Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Suicide gankers have national holiday to celebrate their new toy of joy... How does your freighter feel? Discuss.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Suicide gankers have national holiday to celebrate their new toy of joy... How does your freighter feel? Discuss.
Feels safe along with my hulks I have yet to be ganked by such. Police has more KMs on of my freighter than a player does. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
97
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
the mittani sends his regards~ |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
388
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Blastier
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:the mittani sends his regards~
When the only thing you have to contribute is sucking on a guy's **** you're better off not posting because you're either
1) A mentally inferior 14 year old beta nerd 2) A mentally disabled beta homosexual adult |
White Tree
XxBroski North Reloaded Federation NinjaGuldDotxX. Elite Space Guild
475
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
Blastier wrote: 1) A mentally inferior 14 year old beta nerd 2) A mentally disabled beta homosexual adult
Shut up. |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
126
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
Blastier wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:the mittani sends his regards~ When the only thing you have to contribute is sucking on a guy's **** you're better off not posting because you're either 1) A mentally inferior 14 year old beta nerd 2) A mentally disabled beta homosexual adult
Someone got ganked too much ?
What if some peoples are supporting him because he is funny/have a clue about what's happening/is sadistic ?
Are they all mentally disabled peoples ? No.
|
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
Blastier wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:the mittani sends his regards~ When the only thing you have to contribute is sucking on a guy's **** you're better off not posting because you're either 1) A mentally inferior 14 year old beta nerd 2) A mentally disabled beta homosexual adult
^This. Goons are hilarious, they're like a bunch of scared and confused children resting on their mother's bosom.
TBH Mr. Mittens must have one hell of a bosom. |
Vastek Non
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships.
Five words:
No insurance for concorded ships.
Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost.
Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions |
White Tree
XxBroski North Reloaded Federation NinjaGuldDotxX. Elite Space Guild
475
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. |
|
Vastek Non
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao.
Shut up.
How does this relate to Battlecruisers? |
White Tree
XxBroski North Reloaded Federation NinjaGuldDotxX. Elite Space Guild
475
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:33:00 -
[12] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Shut up. How does this relate to Battlecruisers?
How do the other posts about GSF relate to Battlecruisers? Why am I the only person you're telling to shut up?
Get out. |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:35:00 -
[13] - Quote
White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao.
Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? Remember when they didn't use the CSM as a tool to pursue their own in-game goals. Remember when being a CSM member actually meant more than a free vacation?
Yeah, me either. |
Vastek Non
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
White Tree wrote:Vastek Non wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Shut up. How does this relate to Battlecruisers? How do the other posts about GSF relate to Battlecruisers? Why am I the only person you're telling to shut up? Get out.
What goes around comes around, or something |
Blastier
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 15:57:00 -
[15] - Quote
White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao.
Bump, so everyone can see White Tree, a member of the CSM being trolled and vigorously defending the Goons like a doormat |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
Blastier wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Bump, so everyone can see White Tree, a member of the CSM being trolled and vigorously defending the Goons like a doormat
I'm getting ready to high five White Tree. Thanks CSM! I am in awe of the way you manage to make Eve players look like a bunch of tards! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
305
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:02:00 -
[17] - Quote
I predict the novelty of these new ships will cause them to be quite pricey for a while - I would not be surprised to see the market move them at the same price as some battleships.
Comparable BS DPS, comparable cost means that it won't change the freighter gank formula much.
Also, there will no doubt be a couple rounds of balancing after initial release, the players will break these ships in many ways far faster than developers in testing ever could, and by the time the price of these new ships falls to the same cost as other BC's (if it falls that low at all), it is likely that there will be some balancing measures in place to offset the gank abuse potential.
Mechanics are in place to protect freighters against ganks except in extreme circumstances (15-20 disposable BS gangs), and I'm sure CCP will stick to this design philosophy and continue to safeguard freighters, lest the entire economy becomes rapidly unstable as main shipping lanes are shut down.
In the meantime, expect bucketloads of tears, outcries about the new ships being overpowered, general predictions that the Tornado will "destroy EvE", and the obligatory slew of unsub threats. It'll still be fun to fly though, I'm looking forward to it :) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
794
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:03:00 -
[18] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote:Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. It made perfect sense in the past, and it makes perfect sense now: the game rewards you for destroying ships GÇö for doing the thing that keeps the economy going.
Really, ganks should pay double insuranceGǪ
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
39
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:04:00 -
[19] - Quote
White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao.
Hey guys, remember when nullsec was an actual legitimate end-game, and more to to the point, people actually gave two fucks about nullsec?
As well: NO U. |
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
39
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:05:00 -
[20] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? Remember when they didn't use the CSM as a tool to pursue their own in-game goals. Remember when being a CSM member actually meant more than a free vacation? Yeah, me either.
And even more to the point, ^^this^^
**** off, White Tree.
|
|
Renan Ruivo
Hipernova Vera Cruz Alliance
204
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
Why do goons have to be dragged into everything these days? If you don't like them, stop placing them in the center of your EVE and just play the damn game.
I'm not defending them, but the whining is getting annoying now. Sometimes the only difference between a budding genius and a blooming idiot is where they chose to take a stand. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
794
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
Renan Ruivo wrote:Why do goons have to be dragged into everything these days? If you don't like them, stop placing them in the center of your EVE and just play the damn game. You know how pre-teen boys run around and pull on the girls' pig-tails?
Same thingGǪ
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
baltec1
129
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:10:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? Remember when they didn't use the CSM as a tool to pursue their own in-game goals. Remember when being a CSM member actually meant more than a free vacation? Yeah, me either. And even more to the point, ^^this^^ **** off, White Tree.
Bitter much? |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
131
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:18:00 -
[24] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:Why do goons have to be dragged into everything these days? If you don't like them, stop placing them in the center of your EVE and just play the damn game. You know how pre-teen boys run around and pull on the girls' pig-tails? Same thingGǪ
so basically this whole thread is about the new ship pigtrails that they are going to release
im pretty sure i got the gist of the thread, please correct me if i was wrong. |
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:22:00 -
[25] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Suicide gankers have national holiday to celebrate their new toy of joy... How does your freighter feel? Discuss. I don't have any exhumers or freighter (yet)!
Tippia wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. It made perfect sense in the past, and it makes perfect sense now: the game rewards you for destroying ships GÇö for doing the thing that keeps the economy going. Really, ganks should pay double insuranceGǪ Nah, take away the insurance nonsense and introduce arenas where you lose your ships .. far, far better boost for the economy! |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:23:00 -
[26] - Quote
Skippermonkey wrote:Tippia wrote:Renan Ruivo wrote:Why do goons have to be dragged into everything these days? If you don't like them, stop placing them in the center of your EVE and just play the damn game. You know how pre-teen boys run around and pull on the girls' pig-tails? Same thingGǪ so basically this whole thread is about the new ship pigtrails that they are going to release im pretty sure i got the gist of the thread, please correct me if i was wrong.
Oh come on! You're not even close. It's about the pigtails of the players, or something like that. Honestly I don't know this thread has been slightly derailed. |
Weaselior
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
1068
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
gonna suicide hundreds of these things |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:38:00 -
[28] - Quote
Suicide ganking was the first thing I thought of when reading about the Tornado... lol. We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |
Akirei Scytale
Test Alliance Please Ignore
214
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:40:00 -
[29] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:
Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online?
I don't. They sure as hell never represented me before. |
Anachronic
Abacus Industries Group Knights Of Freedoms
37
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:gonna suicide hundreds of these things
Suicide all the things? |
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:54:00 -
[31] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote: Five words:
No insurance for concorded ships.
Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost.
The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
As a game mechanic it has completely outlived it's usefulness, as incomes have grown significantly. And it never made any sense in terms of RP justification with all the ganking going on.
|
Kengutsi Akira
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:58:00 -
[32] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:the mittani sends his regards~
ah that explains it lol
Pusing a ship into the game to make it easier to interdict ice... lol well, we know where CCP stand
What Mittani wants, Mittani gets, Mittani help us all
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 16:58:00 -
[33] - Quote
Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 |
Rellik B00n
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:05:00 -
[34] - Quote
my pigtail detector alerted me to this thread but sadly the content was not what i was hoping for.
|
Kengutsi Akira
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:06:00 -
[35] - Quote
Razin wrote: The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 as well
I dont fly with it anyways, the numbers are buggy. It inevitably used to tell me that when I insured my Drake Id get back like 5x the price. But it never did >.< So I stopped using it What Mittani wants, Mittani gets, Mittani help us all
|
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:08:00 -
[36] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1
I disagree I think its great where it's at except for one thing; remove or reduce the amount paid to those killed by concord. Maybe cut the ISK payment in half? |
Boris Ginnungagap
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:15:00 -
[37] - Quote
Suiciding in T3 ship... |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:18:00 -
[38] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 I disagree I think its great where it's at except for one thing; remove or reduce the amount paid to those killed by concord. Maybe cut the ISK payment in half? Why?
|
Aidan Brooder
Dynasphere Ltd.
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:19:00 -
[39] - Quote
Boris Ginnungagap wrote:Suiciding in T3 ship...
Yes, my mind boggles at the money some people have... Also the idea to destroy such a beauty to kill an ugly Hulk. Makes me sad. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
795
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:21:00 -
[40] - Quote
Aidan Brooder wrote:Boris Ginnungagap wrote:Suiciding in T3 ship... Yes, my mind boggles at the money some people have... Also the idea to destroy such a beauty to kill an ugly Hulk. Makes me sad. No, what really boggles the mind is how some people can't seem to distinguish between T3 and Tier 3. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
396
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:23:00 -
[41] - Quote
Tippia wrote: No, what really boggles the mind is how some people can't seem to distinguish between T3 and Tier 3.
I made that error. I am shamed. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
mkint
164
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:25:00 -
[42] - Quote
What doesn't make sense (besides some fellatio between devs and goons) is why is there a new BC when there is already a broken BC class?
I challenge anyone to look at the market history graphs of any tier 1 BC for however far back you want to look. The price is completely flatlined. Compare that to the graphs for a tier 2 BC. Also take a look at the volume graphs. The complete lack of market activity tells me that the ship class across all races is entirely obsolete.
Now we get a tier 3 BC that does the same job as a tier 1? Why not just go ahead and remove the tier 1's from the game altogether? |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:39:00 -
[43] - Quote
Tippia wrote:mkint wrote:Now we get a tier 3 BC that does the same job as a tier 1? Why not just go ahead and remove the tier 1's from the game altogether? That's less of a problem GÇö the tier-1s need to be fixed regardless. The larger worry is that these tier-3s will obsolete the tier-2s just like the tier-2s did to the tier-1s. Hopefullly, that GÇ£less tank than a battleshipGÇ¥ is a typo, and they actually mean GÇ£less tank than a battlecruiserGÇ¥ (as in, tanks like a cruiser, at best).
Hopefully they tank like a weak cruiser (Caracal! ), otherwise even a strong (cruiser) tank with BS damage might be a little ridiculous. I guess we'll see when they release them on sisi. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
397
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:39:00 -
[44] - Quote
Tippia wrote:mkint wrote:Now we get a tier 3 BC that does the same job as a tier 1? Why not just go ahead and remove the tier 1's from the game altogether? That's less of a problem GÇö the tier-1s need to be fixed regardless. The larger worry is that these tier-3s will obsolete the tier-2s just like the tier-2s did to the tier-1s. Hopefullly, that GÇ£less tank than a battleshipGÇ¥ is a typo, and they actually mean GÇ£less tank than a battlecruiserGÇ¥ (as in, tanks like a cruiser, at best).
Can't replace, for example, the drake... at least as far as things like Sleeper sites and missions with frigs and cruisers running around in here. The ships they can't hit will be the ones that do them in. At least the T2s are more balanced as far as viable targets. A flock of Sleeper frigs will eat these tier 3s like candy.
It would be funny to watch though... Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:44:00 -
[45] - Quote
Uhoh, I'm going to buy a jump freighter for AFK hauling in high sec immediately. Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 17:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:
It's a matter of opinion so we can sit here and talk about this all day, but I feel it (insurance) encourages PvP, helps newer players adjust to Eve, and provides an even greater gap between Tech 1 and Tech 2, which there should be.
As to why I feel suicide ganking shouldn't get full payment on insurance:
Suicide ganking is too easy, if someone wants to gank you, they can do it, and it's pretty much impossible to stop. Let's be honest, a gank BC does not cost a lot of ISK. You throw on some pretty damage mods, guns and...thats it. Next, you insure it and off you go killing people with very little set back. There is very little risk, for a (IMO) huge reward. The reward is being able to kill your enemies (who aren't suspecting it) with ease. Then, when you get sick and tired of face ******* unsuspecting people and incur a negative sec standing, you just biomass and restart.
From what I can see, there is very little risk for the excessive reward.
Since I answered your question, I would like to know "Why?" Why do you feel insurance shouldn't exist?
Insurance exists to help players recoup their ship losses. It is assumed that any loss that is reimbursed is incurred within the game rules (otherwise the petitioning mechanism is used). It doesnGÇÖt matter if the loss happened as a result of huge disparity in the involved playersGÇÖ age, equipment used, or without any GÇÿfunGÇÖ for the player suffering the loss. Since both the ganker and the gankee are playing within the game rules, both are reimbursed as per the purchased GÇÿpolicyGÇÖ. ItGÇÖs just a game mechanic.
Whether this game mechanic is still required is debatable, but in my opinion the current levels of achievable player income make ship insurance an unnecessary ISK faucet. Completely removing insurance would also make these empire ganking discussions a little more substantive by focusing on issues of ship balance, etc.
|
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:06:00 -
[47] - Quote
Razin wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:
It's a matter of opinion so we can sit here and talk about this all day, but I feel it (insurance) encourages PvP, helps newer players adjust to Eve, and provides an even greater gap between Tech 1 and Tech 2, which there should be.
As to why I feel suicide ganking shouldn't get full payment on insurance:
Suicide ganking is too easy, if someone wants to gank you, they can do it, and it's pretty much impossible to stop. Let's be honest, a gank BC does not cost a lot of ISK. You throw on some pretty damage mods, guns and...thats it. Next, you insure it and off you go killing people with very little set back. There is very little risk, for a (IMO) huge reward. The reward is being able to kill your enemies (who aren't suspecting it) with ease. Then, when you get sick and tired of face ******* unsuspecting people and incur a negative sec standing, you just biomass and restart.
From what I can see, there is very little risk for the excessive reward.
Since I answered your question, I would like to know "Why?" Why do you feel insurance shouldn't exist?
Insurance exists to help players recoup their ship losses. It is assumed that any loss that is reimbursed is incurred within the game rules (otherwise the petitioning mechanism is used). It doesnGÇÖt matter if the loss happened as a result of huge disparity in the involved playersGÇÖ age, equipment used, or without any GÇÿfunGÇÖ for the player suffering the loss. Since both the ganker and the gankee are playing within the game rules, both are reimbursed as per the purchased GÇÿpolicyGÇÖ. ItGÇÖs just a game mechanic. Whether this game mechanic is still required is debatable, but in my opinion the current levels of achievable player income make ship insurance an unnecessary ISK faucet. Completely removing insurance would also make these empire ganking discussions a little more substantive by focusing on issues of ship balance, etc.
I would like to see other ISK faucets altered (Concord bounties? Please?) instead of one that is in the game to help people and encourage PvP.
I still stand by my argument that there is little risk for excessive reward when suicide ganking. Again, we could go on all day about this so to each his own.
|
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
It does show that either they intend to or need to start planning for more nerfs to the hisec ganks. I have no doubt that the goons will abuse the hell out of these and as such things like removing insurance for CONCORD involvement in your actions and yet even faster response times for them need to be on the table.
Another option perhaps is the need to change the paper bags that are the buffer tank on almost all mining craft. Tho that opens up a whole nother bag of worms right there and it's likely best to make CONCORD changes first. |
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:26:00 -
[49] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:I still stand by my argument that there is little risk for excessive reward when suicide ganking.
There is zero risk. The cost of the ship and fittings is simply an expenditure as a cost of doing business. It is no different than stocking up on ammo for running missions.
When I ran missions I knew, +/- 50, about how many rounds I would need to complete a mission. It made the P/L statement much easier to figure. Same way with suicide ganking....
|
Josie Starshine
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:26:00 -
[50] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? Remember when they didn't use the CSM as a tool to pursue their own in-game goals. Remember when being a CSM member actually meant more than a free vacation? Yeah, me either.
(See underlined above) Good point. Considering CCP seems to be a bit strapped for cash at the moment... Net Meeting, WebEX.
|
|
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 18:42:00 -
[51] - Quote
MeestaPenni wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:I still stand by my argument that there is little risk for excessive reward when suicide ganking.
There is zero risk. The cost of the ship and fittings is simply an expenditure as a cost of doing business. It is no different than stocking up on ammo for running missions. When I ran missions I knew, +/- 50, about how many rounds I would need to complete a mission. It made the P/L statement much easier to figure. Same way with suicide ganking....
I would argue there is some risk, but either way it's a disproportionate amount of risk. |
Vricrolatious
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:05:00 -
[52] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions
Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship! WIDot, Best Dot, Even Sans Dot! -Vric |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:06:00 -
[53] - Quote
Vricrolatious wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship!
what? |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:08:00 -
[54] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 I disagree I think its great where it's at except for one thing; remove or reduce the amount paid to those killed by concord. Maybe cut the ISK payment in half?
Hell, I support disallowing insurance for players after a certain age.
The insurance is a good buffer for noobs to learn, and most of the time I forget to insure the ship I suicide gank with anyway. Removing insurance isn't going to stop my ganking at all. We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:12:00 -
[55] - Quote
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 I disagree I think its great where it's at except for one thing; remove or reduce the amount paid to those killed by concord. Maybe cut the ISK payment in half? Hell, I support disallowing insurance for players after a certain age. The insurance is a good buffer for noobs to learn, and most of the time I forget to insure the ship I suicide gank with anyway. Removing insurance isn't going to stop my ganking at all.
I don't want suicide ganking to stop. I want there to be more of a set-back to the ganker. |
RougeOperator
Autocannons Anonymous
94
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:13:00 -
[56] - Quote
Fun new tool for carebears.
They wont have to train up BS skills anymore to run level 4 missions.
Imagine how easy they will make level 3 missions.
|
mkint
164
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:24:00 -
[57] - Quote
RougeOperator wrote:Fun new tool for carebears.
They wont have to train up BS skills anymore to run level 4 missions.
Imagine how easy they will make level 3 missions.
reading comprehension fail |
Vricrolatious
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:28:00 -
[58] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:Vricrolatious wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship! what?
If I take a Thorax or a Brutix (or something else cheap and disposable) into Empire and pop a miner in an ice belt, sure I'll lose my ship, but I'll get paid a bounty from the alliance wallet. Insurance is great, but bounties are better.
Goons, putting the game back in the player's hands! WIDot, Best Dot, Even Sans Dot! -Vric |
Anachronic
Abacus Industries Group Knights Of Freedoms
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:30:00 -
[59] - Quote
RougeOperator wrote:Fun new tool for carebears.
They wont have to train up BS skills anymore to run level 4 missions.
Imagine how easy they will make level 3 missions.
I would LOVE to see you try and run a Lvl4 in one of these boats...
Without a BS sized tank you will just melt or it will take you forever to run the missions cause of warpouts
|
Vricrolatious
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:32:00 -
[60] - Quote
Anachronic wrote:RougeOperator wrote:Fun new tool for carebears.
They wont have to train up BS skills anymore to run level 4 missions.
Imagine how easy they will make level 3 missions.
I would LOVE to see you try and run a Lvl4 in one of these boats... Without a BS sized tank you will just melt or it will take you forever to run the missions cause of warpouts
Depends really, you can run a fair amount of L4s in a Drake when setup correctly. WIDot, Best Dot, Even Sans Dot! -Vric |
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:51:00 -
[61] - Quote
Here's a thought: index insurance to the player's security rating. It follows the concept of insurance, where you charge higher risk people higher premiums (or in this case, pay out less). Since repeated suiciding will decrease the sec rating, insurance would provide diminishing return over time if the person is a "serial suicider"... |
Anachronic
Abacus Industries Group Knights Of Freedoms
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 19:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
Vricrolatious wrote:Anachronic wrote:RougeOperator wrote:Fun new tool for carebears.
They wont have to train up BS skills anymore to run level 4 missions.
Imagine how easy they will make level 3 missions.
I would LOVE to see you try and run a Lvl4 in one of these boats... Without a BS sized tank you will just melt or it will take you forever to run the missions cause of warpouts Depends really, you can run a fair amount of L4s in a Drake when setup correctly.
Yeah...and the drake isn't the norm. There is a reason that people fly it so much. Stupid tank + really good damage potential. I stand by my statement. Also the potential inability of these to deal with frigates would probably make them a less than optimal choice for missions. |
Skunk Gracklaw
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
268
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 20:21:00 -
[63] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? I remember those CSMs...each person had their own agenda so absolutely nothing ever got done because they couldn't agree on anything.
|
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 20:41:00 -
[64] - Quote
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? I remember those CSMs...each person had their own agenda so absolutely nothing ever got done because they couldn't agree on anything.
I dunno whats worse tbh. The CSM with members with conflicting interests or a CSM that the Goon uses to further their own narrow goals. I think it is blatantly clear that the current election process need "iteration" - to use a CCP buzzword - to ensure a CSM that is more representative of all players. |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:11:00 -
[65] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:Suicide gankers have national holiday to celebrate their new toy of joy... How does your freighter feel? Discuss.
Who says the Tornado will be able to fit a full rack of 1400mm Arties ? If they can only fit 1200mm the alpha is already halfed and it would probably not worth it to use a Tornado instead of a Hurricane. Seriously wait for the specs of a ship before you cry about it.
And fyi my Freighter feels pretty good today. Its a bit nervous when docking at 4-4 because of those mean Pirates in front of the station but it started a therapy to get over that and I'm sure this will work out well. Its also quite happy to deliver those BCs to fellow Goons that go and blow up Exhumers with it because its always been afraid of small ships. |
MNagy
Yo-Mama Quixotic Hegemony
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:17:00 -
[66] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. It made perfect sense in the past, and it makes perfect sense now: the game rewards you for destroying ships GÇö for doing the thing that keeps the economy going. Really, ganks should pay double insuranceGǪ
I say get rid of insurance all together.
Either use a ship that you can afford to lose or don't.
Getting rid of it solves more problems than keeping it and the problems it creates.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
798
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:23:00 -
[67] - Quote
MNagy wrote:Getting rid of it solves more problems than keeping it and the problems it creates. Nah. Getting rid of it doesn't solve any problems, and adds a few instead.
Keeping it does solve a number of problems.
Thus keeping it trivially solves more problems than the alternative.
GǪoh, I suppose that there is one problem that removing it would GÇ£solveGÇ¥: people's inability to figure out that game mechanisms are not real. I say GÇ£solveGÇ¥ GÇö with quotation marks GÇö because it's not an actual solution to that problem, but rather a way to keep it from occurring quite as often. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Russell Casey
One Ton THREE WOLF
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:34:00 -
[68] - Quote
Why is a battlecruiser with large guns suddenly more effective than a battleship using large guns? And for that matter, why do people think insurance will cover a tier-3 ship? |
baltec1
129
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:42:00 -
[69] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Skunk Gracklaw wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? I remember those CSMs...each person had their own agenda so absolutely nothing ever got done because they couldn't agree on anything. I dunno whats worse tbh. The CSM with members with conflicting interests or a CSM that the Goon uses to further their own narrow goals. I think it is blatantly clear that the current election process need "iteration" - to use a CCP buzzword - to ensure a CSM that is more representative of all players.
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
|
Sebero Sinak
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:42:00 -
[70] - Quote
[/quote]
so basically this whole thread is about the new ship pigtrails that they are going to release
im pretty sure i got the gist of the thread, please correct me if i was wrong.[/quote]
pretty sure you got it right ...the pigtrails will be frozen pellets coming out the back - useful for tracking afk cloakers |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
799
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:44:00 -
[71] - Quote
Russell Casey wrote:Why is a battlecruiser with large guns suddenly more effective than a battleship using large guns? And for that matter, why do people think insurance will cover a tier-3 ship? Because it will provide similar damage to a BS for less cost, and because the insurance covers all other tier-3 ships.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 21:53:00 -
[72] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for:
- The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible - Ill even put a tinfoil hat on and point to the new tier 3 glass cannon battlecruisres and ask how well that ship fit with current goon whelp fleet doctrine and suicide operations. Yes thats right. like a glove.
Other focus groups in and out of forums have advocated most of the other stuff. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
69
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:05:00 -
[73] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for: - The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible - Ill even put a tinfoil hat on and point to the new tier 3 glass cannon battlecruisres and ask how well that ship fit with current goon whelp fleet doctrine and suicide operations. Yes thats right. like a glove. Other focus groups in and out of forums have advocated most of the other stuff.
Well, your first 3 points were badly in need of attention regardless of who advocated it... and the last point concerns probably the most universally popular step CCP has taken in the last 18 months.
I really don't see your point. To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:13:00 -
[74] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for: - The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible - Ill even put a tinfoil hat on and point to the new tier 3 glass cannon battlecruisres and ask how well that ship fit with current goon whelp fleet doctrine and suicide operations. Yes thats right. like a glove. Other focus groups in and out of forums have advocated most of the other stuff. Well, your first 3 points were badly in need of attention regardless of who advocated it... and the last point concerns probably the most universally popular step CCP has taken in the last 18 months. I really don't see your point.
Im not saying it isnt needed or even wanted - althoug opinions HAVE differed. What I am saying is dont think for a second that the current CSM leadership isnt pushing for their own narrow interests in their interaction with CCP. The Mittani has himself stated repeatedly that he represents those who voted for him (Goons) and them only.
Thats why I think the current election mechanic to be flawed. CCP wants a representative player body to interact with. It clearly does not have that today, as Hilmar recently confirmed in the recent interview with Eurogamer. |
Vastek Non
State War Academy Caldari State
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:17:00 -
[75] - Quote
Vricrolatious wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship!
And of course everything is about Goons
You may try to read the part where it said "it has never made sense in the past, it doesn't make sense now". You are just a current example of a suicide ganker, not the only one ever. Get over yourself.
And thinking about it, the no insurance is another option that might work +1. It might actually bring back that feeling of risk that seems to be missing from a lot of combat. Too much isk, too many bots. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
320
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:26:00 -
[76] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1
Absolutely! |
Vricrolatious
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:31:00 -
[77] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote:Vricrolatious wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship! And of course everything is about Goons You may try to read the part where it said "it has never made sense in the past, it doesn't make sense now". You are just a current example of a suicide ganker, not the only one ever. Get over yourself. And thinking about it, the no insurance is another option that might work +1. It might actually bring back that feeling of risk that seems to be missing from a lot of combat. Too much isk, too many bots.
Actually, I've never suicide ganked anyone and as far as making it about Goons, why not? Every thread in regards to suicide ganking that I've seen in the last two weeks has been about Goons, so yeah, I ran on that assumption. WIDot, Best Dot, Even Sans Dot! -Vric |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:33:00 -
[78] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for: - The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible - Ill even put a tinfoil hat on and point to the new tier 3 glass cannon battlecruisres and ask how well that ship fit with current goon whelp fleet doctrine and suicide operations. Yes thats right. like a glove. Other focus groups in and out of forums have advocated most of the other stuff.
you're pretty stupid m8 |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:35:00 -
[79] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:White Tree wrote:Hey guys remember the time Band of Brothers waged a propaganda war against Goonswarm claiming they were all children who had school and they genuinely believed it so they didn't even bother attending OPs during school hours and subsequently got repeatedly smashed by them. Remember the way it happened again when the CFC took Fountain lmao. Hey guys remember that time when the members of the CSM were actually useful and wholly represented the player base of Eve Online? Remember when they didn't use the CSM as a tool to pursue their own in-game goals. Remember when being a CSM member actually meant more than a free vacation? Yeah, me either.
I'm not a soccer fan but...
gooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllll!
|
Generals4
227
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:39:00 -
[80] - Quote
Russell Casey wrote:Why is a battlecruiser with large guns suddenly more effective than a battleship using large guns? And for that matter, why do people think insurance will cover a tier-3 ship?
Because you lose less isks reducing the cost of suicide ganking with a certain firepower. -Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. |
|
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
117
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:44:00 -
[81] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Razin wrote:The best solution is to have no insurance, period.
+1 Absolutely! Or top it at 500k so newbs can still get their first frigates covered.
Or double the insurance fee with every accident. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 22:47:00 -
[82] - Quote
Andski wrote: you're pretty stupid m8
great argument "mate" |
Jinn Rho
Corp 1 Allstars
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 23:41:00 -
[83] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships.
Pretty much. How many suicide gankers willingly each spend over 150-200m+ on a single gank? Tier3 BCs are obviously going to be expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if the required manufacturing materials clock these ships over 180m.
Let's see CCP slap on a silly tech book that has you lose a lvl every time you lose a Tier3 BC, similar to the current Tech3 Cruiser. Now that'd be funny, conservative, and actually tactical... no need to outdate current Tier2 BCs. |
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 23:52:00 -
[84] - Quote
TBH should be a BS. Simples |
XIRUSPHERE
In Bacon We Trust
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 23:54:00 -
[85] - Quote
Why would anyone bother wasting the isk. You can take a mack down with a thorax and a hulk down with a brutix. If you want industrials you can set up a 1000 scan res rupture.
If you want to do large scale damage then the only option is a tier 1 BS with 8 slots and the grid to support the bombs, lol tank for the lucky cycle and cap injectors. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.10.21 23:55:00 -
[86] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Andski wrote: you're pretty stupid m8
great argument "mate"
I'm not going to repeat the same shit ad nauseum, but hey keep saying dumb crap without a clue what you're talking about |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:02:00 -
[87] - Quote
Andski wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Andski wrote: you're pretty stupid m8
great argument "mate" I'm not going to repeat the same s hit ad nauseum, but hey keep saying dumb crap without a clue what you're talking about
You are just full of brilliant arguments today, arent you? Now why dont you do us all a service and stop filling the forums with your venom? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:13:00 -
[88] - Quote
Well I was about to tell how gallente is going to be ****** once again in this Tiers 3 battle cruiser since now he'll have to run more (run forester run) to catch the battle cruiser shooting from almost 100km with his 800mm AC's
But then, I read "Mittani" and " Goons"
Got owned by trolls |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:51:00 -
[89] - Quote
Vricrolatious wrote:Igualmentedos wrote:Vricrolatious wrote:Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions Insurance means nothing when Dear Leader offers to pay you for the kill that you before Concord destroyed your ship! what? If I take a Thorax or a Brutix (or something else cheap and disposable) into Empire and pop a miner in an ice belt, sure I'll lose my ship, but I'll get paid a bounty from the alliance wallet. Insurance is great, but bounties are better. Goons, putting the game back in the player's hands!
No man, I got the point, I was just poking fun at your post. I'm not gonna lie, that is kind of cool that the Goonies do that though. Sometimes you guys make me /facepalm but other times I think you hit the nail on the head.
|
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 00:53:00 -
[90] - Quote
Ptraci wrote:Here's a thought: index insurance to the player's security rating. It follows the concept of insurance, where you charge higher risk people higher premiums (or in this case, pay out less). Since repeated suiciding will decrease the sec rating, insurance would provide diminishing return over time if the person is a "serial suicider"...
Wow, I really like that idea. It would really add a new dimension to being a pirate. Of course, they should balance that by making a pirate exclusive activity. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:06:00 -
[91] - Quote
Ptraci wrote:Here's a thought: index insurance to the player's security rating. It follows the concept of insurance, where you charge higher risk people higher premiums (or in this case, pay out less). Since repeated suiciding will decrease the sec rating, insurance would provide diminishing return over time if the person is a "serial suicider"...
It'd only make sense, right? Just like how mining barges should be paid out less if they're being blown up in high-risk areas. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:10:00 -
[92] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Andski wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Andski wrote: you're pretty stupid m8
great argument "mate" I'm not going to repeat the same s hit ad nauseum, but hey keep saying dumb crap without a clue what you're talking about You are just full of brilliant arguments today, arent you? Now why dont you do us all a service and stop filling the forums with your venom? Edit: sorry, I realize your are probably genetically programed to spew ****. very well. carry on.
Okay, since you're clearly a moron, let me repeat the same thing I've said 20 times!
First, GSF has a large supercapital fleet. We are also affected by the nerf. Second, the "resource rebalance" you talk about affects technetium negatively. Sales of technetium are our biggest income source.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:30:00 -
[93] - Quote
Hey kids, are you finished?
Good, now we can discuss about the new tiers 3 battle cruiser bs guns sized overpownerwtfomgitrocksthecrapoutofyourmom
Thx |
Anela Cistine
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:35:00 -
[94] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for: - The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible
I regret to inform you that you have bought into the goon propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Despite what we've told you, we aren't the boogeyman, we want to play a good game, just like you.
1. CFC has one of the largest supercap fleets in the game, and plenty of secure space to build more. Supercaps are a bad mechanic, and they are bad for EVE. The problem is that CCP didn't plan for the day when there would be 10 or 20 or 30 titans in a single fleet. The idea of blobs of supercaps didn't occur to them until it was too late. The more powerful supercaps are, the more they entrench the intrests of large alliances already in nullsec. If the only counter to supercarriers is MORE supercarriers, and you can't build supercarriers until you own space, who benefits? Sov holding alliances like Goonswarm. In the future we want it to be possible for a subcap gang to win against a supercap, not easy, just possible.
2. This is dumb. We have been advocating hard for a tech nerf, because it is stupid at a regional R32 is more valuable than the R64s. We didn't like it when we lived in Delve (no tech) and we don't like it now that we live in Deklein (plenty of tech). It is a bad mechanic. We would like a resource spread that doesn't render large swathes of nullsec worthless, despite the fact that we live in one of the really valuable parts right now.
3. Time Dilation makes lag fair. Having hundreds of players get stuck looking at a black screen for 6 hours, is a bad mechanic. It is bad when it has happened to us, and it isn't much more fun when it happens to our enemies. Would you want to play a game where you are blind, paralyzed, and unable to even log off for hours at a time? No, of course not. Most goons lament the loss of the good old days of small gang warfare, but until sov battles are fought using Alliance Tournament rules, you are going to bring everything you have because the other guy is bring all he has. That has been a fact of Eve since before goons started playing in 2006.
Those are all objectively good things, things that nearly everyone wants. Our "playstyle" works just as well in a bad game as a good game, but like you we'd rather play a good game. We don't want to win eve, we just want to have fun. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
289
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 01:55:00 -
[95] - Quote
Anela Cistine wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:baltec1 wrote:
These narrow goals being fixing blasters, supercarrier imbalances, new ships, fixes for old bugs, new technology to fight lag to name but a few.
Sorry but you give the Goon too much credit here. Leading the CSM and taking the lead on all these different areas are not the same. Goons have primarily been advocating for: - The supercap nerf, as a direct counter to the DRF and elite PVP enemies - A resource rebalance within different areas of space to the benefit of the Goon - Time dilation, which will ensure that even larger blobs are feasible I regret to inform you that you have bought into the goon propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Despite what we've told you, we aren't the boogeyman, we want to play a good game, just like you. 1. CFC has one of the largest supercap fleets in the game, and plenty of secure space to build more. Supercaps are a bad mechanic, and they are bad for EVE. The problem is that CCP didn't plan for the day when there would be 10 or 20 or 30 titans in a single fleet. The idea of blobs of supercaps didn't occur to them until it was too late. The more powerful supercaps are, the more they entrench the intrests of large alliances already in nullsec. If the only counter to supercarriers is MORE supercarriers, and you can't build supercarriers until you own space, who benefits? Sov holding alliances like Goonswarm. In the future we want it to be possible for a subcap gang to win against a supercap, not easy, just possible. 2. This is dumb. We have been advocating hard for a tech nerf, because it is stupid at a regional R32 is more valuable than the R64s. We didn't like it when we lived in Delve (no tech) and we don't like it now that we live in Deklein (plenty of tech). It is a bad mechanic. We would like a resource spread that doesn't render large swathes of nullsec worthless, despite the fact that we live in one of the really valuable parts right now. 3. Time Dilation makes lag fair. Having hundreds of players get stuck looking at a black screen for 6 hours is a bad mechanic. It is bad when it has happened to us, and it isn't much more fun when it happens to our enemies. Would you want to play a game where you are blind, paralyzed, and unable to even log off for hours at a time? No, of course not. Most goons lament the loss of the good old days of small gang warfare, but until sov battles are fought using Alliance Tournament rules, you are going to bring everything you have because the other guy is bringing all he has. That has been a fact of Eve since before goons started playing in 2006. Those are all objectively good things, things that nearly everyone wants. Our "playstyle" works just as well in a bad game as a good game, but like you we'd rather play a good game. We don't want to win eve, we just want to have fun.
no you see they're just mad because the CSM hasn't been pushing CCP to allow high-sec incursions to be run solo |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:01:00 -
[96] - Quote
1. You have a big supercap fleet. Your enemies supercap fleet is bigger.
2. Funny, didnt hear any complaints before the DRF and "elite PVP" alliances you so despised moved in. Again your tech income is high. Their tech income is higher.
3. My point stand. It will support larger numbers which you are in the best position to exploit.
Now dont read me wrong, I support the changes. Supercaps have nearly killed off nullsec. Shaking up resorce distribution will create new conflict lines which will provide a necessary kickstart for renewed nullsec warfare, which is needed because CCP slept in class and let the supercaps destroy nullsec warfare in the first place. And time dilation will provide a possibility for the most epic battles in EVE history. All this is good.
BUT, dont come here and whiteknight yourself and pretend you "do it for the game". You do it first and foremost for the Goon game. Changes and proposals not really relevant to the goons doenst get much attention from you guys. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
289
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:11:00 -
[97] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:2. Funny, didnt hear any complaints before the DRF and "elite PVP" alliances you so despise moved in. Again your tech income is high. Their tech income is higher.
You obviously didn't pay attention before that. |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:14:00 -
[98] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
3. My point stand. It will support larger numbers which you are in the best position to exploit.
So any means to fix lag are bad because they benefit the blob, seriously ? I dont know what you do in EVE but I'm certain you wouldnt want to have the kind of lag we get in large fleet fights. It doesnt matter if you like blobs or not, ******* up peoples game is bad, fixing that problem is good. There is no technical solution for blobbing, if you dont like it, leave Sov 0.0.
|
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:22:00 -
[99] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:
3. My point stand. It will support larger numbers which you are in the best position to exploit.
So any means to fix lag are bad because they benefit the blob, seriously ?
Reading comprehension ftw? Try reading the WHOLE post before responding. It usually helps. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:26:00 -
[100] - Quote
Andski wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:2. Funny, didnt hear any complaints before the DRF and "elite PVP" alliances you so despise moved in. Again your tech income is high. Their tech income is higher. You obviously didn't pay attention before that.
I did. It just isnt relevant to the matter at hand. From a stratetic point of view, the you are currently in an income deficit compared to your enemies in the north/east. It thus makes complete strategic sense to try to push for resource distribution to nullify your enemies advantage. What you did or did not think about tech before is not relevant to that particular strategic problem. |
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:35:00 -
[101] - Quote
hey can I join the "crapping up the thread with a threadjack about off topic stupid stuff no one but 3 of us care about" club?
you guys are so cool i'm swooning |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
61
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:37:00 -
[102] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:hey can I join the "crapping up the thread with a threadjack about off topic stupid stuff no one but 3 of us care about" club?
you guys are so cool i'm swooning
+rep |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:53:00 -
[103] - Quote
So anyways I'm thinking 'mwd/painter/1400mm tornado wolfpack' with light tackle support
u down? |
Shade Millith
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 02:57:00 -
[104] - Quote
Vastek Non wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Five words: No insurance for concorded ships. Its never made sense in the past, and it makes no sense now. You want to suicide a ship, sure do it, but you have to pay a cost. Oh yes, and i'm really looking forward to the Gallente/Amarr versions
So long as Concord has it's time to arrival doubled. Back to what it used to be. |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 10:55:00 -
[105] - Quote
Please don't open multiple threads about the same topic, thank you.
Thread locked.
You can continue discussions in this feedback thread. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 01:04:00 -
[106] - Quote
Jinn Rho wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Someone needs to reassess his cost/benefit analysis with regards to using these as disposable ships. Pretty much. How many suicide gankers willingly each spend over 150-200m+ on a single gank? Tier3 BCs are obviously going to be expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if the required manufacturing materials clock these ships over 180m. Let's see CCP slap on a silly tech book that has you lose a lvl every time you lose a Tier3 BC, similar to the current Tech3 Cruiser. Now that'd be funny, conservative, and actually tactical... no need to outdate current Tier2 BCs.
They cant be more expensive than Tier 1 BS because if they are nobody is going to use them. Those ships will be BCs, Tech 1, they will probably cost around 50m, maybe 60. Who the hell would spend 200m for a Tech 1 BC Hull with crap tracking ?
|
Desudes
Pixelmoon The Star League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 02:08:00 -
[107] - Quote
I'd image it will cost more then a drake, less then a scorpion. How would it make sense any other way?
People suicide ganking as a reason to raise costs is ridiculous: if suicide ganking is really a problem there are plenty easier ways to address it that would have less collateral damage FOR THE DESU!!! |
People's Republic ofChina
My Other Capital Ship is Your Mom
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 07:51:00 -
[108] - Quote
Tier 3 battlecruisers make me excited in ways one should not be excited over pixels. Orcas will be cheaper to take out.
LET THE WHALE HUNTING COMMENCE! MAN THE HARPOONS! |
People's Republic ofChina
My Other Capital Ship is Your Mom
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 07:52:00 -
[109] - Quote
Desudes wrote:I'd image it will cost more then a drake, less then a scorpion. How would it make sense any other way?
People suicide ganking as a reason to raise costs is ridiculous: if suicide ganking is really a problem there are plenty easier ways to address it that would have less collateral damage
Like?
Ships need to be exploded. No ship explodey, no need for replacement ships. |
Dalts
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:50:00 -
[110] - Quote
+1 to the idea of getting rid of insurance in certain circumstances.
My personal opinion is that insurance should be invalid if you lose the ship to Concord or in 0.0/WH space.
Fixes lots of things, inc raising the bar at which suicide ganking is profitable.
Most importantly, it makes 0.0 wars cost ISK like they should, rather than the sorry state of affairs now where the only time it really hurts and alliance is if you manage to take out multiple Supercaps that they cannot replace in time for the next battle.
You see posts about battles or battle summaries on a KB and a quoted loss for each side that runs into the billions, but when you factor in the insurance it might only be under a billion that it actually costs each side, making it pretty pointless unless it results in a Tech moon changing hands or a handful of Supercaps going down. Would be lovely if those figures really did show the economic damage you were doing to the opposition. Might even make Titans and Supercaps a bit rarer like CCP intended. Even with basic insurance you get a large wedge of ISK back when a Titan goes down. |
|
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
221
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:03:00 -
[111] - Quote
You currently lose about 30mil on a suicide apoc.
I wager you'll end up losing about 15mil on a Tornado.
That's **** all difference, really.
People ganking for the fun won't care about cost. People ganking for profit won't see a difference. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:49:00 -
[112] - Quote
I'll gank some for free, just because I can(with new bc's), no matter who no matter when and no matter what. I have all the tools for it and there's nothing someone will ever be able to do about it, plus will cost me peanuts.
After velator or atron's they're not newbies anymore right? -nice start for training gank online. |
Tauren Tom
Order of the Silver Dragons Clone Vat
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 14:21:00 -
[113] - Quote
It's the equivalent of a redneck strapping the turret off an m1a1 abrams to the roof of his beat up ford pickup truck and then trying to blow up a grain silo.
It looks cool until you realize how stupid it was to sit in a tin can with a gun strapped to it with enough recoil to rip the can apart. |
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 14:30:00 -
[114] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:You currently lose about 30mil on a suicide apoc.
I wager you'll end up losing about 15mil on a Tornado.
That's **** all difference, really.
People ganking for the fun won't care about cost. People ganking for profit won't see a difference.
Wrong. Suicide ganking is all about the profit, and cost is one of the direct factors on profit. And you can't lose 15 mil on a 25 mil bc when insured. It's a t1 bc bpo, easily researched and produced in mass. The markup will be small and shorter than when Noctics were introduced (bpo seeds available in ore stations only) and same as when tier 2 bcs were introduced (a few mil markup, lasting for only a few hours). |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:57:00 -
[115] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:You currently lose about 30mil on a suicide apoc.
I wager you'll end up losing about 15mil on a Tornado.
That's **** all difference, really.
People ganking for the fun won't care about cost. People ganking for profit won't see a difference.
15mil sounds about right assuming:
*base mineral cost splits the difference between Cane and Phoon costs *insurance payout - insurance cost = the current % range of base mineral cost of tier 2 BC
[/crystal ball] |
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:06:00 -
[116] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote:You currently lose about 30mil on a suicide apoc.
I wager you'll end up losing about 15mil on a Tornado.
That's **** all difference, really.
People ganking for the fun won't care about cost. People ganking for profit won't see a difference. 15mil sounds about right assuming: *base mineral cost splits the difference between Cane and Phoon costs *insurance payout - insurance cost = the current % range of base mineral cost of tier 2 BC [/crystal ball]
15 mil sounds wrong. You should use tier 1 and tier 2 cost difference (cyclone and cane) as template to likely cost of tier 3, not ships one class up. All t1 ships has followed the same pattern. There is no reason to assume tier 3 bc will break from the pattern. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:58:00 -
[117] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:15mil sounds about right assuming:
*base mineral cost splits the difference between Cane and Phoon costs *insurance payout - insurance cost = the current % range of base mineral cost of tier 2 BC
[/crystal ball] 15 mil sounds wrong. You should use tier 1 and tier 2 mineral cost difference (cyclone and cane) within bc class as template to likely cost of tier 3, not ships one class up. All t1 ships has followed the same pattern. There is no reason to assume tier 3 bc will break from the pattern.
I think you misunderstood the point I was making even though I underlined and bolded the important part.
Fun Fact:
if Tornado cost : Cane cost as Cane cost : Cyclon cost...... the number is roughly the same as splitting cane and phoon costs. |
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:31:00 -
[118] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Goose99 wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:15mil sounds about right assuming:
*base mineral cost splits the difference between Cane and Phoon costs *insurance payout - insurance cost = the current % range of base mineral cost of tier 2 BC
[/crystal ball] 15 mil sounds wrong. You should use tier 1 and tier 2 mineral cost difference (cyclone and cane) within bc class as template to likely cost of tier 3, not ships one class up. All t1 ships has followed the same pattern. There is no reason to assume tier 3 bc will break from the pattern. I think you misunderstood the point I was making even though I underlined and bolded the important part. Fun Fact: if Tornado cost : Cane cost as Cane cost : Cyclon cost...... the number is roughly the same as splitting cane and phoon costs.
I have 18/26/61 mils for cyclone/cane/phon in Rens. The gap is bigger than splitting the difference. Not to mention that unlike phon, Apoc is tier 2 bs that cost significantly more. |
Daquaris
The Milkmen Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:39:00 -
[119] - Quote
Tippia wrote:mkint wrote:Now we get a tier 3 BC that does the same job as a tier 1? Why not just go ahead and remove the tier 1's from the game altogether? That's less of a problem GÇö the tier-1s need to be fixed regardless. The larger worry is that these tier-3s will obsolete the tier-2s just like the tier-2s did to the tier-1s. Hopefullly, that GÇ£less tank than a battleshipGÇ¥ is a typo, and they actually mean GÇ£less tank than a battlecruiserGÇ¥ (as in, tanks like a cruiser, at best).
FWIW the version I've been playing with so far (in pyfa - based on the early leak) has about 25k - 40k ehp.
Seems about fair.
Also, with the right setup, the Talos will push 1700+ dps right now.... YUM! |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 22:16:00 -
[120] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:I have 18/26/61 mils for cyclone/cane/phon in Rens. The gap is bigger than splitting the difference. Not to mention that unlike phon, Apoc is tier 2 bs that cost significantly more.
At first I was like.... YAY wicked arbitrage!!
Then I realized that you moved the price comparison goal posts.
As for the Apoc: Yep, I ignored the comparison with a tier 2 BS of a different race for my totally crystal ball loss amount on a tornado.
Better grasp harder bro, the straws seem to be slipping away faster and faster. |
|
Ladie Harlot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
523
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 22:26:00 -
[121] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Wrong. Suicide ganking is all about the profit lol what
The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 22:29:00 -
[122] - Quote
Daquaris wrote:Also, with the right setup, the Talos will push 1700+ dps right now.... YUM!
I dont have pyf, so is that a faction fit glass cannon or a t2 fit with armor/shield buffer? |
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 22:40:00 -
[123] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Goose99 wrote:I have 18/26/61 mils for cyclone/cane/phon in Rens. The gap is bigger than splitting the difference. Not to mention that unlike phon, Apoc is tier 2 bs that cost significantly more. At first I was like.... YAY wicked arbitrage!! Then I realized that you moved the price comparison goal posts. As for the Apoc: Yep, I ignored the comparison with a tier 2 BS of a different race for my totally crystal ball loss amount on a tornado. Better grasp harder bro, the straws seem to be slipping away faster and faster.
Apoc, 8 1400s for alpha. Gank standard issue. Anyone who knows enough to comment should know. I was replying to this:
Khanh'rhh wrote:You currently lose about 30mil on a suicide apoc.
I wager you'll end up losing about 15mil on a Tornado.
That's **** all difference, really.
People ganking for the fun won't care about cost. People ganking for profit won't see a difference.
And yes, price comparisons to even cheaper tier 1 bs is pointless, as the tier 1 bs will cost roughly twice as much as the bc, 3 times for tier 2. As a bc, Tornado will be far cheaper, while still having the same alpha as a tier 2 bs for gank purposes. Hence this thread. |
Zeerover
Wolfsbrigade
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 23:00:00 -
[124] - Quote
It's not the new BCs that will be the battleganker, it's the updated destroyers. 600+ DPS Catalysts will be an incredibly cost efficent suicide package. |
Desudes
Pixelmoon The Star League
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 23:38:00 -
[125] - Quote
If you think CCP doesn't know these ships won't be suicide gankers friend, I don't know what to say.
If they wanted to stop high sec ganking they would turn off PvP in the areas they don't want people being ganked, like every other MMO. FOR THE DESU!!! |
Daquaris
The Milkmen Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 03:36:00 -
[126] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Daquaris wrote:Also, with the right setup, the Talos will push 1700+ dps right now.... YUM! I dont have pyf, so is that a faction fit glass cannon or a t2 fit with armor/shield buffer?
Nope, a relatively affordable throwaway suicide fit (t2) - admittedly with heat and implants however (I suppose it's not THAT unusual, my ganker has implants...(
Here's the fit if you are interested |
stoicfaux
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 04:44:00 -
[127] - Quote
Am I right in thinking that a T2 1400 Apoc can (barely) alpha a glass cannon Talos?
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
71
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 04:54:00 -
[128] - Quote
An idea just hit me. I think I'm getting Goonitis.
If the Tier 3 BC is cheap enough, how many would it take to alpha a Tech 3 cruiser? Consider the cost ratio, an economic war on a corporation taking down a billion dollar ship with nearly half that in insured hulls...
just saying.
I'm going to stick with my Cyclone. They'll probably be down to 5 million ISK this winter.
|
Daquaris
The Milkmen Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 06:06:00 -
[129] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:An idea just hit me. I think I'm getting Goonitis.
If the Tier 3 BC is cheap enough, how many would it take to alpha a Tech 3 cruiser? Consider the cost ratio, an economic war on a corporation taking down a billion dollar ship with nearly half that in insured hulls...
just saying.
I'm going to stick with my Cyclone. They'll probably be down to 5 million ISK this winter.
You can already do it cheap (and easily) enough with an artypoc. |
Calgrissom Torvec
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:10:00 -
[130] - Quote
Been preaching this ever since they released the info that new low skill BC where coming out with BS weapon mounts. If anyone thinks that these new BC are anything but CCP giving griefers/gankers a cheaper tool to hi sec gank with there crazy. CCP wants pirates running rampant in OP cheap ships as it fuels plex sales for poor high sec players trying to recoup from gankers. There is no place in the game for cheap fast high power weapon ships other thank ganking and the best part is most everyone doesnt see this.
Inc major tears and cries for the nerf bat after these things hit the street. |
|
Calgrissom Torvec
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:26:00 -
[131] - Quote
Edit: Wanted to add that ive always said Insurance should never be payed out to anyone who is concorded. If CCP didnt want high sec ganking that would stop 90% of it. But ganking makes CCP to much money on plex sales so of course they are going to fuel their gank players with as much insentive to gank as possible. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 13:42:00 -
[132] - Quote
Calgrissom Torvec wrote:Edit: Wanted to add that ive always said Insurance should never be payed out to anyone who is concorded. If CCP didnt want high sec ganking that would stop 90% of it. But ganking makes CCP to much money on plex sales so of course they are going to fuel their gank players with as much insentive to gank as possible.
This. No insurance if you're killed by concord.
|
VaMei
Meafi Corp
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:02:00 -
[133] - Quote
I know all of the numbers people are tossing around are alpha and may not get to Sisi let alone go live, but are people really that worried about getting ganked by a t3 BC with 400mm resolution guns, when destroyers are having their -25% ROF removed? Removing that -25% is actually a 33% increase over current numbers, and that's to guns that can actually hit a small target on a ship with better tracking than anything else out there.
Add in the proposed buffs to blasters, and the Neutron Catalyst firing Void is going to bring suicide gankers to a whole new level of wet dreams. |
Daquaris
The Milkmen Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 17:14:00 -
[134] - Quote
I am ready for this.
Looks like a max skilled cat will push around 750 dps.... |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:00:00 -
[135] - Quote
VaMei wrote:I know all of the numbers people are tossing around are alpha and may not get to Sisi let alone go live, but are people really that worried about getting ganked by a t3 BC with 400mm resolution guns, when destroyers are having their -25% ROF removed? Removing that -25% is actually a 33% increase over current numbers, and that's to guns that can actually hit a small target on a ship with better tracking than anything else out there. Add in the proposed buffs to blasters, and the Neutron Catalyst firing Void is going to bring suicide gankers to a whole new level of wet dreams. so from now on destroyers will be the suicide ships?:O tempest alpha around 8-10k trasher around 1k-1.2k both can do only 1 volley as far as i know tempest should be able to easily hit its target (industrials)
getting the rof penalty off from trasher wont change this average industrial 3k ehp
the new bc possibly will have around 80% alpha of a tempst , so would you use 1 ships and account to insta kill an indi or you would take 4 ****** destroyers and split the loot + suffer 4times as much sec penalty? |
Calgrissom Torvec
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:21:00 -
[136] - Quote
VaMei wrote:I know all of the numbers people are tossing around are alpha and may not get to Sisi let alone go live, but are people really that worried about getting ganked by a t3 BC with 400mm resolution guns, when destroyers are having their -25% ROF removed? Removing that -25% is actually a 33% increase over current numbers, and that's to guns that can actually hit a small target on a ship with better tracking than anything else out there. Add in the proposed buffs to blasters, and the Neutron Catalyst firing Void is going to bring suicide gankers to a whole new level of wet dreams.
No people are worried about Minmatar Tornado's with 1400/1200 artys roflstomping indies. Solo ganking just got a 50% discount because now instead of a tempest people will use the tornado. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:21:00 -
[137] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:An idea just hit me. I think I'm getting Goonitis.
If the Tier 3 BC is cheap enough, how many would it take to alpha a Tech 3 cruiser?
1st depends how the T3 is tanked
2nd depends how skilled are your friends, because you don't think you can do this al alone do ya?
3rd depends how stupid is the T3 pilot
The "stupid" one let you disrupt him and keeps shooting mobs, you gank it and he's still there waiting his targets do get blown (hi null sec rating bots)
True story bro
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
63
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 19:23:00 -
[138] - Quote
On paper.
|
shal ri
Zanzibar Land
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 20:01:00 -
[139] - Quote
all i hear is carebears b******* about being ganked while mining thier little hearts out. its eve. its made for pvp. y play if u dont plan on doing any killin like really. go play WOW if u dont want to pvp. in regards to ganking in high sec, thank god that its allowed. f****** carebears sit in high sec all safe doin the circle jerk to stay busy while they shoot rocks all day and do mish out the ass.
without ganking high sec would be all war decs and ppl spiining thier mining/mish ships in station till the dec is over. gank on gankers kill those carebears. |
bloomeh
Ghost Militia BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 07:40:00 -
[140] - Quote
Make it like real insurance. The more you lose your ships, the more your insurance goes up till they won't insure your high risk ass anymore. |
|
Ima FatBastard
Goonswarm Protective Services
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 08:23:00 -
[141] - Quote
Calgrissom Torvec wrote:No people are worried about Minmatar Tornado's with 1400/1200 artys roflstomping indies. Solo ganking just got a 50% discount because now instead of a tempest people will use the tornado. It's going to be amazing.
|
Onictus
Legendary Knights Vorpal's Edge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 08:41:00 -
[142] - Quote
Calgrissom Torvec wrote:Been preaching this ever since they released the info that new low skill BC where coming out with BS weapon mounts. If anyone thinks that these new BC are anything but CCP giving griefers/gankers a cheaper tool to hi sec gank with there crazy. CCP wants pirates running rampant in OP cheap ships as it fuels plex sales for poor high sec players trying to recoup from gankers. There is no place in the game for cheap fast high power weapon ships other than ganking and the best part is most everyone doesnt see this.
Inc major tears and cries for the nerf bat after these things hit the street.
I think you are over reacting.
There are going to be two major effects from T3 BC....
and an increase is suicide ganking isn't it because its STILL going to be a hell of a lot cheaper to gank in **** fit catalysts and a thashers than +40mil isk battlecruisers. The whole idea is ********.....this isn't going to change anything, indies already get ganked all the time, and you still can't do **** about it in high sec because of the way agression works.
However, these new BCs are going to be terrors to the current all BC all the time fleets, from what I've seen they are going to mangle the current BC line-ups, and the only real way to deal with them will be wolf packs and nano-BSs
So maybe we'll see more BS's out and a about other than station games and the odd log-on trap.
The other thing is that these are going to be terrors in groups to cap pilots, specaily since dreads are losing their drones.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 09:29:00 -
[143] - Quote
Calgrissom Torvec wrote:Been preaching this ever since they released the info that new low skill BC where coming out with BS weapon mounts. If anyone thinks that these new BC are anything but CCP giving griefers/gankers a cheaper tool to hi sec gank with there crazy. CCP wants pirates running rampant in OP cheap ships as it fuels plex sales for poor high sec players trying to recoup from gankers. There is no place in the game for cheap fast high power weapon ships other than ganking and the best part is most everyone doesnt see this.
Inc major tears and cries for the nerf bat after these things hit the street.
Mr Torvec, what you've just said ... is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
289
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 09:52:00 -
[144] - Quote
How are you guys fitting those ships up when i cant find them in Pyfa? (nub question) The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Aamrr
HnL Enterprise
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 10:07:00 -
[145] - Quote
Pyfa released a new experimental build including the new BC stats. The pyfa thread has the details. |
Daquaris
The Milkmen Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 10:48:00 -
[146] - Quote
Headerman wrote:How are you guys fitting those ships up when i cant find them in Pyfa? (nub question)
Try here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=256841#post256841 |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:58:00 -
[147] - Quote
With the tracking bonus I think that this 750ish dps number will be rather accurate if you're shooting at cruisers and up.
When it comes to frigates... even doing half that dps is going to be bloody murder.
|
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
87
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 16:32:00 -
[148] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:With the tracking bonus I think that this 750ish dps number will be rather accurate if you're shooting at cruisers and up. When it comes to frigates... even doing half that dps is going to be bloody murder.
Barges are cruiser sized. So yeah, bloody murder. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |