like mission running - it doesn't give anything thrilling after 10 first ganks (unless you like to do repetitive tasks but then you better run missions for better reward) - it's doesn't make ganker any more experienced in PvP (because they mostly deal with defenseless targets and invulnerable CONCORD)
So I shouldn't do something in this game because you don't enjoy it? How does that logic work?
Quote:Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not? - Because Eve Online is a game and not first/second job? Spending time in Eve to make ISK is just pity. Game is for fun and not for grinding stuff.
Right, so you should find a way to make money in EVE that you enjoy doing for its own sake. Gankers tend to enjoy ganking for its own sake.
Quote:Why do you have an unspoken assumption that shooting people doesn't belong in HS? - Because this is what forums say about high-sec "carebears": they evade PvP at all cost! Move lvl4s to low, do whatever to move them to low/0.0!
Yes, the carebears have made that assumption. The problem is that that assumption is objectively wrong. Proof: 1) In a sandbox game, if something is allowed, it will occur. 2) Shooting people in HS is allowed. 3) Therefore, shooting people in HS will occur. 4) A game designer will only allow or continue to allow something to occur if they intend it to occur. 5) The game designers allow and continue to allow shooting people in HS to occur. 6) Therefore, The game designers intend it to occur.
By the way, if they were actually avoiding it "at all costs" they'd be playing on SISI where PvP without specific consent outside of certain areas is not allowed. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Bi-Mi Lansatha
Tactical Universal Research and Development Caldari Industrialist Association
83
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 06:47:00 -
[165] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:... I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m?... I could be wrong, but in EvE PvP that is not uncommon. My Alliance has a dedicated pirate who hunts in cheaper frigates against larger (more expensive) targets in Highsec. He is very good at it.
Now to your exact issue. If they are flying 10M ISK ships, get a fitted 10M ISK Procurer... they will probably need two to gank you.
|
March rabbit
epTa Team Inc.
624
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 07:07:00 -
[166] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:March rabbit wrote: Why not gank in HS? I dunno. Just few ideas: - it's boring like mission running - it's repetitive like mission running - it doesn't give anything thrilling after 10 first ganks (unless you like to do repetitive tasks but then you better run missions for better reward) - it's doesn't make ganker any more experienced in PvP (because they mostly deal with defenseless targets and invulnerable CONCORD)
So I shouldn't do something in this game because you don't enjoy it? How does that logic work? there was not word "me" in this quote. Personally i like to do missions but it's common fact: repetitive tasks tend to lead to boredom. Boredom leads to quit.
RubyPorto wrote:Quote:Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not? - Because Eve Online is a game and not first/second job? Spending time in Eve to make ISK is just pity. Game is for fun and not for grinding stuff. Right, so you should find a way to make money in EVE that you enjoy doing for its own sake. Gankers tend to enjoy ganking for its own sake. i'm fine with that. But you haven't mentioned FUN. You only mentioned "reliable making money" which is not fun (well some people say carebears have fun of making money tho)
Quote:Why do you have an unspoken assumption that shooting people doesn't belong in HS? - Because this is what forums say about high-sec "carebears": they evade PvP at all cost! Move lvl4s to low, do whatever to move them to low/0.0!
Yes, the carebears have made that assumption.[/quote] only if you speak about goons and other "l33t pvpers". Because carebears never say they need to move to 0.0 or CCP HAVE TO move lvl4s into low- or 0.0.
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5975
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 07:56:00 -
[167] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it.
I have already told you how to protect your retriever.
Quote:My complaint is that ganking is so out of control that people make accounts just to destroy other people because the cost to do so is worthless.
Barge ganking is at a record low, you have never been as safe as you are today.
Quote: Not everyone can just grab the best tech 2 gear and ships for every situation and fly them. Not everyone can afford to lose 200m in ship and equipment just cause 2 people feel like wasting a worthless 20 mill between the 2 of them.
The procurer is a little over half as expensive to buy and fit as the retriever you lost.
Quote:I dont think thats fair i think if your rational you would not think its fair either. If a mining ship is gunna cost 50 mill i t should have some basic ability to resist the bull crap that is going on in high sec. Im not talking about null sec or other ships im talking about High sec its freaking ******** unless your an already established player you cant do anything to defend your self agianst it and that is stupid to me
It does, the problem is you fitted it wrong and took it into an area of space rather dangerous for it to be in. You used the wrong tools for the job. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3205
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 08:18:00 -
[168] - Quote
March rabbit wrote: there was not word "me" in this quote. Personally i like to do missions but it's common fact: repetitive tasks tend to lead to boredom. Boredom leads to quit.
