EVE Search - Faction Mining Barge for harder ganking

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Faction Mining Barge for harder ganking

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lando Storm Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2011.11.01 20:09:00 - [31] - Quote Gealbhan wrote: Krios Ahzek wrote: Weaselior wrote: i support faction mining barges but only if they're hilariously expensive Considering Hulks are 200 mil, Faction barges should be 1 bil minimum. But hey, it'll tank 40% more gankers! Gealbhan wrote: Tank a hulk properly and it can survive most gank attempts, they'd have to throw real isk into the gank to destroy your hulk and by then it becomes counter productive. You truly think miner ganking is actually ''productive'' ? No, I'm just saying it could be made less appealing by fitting your barge properly. Acutaly ganking miners help the EvE economy by making 2+ players buy new ships and mod
Justin Credulent Perkone Caldari State 17	Posted - 2011.11.01 20:28:00 - [32] - Quote Quote: no, paying attention for harder ganking Except it actually doesn't matter if you're paying attention. I don't agree with the OP regarding "Faction Barges" and launcher fittings on mining ships... but I think he's on the right track. I think what CCP should do is actually give exhumers more armor/shields. Considering a Hulk costs 200 mil, it shouldn't be a piece of paper floating in space. It should actually require a serious investment on the part of the ganker to bring it down. And the ganker should have consequences for doing so - for instance, forfeiture of insurance payout. Note, this will not "remove" suicide ganking from the game. It will simply make the game more like real life.
Nova Fox Novafox Shipyards 187	Posted - 2011.11.01 20:35:00 - [33] - Quote We already got faction barges.
Lando Storm Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2011.11.01 20:53:00 - [34] - Quote Nova Fox wrote: We already got faction barges. we have faction barges just like we have faction Ishtars ( CreoDron )
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1382	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:02:00 - [35] - Quote Justin Credulent wrote: Considering a Hulk costs 200 mil, it shouldn't be a piece of paper floating in space. It should actually require a serious investment on the part of the ganker to bring it down. its a civilian ship for worthless peasants of course it should be made of rags
Paragon Renegade The Multinational Company. 65	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:05:00 - [36] - Quote All Barges & Exhumers.............and salvagers........... and capital industrials........ are ORE faction ships already. But even if that were the case, having moar tank would make botting easier for Nullminers, and it would still do nothing if the alpha strike was high. Miners should be aligned to station always, and be at least 50% impulse; they'll be gone before they need a tank if they stay aware using D-scan, or even just by looking around. Instead of having everyone cater to the miners, and make life easier for them, make ganking more rewarding (Higher probability of items being dropped from destroyed ships?) but more dangerous. If the miners suck ass, and just mine AFK, it's their own damn fault for being brain-dead. "Man, you aren't actually trying to do this, right? Nobody is that stupid right?" "How wrong you are"
Khai'ne True Grit. 1	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:10:00 - [37] - Quote If you're living in fear of being ganked, mine in a Rokh...pulls in m(ore) than a retriever and you get 200k+ ehp.
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1382	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:13:00 - [38] - Quote Khai'ne wrote: If you're living in fear of being ganked, mine in a Rokh...pulls in ore than a retriever and you get 200k+ ehp. my botting isk/hour!!!!!
Fuujin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 24	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:16:00 - [39] - Quote I would enjoy killing a 1B utterly uninsurable vanity barge.
Justin Credulent Perkone Caldari State 18	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:29:00 - [40] - Quote Quote: But even if that were the case, having moar tank would make botting easier for Nullminers, and it would still do nothing if the alpha strike was high. Except for the fact that nullbots are going to do it regardless of whether or not Exhumers have more tank added or not. Also, from my understanding, nullbots are programmed to warp to safe spot (usually a fortified POS) whenever a non-blue enters the system. So the tank is a moot point. (This is not to suggest that you can stop an entire Alliance from botting simply by parking a few cloaky alts in the bot-systems.. no sir no sir... ) Quote: Miners should be aligned to station always, and be at least 50% impulse; they'll be gone before they need a tank if they stay aware using D-scan, or even just by looking around. And what happens when you get out of range of your mining lazers? And BTW, unless you're in nullsec, D-scanner to protect miners from ganking is pretty much useless. Quote: Instead of having everyone cater to the miners, and make life easier for them, make ganking more rewarding (Higher probability of items being dropped from destroyed ships?) but more dangerous. If the miners suck ass, and just mine AFK, it's their own damn fault for being brain-dead. Except for the fact that no one caters to miners, and in fact pirates and griefers feel entitled to attack miners.

Fuujin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:37:00 - [41] - Quote Justin Credulent wrote: And what happens when you get out of range of your mining lazers? And BTW, unless you're in nullsec, D-scanner to protect miners from ganking is pretty much useless. Except for the fact that no one caters to miners, and in fact pirates and griefers feel entitled to attack miners. Change alignment to another celestial to stay in range? Target another rock/ice chunk? Be at the keyboard for more than 30s out of every 10 minutes? Just because you don't know how to D-scan effectively, doesn't mean others can't. It's quite easy to setup and monitor...though it does require you to not be afk. And I'm grasping my pearls at the notion of people attacking other people in a PvP game when it would be economically advantageous for them to do so! My word, what will we see next, people organizing to blow up freighters carrying billions of isk in goods?
Justin Credulent Perkone Caldari State 20	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:41:00 - [42] - Quote Quote: Just because you don't know how to D-scan effectively, doesn't mean others can't. It's quite easy to setup and monitor...though it does require you to not be afk. D-Scan will not help a miner to avoid being ganked in hi-sec, and I challenge you to prove me wrong.
Lando Storm Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:42:00 - [43] - Quote Fuujin wrote: Justin Credulent wrote: And what happens when you get out of range of your mining lazers? And BTW, unless you're in nullsec, D-scanner to protect miners from ganking is pretty much useless. Except for the fact that no one caters to miners, and in fact pirates and griefers feel entitled to attack miners. Change alignment to another celestial to stay in range? Target another rock/ice chunk? Be at the keyboard for more than 30s out of every 10 minutes? Just because you don't know how to D-scan effectively, doesn't mean others can't. It's quite easy to setup and monitor...though it does require you to not be afk. And I'm grasping my pearls at the notion of people attacking other people in a PvP game when it would be economically advantageous for them to do so! My word, what will we see next, people organizing to blow up freighters carrying billions of isk in goods? Thats why i suggested to have the mining wesel shoot back instead of just a tank buff. IMO it would make ganking a bit more fun because it would be a 2 way exchange. Also the ships im suggesting would really only be used in High sec. the current mining barges would still have bonuses and null sec miners know to POS up when a neut or red comes in system
Jaroslav Unwanted Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 31	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:44:00 - [44] - Quote Fuujin wrote: Justin Credulent wrote: And what happens when you get out of range of your mining lazers? And BTW, unless you're in nullsec, D-scanner to protect miners from ganking is pretty much useless. Except for the fact that no one caters to miners, and in fact pirates and griefers feel entitled to attack miners. Change alignment to another celestial to stay in range? Target another rock/ice chunk? Be at the keyboard for more than 30s out of every 10 minutes? Just because you don't know how to D-scan effectively, doesn't mean others can't. It's quite easy to setup and monitor...though it does require you to not be afk. And I'm grasping my pearls at the notion of people attacking other people in a PvP game when it would be economically advantageous for them to do so! My word, what will we see next, people organizing to blow up freighters carrying billions of isk in goods? Just because you do not approve the play-style of many doesn't mean they are doing it wrong. Some people "play" EVE mostly afk, reading books, doing other stuff. Or just chatting out with "friends" about many subjects at private channels. Changing their play style not gonna happen because they probably got more interesting things in their life than hitting D-scan and changing alignment to different SS or/and celestial.
gfldex 28	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:53:00 - [45] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Once upon a time there were no mining barges. Back then people would mine in apocalypses. You know how hard it is to gank an apoc? Given that all but one lowslot was filled with co-pros and there was no stacking penalty for dmg mods a thorax or a maller was very capable of soloing a mining apoc. Having 1/4 base HP compared to nowadays didn't help much either. At the other hand ppl tend to team up at those times instead of fielding armies of alts, so the payback could be rather unpleasant.
Fuujin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25	Posted - 2011.11.01 21:55:00 - [46] - Quote Jaroslav Unwanted wrote: I want utter safety 100% of the time!!! I, too, think that logging into a PvP game and going AFK in an expensive ship is a great idea. If you want safety where you can pass out on the keyboard, go to WoW or Hello Kitty. There's a risk in Eve every time you undock. Just because you don't want to acknowledge the risk doesn't make it go away, and denying that the risk exists at all just makes you look and sound dumb. Mitigate and minimize your risks, and you reduce the odds of taking a loss significantly. Or you can keep flying paper-thin ships that drop pricey modules (along with sweet tears) and likely get blown up much more frequently. It's your choice--and there is a choice there, whether you want to acknowlege it or not.
Jaroslav Unwanted Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 31	Posted - 2011.11.01 22:00:00 - [47] - Quote Fuujin wrote: Jaroslav Unwanted wrote: I want utter safety 100% of the time!!! I, too, think that logging into a PvP game and going AFK in an expensive ship is a great idea. If you want safety where you can pass out on the keyboard, go to WoW or Hello Kitty. There's a risk in Eve every time you undock. Just because you don't want to acknowledge the risk doesn't make it go away, and denying that the risk exists at all just makes you look and sound dumb. Mitigate and minimize your risks, and you reduce the odds of taking a loss significantly. Or you can keep flying paper-thin ships that drop pricey modules (along with sweet tears) and likely get blown up much more frequently. It's your choice--and there is a choice there, whether you want to acknowlege it or not. Depend. In the end everything is PvP game accordingly to your description even Tetris is an PvP game. Even solitair is PvP game. Generally you creating condition such as "i win environment" which creates such term as PvP. But as far as shooting up people who got no clue, time or dont care about your "little imaginary i win condition" PvP game are actually not engaged in such. Their condition of "i win" differs greatly from yours. As i say : You dont have to approve their understanding of an game as well as you dont have to approve their gameplay but that doesnt mean they are doing it wrong. Anyway ballpark is yours as you creating it. People will adapt or move out. Simple. edit... bolded .. thats probably only problem . As i wrote in different thread once... Mission runner in "expensive ship and fit" team up with ten friends and is on somewhat safer site. Miner gank up with 5000 strong subcap fleet and still gonna get destroyed by 20 mil ship .. Something seems to be off limit there. Not that i mine but still its interesting.
Fuujin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 25	Posted - 2011.11.01 22:33:00 - [48] - Quote Jaroslav Unwanted wrote: In the end everything is PvP game accordingly to your description even Tetris is an PvP game. Even solitair is PvP game. Generally you creating condition such as "i win environment" which creates such term as PvP. But as far as shooting up people who got no clue, time or dont care about your "little imaginary i win condition" PvP game are actually not engaged in such. Their condition of "i win" differs greatly from yours. As i say : You dont have to approve their understanding of an game as well as you dont have to approve their gameplay but that doesnt mean they are doing it wrong. Anyway ballpark is yours as you creating it. People will adapt or move out. Simple. edit... bolded .. thats probably only problem . As i wrote in different thread once... Mission runner in "expensive ship and fit" team up with ten friends and is on somewhat safer site. Miner gank up with 5000 strong subcap fleet and still gonna get destroyed by 20 mil ship .. Something seems to be off limit there. Not that i mine but still its interesting. The mission runner and the miner have equal chances if targeted. The mission runner is more likely to fit a tank, but that tank could have a deliberately-chosen weakness (to optimize for his mission/speed as opposed to overall safety). The miner could sacrifice some mining efficiency to fit a tank as well, and be equally protected. And I distinctly remember a PvP mode in tetris. Eve is PvP to its core. There isn't a single action you can take where you're not contested against another player--whether it's vying for moons (even in hisec--real estate in the convenient systems can be tight), selling ore or loot on the market, buying on the market, or yes, even shooting people--which is allowed everywhere.* Concord is a reactionary consequence, not a protection. If you choose to rely solely on that to protect you, you're basing your safety on false pretenses. No where is safe in eve; sorry if that was your preconception. *GMs frown on popping newbies in school systems...outside of that very limited restriction, you're on your own.
Jaroslav Unwanted Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 33	Posted - 2011.11.01 22:42:00 - [49] - Quote true ... yet to kill an mission squad fitted with buffer and tri logis chains there is an chance that those mission runners will get suicided but the effort and cost for such engagement will no longer be un-significant ... they actually got an chance to shrug off most of the attempts.. The exhumer even with consta rep from carriers to armor as well as to shield will still get one shotted by one maelstrom. Only defence for an miner is to be alligned and warp off once he see something on grid yet that opens another type of "fun" just some idiots will move in their brutixes from belt to belt watching every exhumer warp off and he lose nothing in the process. His chosen action is just annoying as hell . But yes its an evolution. As i wrote in different thread If dramatic changes happens to "relative safety of an high sec mining be it ore or ice" than null sec should offer an opportunity for people who actually intend to continue in "mining endeavor" ofc with some exchange. Logistics /moving stuff is what wins war. If market gets out of minerals/materials ships wont be constructed and while it last people lose their assets and unsub since there would be no game for them at all ... two things can happen it happens one / NPC will sell everything or null sec become populated by industrialists with "PvPers" protecting space the industrialists live because they need ships. and ammo. But i guess we will see ... if something changes or not.
FloppieTheBanjoClown Go Petition Blizzard 218	Posted - 2011.11.01 22:53:00 - [50] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Just give Mining Barges a 3-4 Mid Slots then give Exhumers and Barges Grid to hold a real tank. Large Shield Extenders will make Gankers think, do I really want to spend the ISK to commit this gank. No no no no no. You should have to give up performance to get tank. The whole idea behind a mining barge/exhumer in the first place is that it's built to do ONE THING well. This "make highsec safer" nonsense needs to stop. I've lived in high for 18 months, 16 of those as a carebear. I lost three hulks to ganks in that time and didn't cry about it. I endured wardecs and pirates and my own noobishness. Stop trying to coddle the people who can't deal with the way this game has worked SINCE IT WAS MADE. imadbro. :D

sYnc Vir Wolfsbrigade 16	Posted - 2011.11.01 23:03:00 - [51] - Quote I've always had the opinion Hulks should be armor tanked instead of shield. Seems wrong that a ship based on the Gals is shield bonused. I guess it was to stop people putting 5 Cargo expanders in and afk'ing 30 minutes a load. If ccp could limited the mod numbers I would be all for a rethink on its slot lay out. 3 1 5 springs to mind, but limits should be set on expanders and Mining upgrade modules. Also weres my mining rigs?
Ludi Burek The Player Haters Corp 2	Posted - 2011.11.01 23:17:00 - [52] - Quote I for one wouldn't think twice about throwing a fully t2 fitted apoc at one of these bling barges. In all likelihood, from the behavior I have observed, even if it doesn't die from the alpha, the barge will remain in belt waiting for my GCC to finish so I could finish it with another strike.
IGNATIUS HOOD Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T. 6	Posted - 2011.11.01 23:34:00 - [53] - Quote I see your problem OP.... I look at Mining like this. I had a Hulk, can use a Hulk, liked my Hulk, lost my Hulk quite stupidly... Not a Gank but it was a stupid on my part that it was destroyed... Could never justify the cost of replacing it... I mine in Covetors becuase they, Like Retreivers, are toasters... Cheap, Plentiful, easily replaceable... Perfect attributes for Mining Barges IMO... Ganking barges is the means and the end my friend... Make it a harder nut to crack and those who Gank will just use a bigger nutcracker... I'll pass... How many Covetors can a guy lose for the cost of a super (kill me kill me) ~Faction~ Exhumer? 10?
Amro One One. 17	Posted - 2011.11.02 00:40:00 - [54] - Quote I am so pissed off to find out the orca can not fit a mining lazor. CCP is soo stupid to create a mining ship that cant mine. I want strip miners on my orca FFS well keeping the 3 gang link slot open. ORCA should be able to mine. This is my alt.
Katrina Oniseki Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 63	Posted - 2011.11.02 00:46:00 - [55] - Quote Amro One wrote: I am so pissed off to find out the orca can not fit a mining lazor. CCP is soo stupid to create a mining ship that cant mine. I want strip miners on my orca FFS well keeping the 3 gang link slot open. ORCA should be able to mine. This is my alt. We need a mining titan, with a mining DD. While we're at it, let's make miner-bombers and a mining supercarrier, that launches 20 of them EDIT: Serious reply to this thread: I think mining as a whole needs a total overhaul. Adding a new faction barge won't fix the problem as I see it. the problem is that mining encourages afk playstyles (not to mention macros/botting) because it's far too simple, far too boring, and takes far too long to get any reasonable amount of goods. Because people tend to go AFK and under tank their naturally expensive ships to try and maximize yield, it makes people easy targets for ganks. It also enforces the belief that miners are the underclass of EVE because they don't do anything nearly as challenging as PvE, Marketing, or PvP. so they get picked on. Easy to kill, and perceived as lacking skills to play the rest of the game, or maybe they're just bots. You don't see people picking on explorers nearly as much, because it's not an AFK sport. Mission runners get picked on, but mostly because they fly pimp ships and tend to think EVE is a solo game. Incursion runners are required to buffer the **** out of their ships with logi, or die in a fire, so they rarely get picked on. Wormhole folks face down their own form of stealth PvP. Market people don't deal in space at all. The entire concept of mining needs to be reworked to be more exciting, more variable, and more hands-on. If they at least made it as hands on as missions are, that would be a huge improvement, though with EVE's new Incursion technology I'd like to see a better system set in place that allows for more creative playstyles. There are a ton of ideas that have been suggested over the years to revamp mining as a profession, and few if any have been implemented. TL;DR Mining doesn't need a new barge. It needs some developer affection.


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

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