And ganking is not boring to the people who do it. So "it's boring" isn't a reason not to do it.
Quote:i'm fine with that. But you haven't mentioned FUN. You only mentioned "reliable making money" which is not fun (well some people say carebears have fun of making money tho)
Where did I claim I was presenting an exhaustive list of the reasons why people gank?
Quote:Quote:Yes, the carebears have made that assumption. only if you speak about goons and other "l33t pvpers". Because carebears never say they need to move to 0.0 or CCP HAVE TO move lvl4s into low- or 0.0.
That doesn't make any sense. How does calling for a reduction in the income that can be earned in the extraordinary safety of HS mean that you subscribe to the (incorrect) assumption that PvP doesn't belong in HS? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
241
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 11:54:00 -
[169] - Quote
Perhaps my math fails me and response times have changed, but I was sure that it's pretty easy to fit even a retriever in such a way that a single destroyer can't get it.
Lets assume the catalyst is pushing 700 DPS. Lets assume it takes 20 seconds for them to be neutralized by Concord. That requires .... 14001 EHP to survive. You can get a humble retriever up over 17k ehp WITH an MLU fitted AND the mid slot untanked too.
Are people shooting you with officer fit catalysts? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13600
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 13:49:00 -
[170] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:im talking about the fact that there is nothing you can do to protect say a retriver from a ganker no matter how much tank you put on it. GǪwhich is pure fiction, not a fact. It's easy to protect yourself against a ganker. It's even reasonably easy to protect yourself against two gankers. Three becomes tricky without help, unless you want to restrict yourself to 1.0 systems, but that's as it should be since 3 > 1.
Quote:you people act as though all miners put max yeild builds on then complain when they get ganked Do you know why? Because for as long as I have been in the game, miners have put max yield builds on their barges and exhumers and then complained on the forums when they get ganked. If there are miners who don't do that, they're so few and far inbetween that they fall within the margin of error and we can still quite safely say that all of them do exactly what you describe.
Quote:My complaint is that ganking is so out of control that people make accounts just to destroy other people because the cost to do so is worthless. GǪand you can provide evidence to back these claims up, I suppose? It would be very interesting to see, considering how increasingly rare ganks have become over the years.
Quote:My point is that maybe if it didnt cost a worthless amount of money to blow up miners flying stuff that is so outragiously more expensive the game would be more friendly to people that dont have the skills to fly a mackinaw or the 150-200 million to buy one. It already is. They just have to learn to fly and fit intelligently and not try to rely on SP and ISK to protect them. Numbers and location and scouting will help them far more (and teach them far better lessons) than going for the most inefficient GÇö and ultimately counter-productive GÇö way of staying safe.
Quote:I dont think thats fair i think if your rational you would not think its fair either. I'm quite rational, yes, which is why I recognise it as horribly unfair if you could simply throw ISK at a problem to make it go away. Fortunately, CCP have largely left the idea of ISK as a balancing factor behind them. These days, ISK buys you marginal improvements in a single are GÇö e.g. the more expensive exhumers are better at mining than the less expensive barges GÇö which is already a bit too much.
Since a mining ship costs 50M, you should take care to protect it, and the game offers a multitude of means of doing so GÇö making it more expensive just happens not to be one of them. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
WTFAMILOOKINGAT
Horizon Research Group
27
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 13:52:00 -
[171] - Quote
I tank my ships with situational awareness, seems to work most of the time |
baltec1
Bat Country
5984
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:13:00 -
[172] - Quote
WTFAMILOOKINGAT wrote:I tank my ships with situational awareness, seems to work most of the time
Someone stole your face while you wern't looking. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1630
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:26:00 -
[173] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote: I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m?
Standard high sec thinking: omg how did a COMBAT ship take out my unarmed unprotected industrial ship?
|
Saiyon
Corporate Scum
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:27:00 -
[174] - Quote
be aligned to a station. Watch local (especially for small spikes) use d-scan to look for destroyers, or finally fly with a properly managed mining OP.
If your not prepared to do any of these then mine in higher security space.
The sec system doesn't stop at 0.5.
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1297
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:31:00 -
[175] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Gallamoth Sickle wrote: I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m? Standard high sec thinking: omg how did a COMBAT ship take out my unarmed unprotected industrial ship? Alright. Now I want a vid and killmail of 100 Ibises alpha'ing a random Marauder with light missiles.
I know it's possible. It would be a piece of art. Mining Overhaul Nothing changed since 2008. |
Selene Nask
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:49:00 -
[176] - Quote
Tippia wrote:[quote=Gallamoth Sickle] Quote:you people act as though all miners put max yeild builds on then complain when they get ganked Do you know why? Because for as long as I have been in the game, miners have put max yield builds on their barges and exhumers and then complained on the forums when they get ganked. If there are miners who don't do that, they're so few and far inbetween that they fall within the margin of error and we can still quite safely say that all of them do exactly what you describe. Quote:My complaint is that ganking is so out of control that people make accounts just to destroy other people because the cost to do so is worthless. GǪand you can provide evidence to back these claims up, I suppose? It would be very interesting to see, considering how increasingly rare ganks have become over the years. Quote:My point is that maybe if it didnt cost a worthless amount of money to blow up miners flying stuff that is so outragiously more expensive the game would be more friendly to people that dont have the skills to fly a mackinaw or the 150-200 million to buy one. It already is. They just have to learn to fly and fit intelligently and not try to rely on SP and ISK to protect them. Numbers and location and scouting will help them far more (and teach them far better lessons) than going for the most inefficient GÇö and ultimately counter-productive GÇö way of staying safe.
A couple of comments from a newbie miner. In high-sec I've had an attempted gank once. I happened to have my retriever tanked so I survived. A corpie also new got ganked and didn't survive. He didn't have a tank. I also have a couple of corpies that have mined for a couple of years and have never been ganked. Even though I have experienced a gank myself I know it's pretty rare and in HS something I barely worry about. So much so that I'm usually tabbed to another character when mining. It's also a known risk and higher where I mine because it's right next a low-sec entrance with several known pirate groups.
I'm now a miner that fits for maximum yield when in HS. Why? It's not because I don't know better. It's because getting ganked happens so rarely that even if it does the cost of getting a new barge is outweighed by the amount of ore I regularly bring in. Its a loss easily absorbed. I knowingly increase risk for yield and chosen to take the consequences of doing so. It's the balance between personal risk and reward that makes EVE interesting to me and the game gives a player oodles of choice in deciding where the balance point is for them.
If I started to be ganked more regularly then I'd be more concerned. I'd either move areas and/or tank my ship. If there are indeed areas where people are getting ganked so much that it seems epidemic (when stats say that overall it's not) and they for whatever reason can't handle the stress and frustration I would suggest moving because in my experience there are a good many areas where a 'gank' rarely if ever happens.
All it took for me to get some perspective of the 'threat level' in HS was to do some mining in LS. After that HS mining, even with the odd ship loss now and then, is easy isk mode.
CCP has already provided ample opportunity for people to choose ways of doing things that match up with how much they're capable of handling to lose. Most of these choices I've learned are about trade-offs. There isn't one thing or way that will give perfect everything. I don't think it should. It would hardly be game otherwise. |
Fractal Muse
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
259
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 14:55:00 -
[177] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote: So i mean what defense is there? when orcas are dropped by a few well organized pilots flying cheap ships? I guess you could tank up your mackinaw but it only means what.... the ganker gets 2 of his friends to take out your 200mil ship by risking 10 mill a pilot?
I am all for ganks in high sec but the the cost to gank somoene is pennies on the dollar compared to what the ganked loses its just not fair at all.
The concept that you are trying to come up with is also known as ISK tanking.
This is the idea that an expensive ship should not be killable by a cheap ship.
By your logic of:
Quote:Let me say agian im not trying to complain about getting ganked rather i guess im complaining at the huge unfair cost diff of ships.
A frigate should not be able to kill a cruiser or a battleship.
A cruiser shouldn't be able to kill a battleship or a faction cruiser.
A tech 3 cruiser shouldn't be beaten by anything less than a faction battleship or a capital ship.
Personally, this isn't a vision of EVE that I'd want. But, if that's what you want then that is what you want. You may be better off finding another game though since I don't think this will ever happen to EVE. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1630
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 15:13:00 -
[178] - Quote
Selene Nask wrote: I'm now a miner that fits for maximum yield when in HS. Why? It's not because I don't know better. It's because getting ganked happens so rarely that even if it does the cost of getting a new barge is outweighed by the amount of ore I regularly bring in. Its a loss easily absorbed. I knowingly increase risk for yield and chosen to take the consequences of doing so. It's the balance between personal risk and reward that makes EVE interesting to me and the game gives a player oodles of choice in deciding where the balance point is for them.
Behold all ye whiners, a REAL eve player. One who knows the risk and accepts it as the cost of doing business rather than cry about it.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13600
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 15:23:00 -
[179] - Quote
Selene Nask wrote:I'm now a miner that fits for maximum yield when in HS. Why? It's not because I don't know better. It's because getting ganked happens so rarely that even if it does the cost of getting a new barge is outweighed by the amount of ore I regularly bring in. Its a loss easily absorbed. I knowingly increase risk for yield and chosen to take the consequences of doing so. It's the balance between personal risk and reward that makes EVE interesting to me and the game gives a player oodles of choice in deciding where the balance point is for them. Welcome to EVE. You'll love it here! Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
368
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:15:00 -
[180] - Quote
Can a supporting Orca use warfare link for shield/armor instead of the cap usage and range for laser for example? That would technically help in a fleet right? |
|
Frying Doom
2338
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:17:00 -
[181] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Can a supporting Orca use warfare link for shield/armor instead of the cap usage and range for laser for example? That would technically help in a fleet right? Yes they can, well at least 1, I have never tried more than one warfare link on an orca. Vote Now! My recommendations are:-á 1.James Arget 2.Ayeson 3.Nathan Jameson 4.Cipreh 5.Chitsa Jason 6. Malcanis 7. Mike Azariah 8. Ripard Teg 9. Mangala Solaris 10. Ali Aras 11. Roc Wieler And remember not voting is the same as voting for Null. |
Weetabix Kedgeree
Digital Phenomenon
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:24:00 -
[182] - Quote
Just wanted to say that it is more then possible to tank a single ganger, my alt was afk mining yesterday when someone tried it, he had T2 drones out, in a .6 system, and i came back to a nice 900k bounty, full shsields and 72% hull left :)
Now im fully aware that i was lucky, and my poor retriver would have been dust against 2 gangers, but im happy i survived and even gained out of it :) |
Haulie Berry
391
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:26:00 -
[183] - Quote
There is some fascinating information in that post about the way bonuses are applied that the OP, in particular, definitely, definitely needs to read. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3211
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:27:00 -
[184] - Quote
Selene Nask wrote:I'm now a miner that fits for maximum yield when in HS. Why? It's not because I don't know better. It's because getting ganked happens so rarely that even if it does the cost of getting a new barge is outweighed by the amount of ore I regularly bring in. Its a loss easily absorbed. I knowingly increase risk for yield and chosen to take the consequences of doing so. It's the balance between personal risk and reward that makes EVE interesting to me and the game gives a player oodles of choice in deciding where the balance point is for them.
I always get yelled at when I include "accept the risks and move on" on my list of valid ways to deal with ganking.
Why do you get a pass? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13601
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:39:00 -
[185] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:I always get yelled at when I include "accept the risks and move on" on my list of valid ways to deal with ganking.
Why do you get a pass? Because you're a nasty ebil psychopath nullbear ganker who is only out to trick people with your venal lies, whereas he is a cuddly-wuddly and trusty highsec miner who is trying to protect his oppressed brethren. Duh! Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Hayz Hayward
Heretic Army Atrocitas
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:43:00 -
[186] - Quote
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=61044
If you do this, you're gonna have a bad time.
As for miner ganking, yes, it can be easy, but only because pilots like you make it easy for us
Hayz |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
368
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 16:43:00 -
[187] - Quote
Tippia wrote:RubyPorto wrote:I always get yelled at when I include "accept the risks and move on" on my list of valid ways to deal with ganking.
Why do you get a pass? Because you're a nasty ebil psychopath nullbear ganker who is only out to trick people with your venal lies, whereas he is a cuddly-wuddly and trusty highsec miner who is trying to protect his oppressed brethren. Duh!
You forgot the membership in a NPC corp... NPC corp player are the most reliable ones. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Khalkotauroi Defence Labs
8031
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 17:21:00 -
[188] - Quote
DelBoy Trades wrote:I couldn't care less about gankers ganking miners in hisec, doesn't bother me, but one must pose the question, if someone is so intent on killing people, why not just move to low/null?
inb4 James315 bullshit. If all the gankers moved to lowsec and nullsec, highsec would be a very boring place to be.
Suicide ganking is one of the only methods of warfare that can be applied to NPC corp members like the OP and his ilk, players hiding behind a whopping great dec shield. NPC corps are for all intents and purposes immune to interference from players, people can't disband them, can't steal their corporate assets, can't wardec them, can't awox them etc. A war hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, High Chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside. |
Selene Nask
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 17:43:00 -
[189] - Quote
Tippia wrote:RubyPorto wrote:I always get yelled at when I include "accept the risks and move on" on my list of valid ways to deal with ganking.
Why do you get a pass? Because you're a nasty ebil psychopath nullbear ganker who is only out to trick people with your venal lies, whereas he is a cuddly-wuddly and trusty highsec miner who is trying to protect his oppressed brethren. Duh!
She is....
I'm one of those weird and rare humans in EVE that has RL boobs.
I know, I know, pictures or it isn't true, there are no girls on the intrawebs, blah blah....heard everyone before.
|
Haulie Berry
392
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 17:50:00 -
[190] - Quote
I am pretty sure that, in the entire history of Eve, never once has it been a bad thing that a ship blew up.
Explosions are always good. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13603
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 18:13:00 -
[191] - Quote
Selene Nask wrote:She is....
I'm one of those weird and rare humans in EVE that has RL boobs. Having gone to fanfest on a number of occasions, I can tell you that, unfortunately, they're not nearly as rare as the Y-chromosome distribution of players might lend you to believeGǪ Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
368
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 19:03:00 -
[192] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Selene Nask wrote:She is....
I'm one of those weird and rare humans in EVE that has RL boobs. Having gone to fanfest on a number of occasions, I can tell you that, unfortunately, they're not nearly as rare as the Y-chromosome distribution of players might lend you to believeGǪ
You sure you didn't spot manboobs? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13603
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 19:06:00 -
[193] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:You sure you didn't spot manboobs? Of course they were. That doesn't take away from their being RL boobs.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
The CandyGirl
the united Negative Ten.
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 19:13:00 -
[194] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:Ganking is basicly EvE with Easy-mode on. Why actually go looking for actual PvP targets elsewhere in the game, when you've got yourself unlimited risk-free targets floating around highsec, that don't shoot back? Better still, most of their targets are unwilling and/or uninterested in PvP, and thus are completely unprepaired for sudden ganking. As long as these gankers make sure their target is worth more than the cost of the ships used, they win. Then again, some of them do it just for the hell of it, or to make their pathetic killboards increase.
Worst of all, they all rant their highsec-hating rhetoric to justify their position. They've already made lowsec into a wasteland, and taught new players and carebears alike that traveling there is a death-sentence, and so now they've moved to highsec. As far as their concerned, their gameplay is the only gameplay, and everyone should conform to their opinion.
Though i won't go as far as saying that ganking should be impossible in highsec, i definately think it should be made harder and/or less profitable. Cause lets face it, these L33T PvPers wouldn't know real PvP if it came up and smacked them in the face with a fish. And ultimately their selfish actions prevent players natural progression out of highsec to other areas
not everyone cares about "gud fights"
only non pirates and non gankers refer to suicide ganking and pirating as pvp... it is killing and taking yo stuff.
pirates and suicide gankers kill for 2 reasons and only 2 reasons
profit
and
tears
we could care less about anything else
also if you are to stupid to not know how to 100% safely travel in high sec in ANY ship (minus freighters) that is your own damn problem.
so qq more Being a smartass is always better than being a dumbass! |
Lenda Shinhwa
New Order Logistics CODE.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 19:34:00 -
[195] - Quote
Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438
But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier.....
[ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats
So methinks OP doth protest to much.
|
Dave Stark
2592
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 19:39:00 -
[196] - Quote
Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier..... [ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats So methinks OP doth protest to much.
am... am i really looking at an armour tanked retriever? |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
368
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:02:00 -
[197] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier..... [ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats So methinks OP doth protest to much. am... am i really looking at an armour tanked retriever?
Bonus points for effort? I meant it's more tank than a full set of MLU... |
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:13:00 -
[198] - Quote
March rabbit wrote: Why not gank in HS? I dunno. Just few ideas: - it's boring like mission running - it's repetitive like mission running - it doesn't give anything thrilling after 10 first ganks (unless you like to do repetitive tasks but then you better run missions for better reward)
Few things in life don't end up being boring and repetitive. However, not all miners are bots, where all mission rats are bots. Therefore the occasional non-bot can surprise you bringing nice twists into the equation. That makes it slightly less boring and repetitive than missions.
But the issue with your post is the "better rewards" part.
You see, it only works if you interpret rewards as ISK. Where a ganker would interpret rewards as Tears. And red crosses give no tears at all. Therefore your statement is false. A ganker is better off shooting barges than crosses if he is after rewards.
March rabbit wrote: - it's doesn't make ganker any more experienced in PvP (because they mostly deal with defenseless targets and invulnerable CONCORD) - ...
Learning fleet movement, coordination, aggression rules, picking the correct target from a crowd, optimal range, getting used to inevitably losing the ship, saving your pod.
A new player should clearly not do such things as it does not give them PvP experience and they should fatten their bankroll with missions instead.
March rabbit wrote: Why not go where the targets are? - Because targets are everywhere? And the only difference between untanked miners and targets in low/WH/0.0 is: defence and effort? And skills needed?
If targets are everywhere and the ones near me are the easiest to find, why would I travel and hunt for something staring me in the face?
Furthermore, these targets give the best "rewards". And by rewards I mean Tears. Since the ones I find after extensive travel are more likely to give me a GF than tears.
March rabbit wrote:Why not go where you can reliably make money shooting people if you're careful and they're not? - Because Eve Online is a game and not first/second job? Spending time in Eve to make ISK is just pity. Game is for fun and not for grinding stuff. I'm glad you do, in fact, get it.
|
Dave Stark
2592
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:13:00 -
[199] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier..... [ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats So methinks OP doth protest to much. am... am i really looking at an armour tanked retriever? Bonus points for effort? I meant it's more tank than a full set of MLU...
"i know, let's take the lowest tanking stat, and use that as my method of tanking" shame i'm too lazy to check, because i guarantee he'd have probably got more ehp out of bulkheads and shield rigs. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13604
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:43:00 -
[200] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:shame i'm too lazy to check, because i guarantee he'd have probably got more ehp out of bulkheads and shield rigs. Of course. Both against blasters and omni damage. The downside is that it also fits an MLUGǪ oh wait. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Dave Stark
2594
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:44:00 -
[201] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Dave Stark wrote:shame i'm too lazy to check, because i guarantee he'd have probably got more ehp out of bulkheads and shield rigs. Of course. Both against blasters and omni damage. The downside is that it also fits an MLUGǪ oh wait.
he didn't have mlus anyway.
but it's a retriever, so i'd have personally fit MLUs and not been bothered in the slightest when such a cheap ship got consigned to the scrap heap. |
Lenda Shinhwa
New Order Logistics CODE.
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 21:15:00 -
[202] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier..... [ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats So methinks OP doth protest to much. am... am i really looking at an armour tanked retriever? Bonus points for effort? I meant it's more tank than a full set of MLU... "i know, let's take the lowest tanking stat, and use that as my method of tanking" shame i'm too lazy to check, because i guarantee he'd have probably got more ehp out of bulkheads and shield rigs.
Mining in a retriver in Balle (0.5) is a death wish. No tank would save it. I don't know why people do it without having a permit from the New Order at least. Which is what I tried to explain to Gallamoth, but instead he challenged me to a duel. Permit tank = best tank. |
Dave Stark
2594
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 21:17:00 -
[203] - Quote
Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Mining in a retriver in Balle (0.5) is a death wish. No tank would save it. I don't know why people do it without having a permit from the New Order at least. Which is what I tried to explain to Gallamoth, but instead he challenged me to a duel. Permit tank = best tank.
i found an even better tank was just mining afk totally regardless because gankers are actually that rare they can successfully be ignored.
my max yield setups have paid for themselves many times over, and if i didn't visit the forums i wouldn't even know miner ganking existed.
*shrug* |
Capt Starfox
New Order Logistics CODE.
419
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 03:59:00 -
[204] - Quote
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:
I mean how is ok for someone to fly a ship worth a total of maybe 8-10 million take out somoene flying a ship worth 50m?
You're numbers are wrong, base price for a fitted tech-II Cat (bottom of the barrel gank boat) is 15m. A Retriever can withstand one of these in a gank... if fitted properly of course.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote: I have read posts about people losing their orcas to ganks in high sec by several people all combined maybe flying ships that total 80-100 million (8-10 ships) or even less taking out a ship worth well over 1 bill full fitted? Again, numbers are wrong. And the ppl who lose their Orcas are idiots and deserve it.
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:So i mean what defense is there? when orcas are dropped by a few well organized pilots flying cheap ships? I guess you could tank up your mackinaw but it only means what.... the ganker gets 2 of his friends to take out your 200mil ship by risking 10 mill a pilot? About the defense, you should read more instead of coming to the forums to cry. And by a "few" people you mean 4 Talos' right? A fitted tech-II Talos also being about 130m, right?
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:I am all for ganks in high sec but the the cost to gank somoene is pennies on the dollar compared to what the ganked loses its just not fair at all. This game just seems to be going down the toilet rapidly in the latest years. New players dont stand a chance agianst the EVE lifers that run multiple accounts and throw 10's of millions away on catalyst losses just to destroy people. You're not all for ganking, stop lying. For anyone who can't handle Eve, WoW ---------->
Gallamoth Sickle wrote:Why does CCP seem to have buffed destroyers creating a situation that favors the ganker and leaves the ganked almost completely defensless? Even aligning to gate, mining in .7 and above, being at the computer, D-scanning constantly you still run a better chance of dieing than not if you find your self chosen by a ganker. You must be new around here, this is nowhere near factual. Psychotic Monk for CSM 8 |
Frying Doom
2339
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 04:12:00 -
[205] - Quote
Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Lenda Shinhwa wrote:Well isn't this just precious. I guess its all my fault. Picking on the OP and all: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=17231438But wait.. what is this from the chat logs just 2 days earlier..... [ 2013.04.11 19:39:07 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa what are you gunan do about it i think your permits are a joke and i think your a joke too? [ 2013.04.11 19:39:53 ] Gallamoth Sickle > Lenda Shinhwa why dont you just shut up ur a worthless player with empty threats So methinks OP doth protest to much. am... am i really looking at an armour tanked retriever? Bonus points for effort? I meant it's more tank than a full set of MLU... "i know, let's take the lowest tanking stat, and use that as my method of tanking" shame i'm too lazy to check, because i guarantee he'd have probably got more ehp out of bulkheads and shield rigs. Mining in a retriver in Balle (0.5) is a death wish. No tank would save it. I don't know why people do it without having a permit from the New Order at least. Which is what I tried to explain to Gallamoth, but instead he challenged me to a duel. Permit tank = best tank. Screw the new order, when I have to worry about them ganking 127k ehp skiff, profitably then I would consider them a threat.
Also in response to another thread, how do they profitably gank a 270k ehp orca?
You are working on risk vs reward. You want a higher reward (Yield) then you are accepting a higher risk. Vote Now! My recommendations are:-á 1.James Arget 2.Ayeson 3.Nathan Jameson 4.Cipreh 5.Chitsa Jason 6. Malcanis 7. Mike Azariah 8. Ripard Teg 9. Mangala Solaris 10. Ali Aras 11. Roc Wieler And remember not voting is the same as voting for Null. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5994
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 06:30:00 -
[206] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:
Also in response to another thread, how do they profitably gank a 270k ehp orca?
Hulks in the hold. |
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts Hegemonous Pandorum
142
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 06:52:00 -
[207] - Quote
[quote=Frying Doom Screw the new order, when I have to worry about them ganking 127k ehp skiff, profitably then I would consider them a threat.
Also in response to another thread, how do they profitably gank a 270k ehp orca?
You are working on risk vs reward. You want a higher reward (Yield) then you are accepting a higher risk.[/quote]
If you look through New Order Logistics or other affiliated groups and look at their orca kills a good portion of the orcas are anti-tanked rather than being tanked. for some reason, despite the massive holds on an orca, people grab some expanded IIs to go in the lows. On a ship whose EHP is almost all in the structure.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |