EVE Search - Totally broken game mechanic who need changed

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Totally broken game mechanic who need changed

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2210	Posted - 2014.01.12 00:17:00 - [31] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Whereas before, the gankers would have needed to go to low or nullsec and fly loops around a few systems for an hour or two a week to keep their sec status up, thereby actually EARNING money while improving sec status, rather than spending it... Two hours to recover security status lost for tens of ships suicide ganked in high sec? I did ratting for sec status and believe that was a pain in the a.. to just get 1 point back... and a lot of hours of grinding is not a pleasant activity for the ones who hate doing PVE... And believe me, that made all people think twice before thrashing characters security status and become unable to fly in high security systems... Now that is not a problem anymore, you don't need many weeks of ratting to get from -10 to 0 security status like before, you need just some isk. And that is what boost a lot suicide gang activity. Yes. That's what the guys from the goon ministry of love did, one BS rat per system, in a loop. They changed the way the system works now, but it's still really not hard to grind sec status back up. Certainly doesn't take weeks, but then, it never did. And anyway, you don't actually need to worry about your sec status at all if you know what you're doing. That guy you linked certainly seems to be a part of an organised ganking group, they'll be perfectly able to do it without bothering about sec status.
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 7	Posted - 2014.01.12 00:50:00 - [32] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: And anyway, you don't actually need to worry about your sec status at all if you know what you're doing. That guy you linked certainly seems to be a part of an organised ganking group, they'll be perfectly able to do it without bothering about sec status. Well, if you look in game at all that gankers security status you will see that is still very high despite of so many suicide attacks... And you ignore again main reasons of security status loss... Is not meant to prevent suicide attacks (still make gankers work a lot more complicate), but to prevent people to security trash their characters and become unable to travel in high sec in something else than a shuttle or a cheap frigate... That was a very strong reason to prevent people to use precious old character that way... They used in exchange throw away chars... Even in character bazaar high security status was an important asset for a character. Now that is not anymore the case!
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 1966	Posted - 2014.01.12 00:55:00 - [33] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Gankers can just kill faction ships who worth a lot even t2 fitted because they don't risk anything in the process, and is cool to have tens of expensive ships kills on killboard just using cheap destroyers... Also main problem is that is no backslash anymore for suicide ganking unlimited number of ships in hisec, because security status is not anymore a limited resource, period. Sorry but you have yet to show that there has been any sort of mass proliferation of suicie ganking since tags for sec was introduced. Bottom line is that suicide ganking has been rampant for YEARS. Nothing new here. And did anyone look closely at that KB? Some of those pretty pimp ships were being flown by pilots under an ACTIVE WARDEC. Darwin's law is still true.
Gadicus Sharhrizai FST Labs 1	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:06:00 - [34] - Quote Derath Ellecon wrote: [quote=Mojo Joo] And did anyone look closely at that KB? Some of those pretty pimp ships were being flown by pilots under an ACTIVE WARDEC. Darwin's law is still true. Lolz.. Didn't notice that until you said something. I would also think that someone of them may have also been from the first ganker warping in and baiting by stealing lutz... I've had people try to do that to me and just laugh (specially when d-scan shows a bunch of his friends.)
Edwin McAlister Interstellar Engineering and Electronics INC 20	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:08:00 - [35] - Quote while ganking is an accepted part of the game, has been , and always will be.... there is a very good question being brought up in this ......... At what point does it cross the line from being an acceptable part of the game and economy to being a disruption upon the game and costing the company active subscriptions?? while only cccp can see the actual numbers, this is a valid point and should be closely watched.. the ganker community needs to be fully aware of the cost of their actions on the game overall and be ready to accept the end result.
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 7	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:12:00 - [36] - Quote Derath Ellecon wrote: Darwin's law is still true. Is not, and you are the proof. All that ships are killed in same area by same gankers, not by war targets.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance 4685	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:14:00 - [37] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: And you ignore again main reasons of security status loss... Is not meant to prevent suicide attacks (still make gankers work a lot more complicate), No it doesn't. Just get a guy (usually a neutral alt) to warp over to a safespot close to station/stargate and leave gank ships there. Then the gankers warp the same safespot in their pods (CONCORD and Faction Police won't show up for or engage pods) and wait until their neutral scout finds a good target. Then they hop into the ships, warp, and execute. The "real risk" in suicide ganking comes from ... - damage not being applied properly and the target surviving. - someone else grabbing the loot before the scout can (in which case the whole thing is a loss). Mojo Joo wrote: but to prevent people to security trash their characters and become unable to travel in high sec in something else than a shuttle or a cheap frigate... As an outlaw with close to -10 security status I can safely confirm that it is possible to warp around high-sec in a cruiser or nano-battlecruiser. Mojo Joo wrote: That was a very strong reason to prevent people to use precious old character that way... They used in exchange throw away chars... Even in character bazaar high security status was an important asset for a character. Now that is not anymore the case! You're looking at things too much from a "carebear" perspective. Gankers, pirates, and outlaws generally DO NOT CARE about security status... in fact, it's a point of pride for us to be -5.0 or lower. So how do we do our shopping? Simple... we have neutral alts do our shopping for us. This allows our mains characters to gank away without a problem. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
FerrunOnFire Tzolk'in Infinite Possibilities. 1	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:23:00 - [38] - Quote Somhow i get the felling this has to do with the new SOA lvl 4 agent, to many ppl close to Hek. And i do recall a guy ganking pods there just for fun. Ganking mission runners, minners etc. etc is part of the game, and it keeps the high priced market running. Other whis we all end up with pimped high sec ships
Sigras Conglomo 646	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:29:00 - [39] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Zane Tekitsu wrote: Nullsec is always an option you know... The money is better, and the systems are safer than 1.0 systems... True, but that is not a realistic solution for all people. Also high security is supposedly called that way because is meant to be home for people who don't want to be shot at any moment without real consequences like in 0.0 ... I believe this is correct, High sec is for people who dont want to get shot at without their attacker suffering some sort of consequences. Those consequences are the loss of their ship and any insurance that ship had. Now I understand that you think those consequences arent enough, but you have yet to make a suggestion to change them. BTW as a non-ganker, I think those consequences are enough. Nobody should ever be 100% safe in New Eden unless docked or logged off, and TBH i believe docking shouldnt even be safe in 0.0 which is why I would like stations in 0.0 to be destructible.
Sean Parisi Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T 493	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:47:00 - [40] - Quote Simple Darwinism
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 15	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:50:00 - [41] - Quote Sigras wrote: Mojo Joo wrote: Zane Tekitsu wrote: Nullsec is always an option you know... The money is better, and the systems are safer than 1.0 systems... True, but that is not a realistic solution for all people. Also high security is supposedly called that way because is meant to be home for people who don't want to be shot at any moment without real consequences like in 0.0 ... I believe this is correct, High sec is for people who dont want to get shot at without their attacker suffering some sort of consequences. Those consequences are the loss of their ship and any insurance that ship had. Now I understand that you think those consequences arent enough, but you have yet to make a suggestion to change them. BTW as a non-ganker, I think those consequences are enough. Nobody should ever be 100% safe in New Eden unless docked or logged off, and TBH i believe docking shouldnt even be safe in 0.0 which is why I would like stations in 0.0 to be destructible. What are the consequences when gankers lose just some dirty cheap destroyers and kill ships who worth billion, getting loot who make them rich? Also the security status loss consequence was also removed by pirate lovers from CCP. That will come back and hit now in the head when the suicide ganking will begin to get epic proportion. That gankers make tens of billions every day suicide ganking in destroyers, and that is a isk print machine at zero risk cost who need to be stopped.
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2212	Posted - 2014.01.12 01:56:00 - [42] - Quote So, the guys who lose sec status, their ship and their insurance, and if they do it enough can be shot by anyone, anywhere, anytime, don't face a speck of risk. Yet the guys who spend tens of billions on fittings for ships for no apparent reason should be completely immune purely because they spent a lot of money, do I understand the point you're trying to make? Considering the fact that the tags for status thing has been in for MONTHS, why are you only whining about this now?
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 15	Posted - 2014.01.12 02:01:00 - [43] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: So, the guys who lose sec status, their ship and their insurance, and if they do it enough can be shot by anyone, anywhere, anytime, don't face a speck of risk. What they lose, a 800k destroyer when kill a ship who worth 1000-2000 times more? Insurance for destroyers?!?!?!? You are a free time clown or what?
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2212	Posted - 2014.01.12 02:14:00 - [44] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Danika Princip wrote: So, the guys who lose sec status, their ship and their insurance, and if they do it enough can be shot by anyone, anywhere, anytime, don't face a speck of risk. What they lose, a 800k destroyer when kill a ship who worth 1000-2000 times more? Insurance for destroyers?!?!?!? You are a free time clown or what? Explain why it should be impossible to gank a pimpfit ship. Now explain why a ship should be invulnerable purely because it's expensive.
Gadicus Sharhrizai FST Labs 3	Posted - 2014.01.12 02:48:00 - [45] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Danika Princip wrote: So, the guys who lose sec status, their ship and their insurance, and if they do it enough can be shot by anyone, anywhere, anytime, don't face a speck of risk. What they lose, a 800k destroyer when kill a ship who worth 1000-2000 times more? Insurance for destroyers?!?!?!? You are a free time clown or what? It's been asked time and again... why do you need to fly a ship worth that many billions (if you don't want to be a target)? I think on the first page, someone linked this article: http://themittani.com/features/alod-return-investment You really need to read it, i know... logic.. it can kinda suck Its the same thing for miners, running around in yield fit Rets, Macks, Hulks is a very bad idea.. If you want to be safe, tank out a procure and no one will bother... why? Because of isk loss ratio. It takes way to many catas to kill a well tank proc and its only worth a few million. Use this same mechanic with your ship... want to fly a fraction BS or Marauder, great, don't fill the damn thing with officer fit and you won't be a target. ---- We have argued back and forth for pages, the only thing you keep saying is "wahh... i shouldn't be able to lose my expensive ship to dessies" without even considering the possibility that there is another solution besides CCP making the best single player game, just for carebears like you. Bring in some corp mates (Do you even have any) Bring in extra mods (ECM Burst and jammers or smartbombs) and drop a mobile depot so you can quickly change fitting. Your problem is that just because you have been butt hurt you just want to stick your head in the sand and cry for someone else to fix you problem instead of trying to find a solution. We have all given you ideas and things you can do, but you still get hung up on the fact that you can be suicide ganked. Get over it., if you play with your head in the sand then you are gonna have a bad day every now and again. You can either: 1) Play Smarter 2) Play the same way you have been, and lose more ships 3) Say screw missions and become a day trader (trader one PVP for another) 4) Uninstall eve It doesn't matter what consequence they put on gankers (E.G. take away tags..) people will still do it... a certain point they will do just to spite people like you regardless of the repercussions .
Derath Ellecon Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal 1967	Posted - 2014.01.12 03:46:00 - [46] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Derath Ellecon wrote: Darwin's law is still true. Is not, and you are the proof. All that ships are killed in same area by same gankers, not by war targets. Reading comprehension isn't your thing is it? The simple fact that a pilot is willing to undock in a 2 bil isk macharial, in an obviously popular mission hub, during an active wardec is an excellent illustration of someone who threw their common sense out the window (if they had any to begin with). You still have done NOTHING to show that ganking is even on the rise as a result of tags for sec, which seems to be one of your major talking points.
Sarah Stallman International Unification 104	Posted - 2014.01.12 03:52:00 - [47] - Quote Seriously, why are we still discussing this? Someone is butt hurt because they had their USS Compensator spectacularly taken away. Solution: Stop flying expensive ships when the profits don't match the risks.
Dolorous Tremmens The Scope Gallente Federation 52	Posted - 2014.01.12 04:45:00 - [48] - Quote Sometimes troll bait is too tasty looking, and other trolls are circling. Might as well get a taste. General Summary of thread: "Lost shiny Soother, WAH" "make it less shiny, people will want it less" "Wah, they shouldn't be able to take it, they smell bad and have no manners" "You baited them by wearing that slutty looking ship, you were asking for it" "Wah, but they smell bad and have bad manners" "WAH WAH WAH But it was expensive, and they get away with it. and the smell bad and have no manners" "I'm done here, stop feeding them" (in anticipation): "Wah, they sm...." ad nauseam Get some Eve. Make it yours.
FT Diomedes The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 281	Posted - 2014.01.12 05:02:00 - [49] - Quote As much as I hate to say it, I think some of us are missing his point by not looking at the kiilboard. If these are indeed all suicide ganks, then these guys are not always doing it for the ISK. Rather, they seem to be doing it for the green killboard or simply for tears (not that there is anything wrong with that). For example, a T2 fit Cynabal is hardly a pimped mission ship. Some of the ships do scream "gank me!" in bright red letters, but others do not. It is a little disconcerting to me that 11 destroyers can suicide gank a Machariel - I knew high sec was dangerous, but not that dangerous. I am not saying this should be changed - far from it. Just surprised at how cheaply someone can ruin your day. I say this as someone who used to run a lot of missions in Nakugard. I always felt relatively safe in my moderately pimped ships (faction damage mods, everything else T2). Now I realize that it was the low population density that worked for me (local was never more than 30-40 when I used to mission there). All the more reason to move to 0.0, my dear OP. I prefer to live where I know who is trying to kill me (everyone not purple, green, or blue). My skin always crawls when I visit high sec (all those neuts in local!). My analogy for this has always related back to my time in Afghanistan. I always felt safer on a convoy or patrol out in the desert or sparsely populated fields than I did in the market on bazaar day. Anyone could be lurking inside those crowds - you never knew if today was going to be the day for a suicide motorcycle or just another walk through the bazaar. High sec is the same way. Terrorists lurk in the crowds - in 0.0 they stand out like sore thumbs with their little grey, orange, or red icons in local.
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 15	Posted - 2014.01.12 09:06:00 - [50] - Quote This ones are for profit too or just for tears? https://zkillboard.com/corporation/98185728/kills/ When enough low skill players with a bit of leadership will do this "en masse" you will see that will become a very serious game play problem. Only reason for what you still don't see it like a broken game mechanic, is that are still not many players who know how funny and easy is to kill very expensive ships at almost no cost (in isk or security status). To be honest i think very serious to get few friends in destroyers, pay for their security status tags and go ruin the day to all people who i do not like Think, for example, about when some multi-boxers will see that kills on killboard and begin to decimate ships in high sec for money or just for fun and tears... and they will not even need to get 10 friends in fleet to do that job...
Astroniomix Cryptic Meta-4 823	Posted - 2014.01.12 09:17:00 - [51] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: This ones are for profit too or just for tears? https://zkillboard.com/corporation/98185728/kills/ When enough low skill players with a bit of leadership will do this "en masse" you will see that will become a very serious game play problem. Only reason for what you still don't see it like a broken game mechanic, is that are still not many players who know how funny and easy is to kill very expensive ships at almost no cost (in isk or security status). To be honest i think very serious to get few friends in destroyers, pay for their security status tags and go ruin the day to all people who i do not like Think, for example, about when some multi-boxers will see that kills on killboard and begin to decimate ships in high sec for money or just for fun and tears... and they will not even need to get 10 friends in fleet to do that job... Those are actually specifically for profit, not from the gank itself, but as an incentive to get people to pay the "license fee".
Sigras Conglomo 647	Posted - 2014.01.12 09:42:00 - [52] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Sigras wrote: Mojo Joo wrote: Zane Tekitsu wrote: Nullsec is always an option you know... The money is better, and the systems are safer than 1.0 systems... True, but that is not a realistic solution for all people. Also high security is supposedly called that way because is meant to be home for people who don't want to be shot at any moment without real consequences like in 0.0 ... I believe this is correct, High sec is for people who dont want to get shot at without their attacker suffering some sort of consequences. Those consequences are the loss of their ship and any insurance that ship had. Now I understand that you think those consequences arent enough, but you have yet to make a suggestion to change them. BTW as a non-ganker, I think those consequences are enough. Nobody should ever be 100% safe in New Eden unless docked or logged off, and TBH i believe docking shouldnt even be safe in 0.0 which is why I would like stations in 0.0 to be destructible. What are the consequences when gankers lose just some dirty cheap destroyers and kill ships who worth billion, getting loot who make them rich? Also the security status loss consequence was also removed by pirate lovers from CCP. That will come back and hit now in the head when the suicide ganking will begin to get epic proportion. That gankers make tens of billions every day suicide ganking in destroyers, and that is a isk print machine at zero risk cost who need to be stopped. You know a 100% reliable way to stop them? STOP FLYING TRILLION ISK SHIPS WITH 0 EHP Seriously, it wouldnt be an isk print machine if people werent stupid. CCP has stated several times that concord is not there to protect you, they're there to make sure the guilty parties lose their ships. If they really wanted to protect you they would just disable non-consensual combat in high sec, but they dont because it is working as intended. The fact that people can actually set up a protection racket is one of the best parts of eve. What change exactly are you suggesting? because as long as people can fire against targets in high sec there will always be a soft cap over which you are profitable to gank. Even if they changed it so you got blown up as soon as you fired a shot, there would still be a point where you're profitable to gank, and that point would be around 22,000 ISK/EHP or 2.2 billion ISK for a 100,000 EHP ship. So again I ask what change are you proposing that will make you happy?
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 16	Posted - 2014.01.12 10:12:00 - [53] - Quote Sigras wrote: So again I ask what change are you proposing that will make you happy? First of all making security tags much more scarce, so making them much more expensive will be a very, very good start. Second, concord time response is obvious to long when you deal with big destroyers fleets, so one balanced solution can be that concord to arrive faster when attackers numbers are bigger. Is a good start to stop the massacre in a way who not break the game mechanics?
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 121	Posted - 2014.01.12 10:27:00 - [54] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Sigras wrote: So again I ask what change are you proposing that will make you happy? First of all making security tags much more scarce, so making them much more expensive will be a very, very good start. Second, concord time response is obvious to long when you deal with big destroyers fleets, so one balanced solution can be that concord to arrive faster when attackers numbers are bigger. Is a good start to stop the massacre in a way who not break the game mechanics? Concord's response time is adequate. Many, many suicide ganks fail. There is not supposed to be a 100% Safe zone in Eve, with 1 exception: Dock up and DO NOT undock. Any time you think about undocking a ship, you have to ask yourself if you're prepared to lose it. That is the rule of Eve, and has always been. That's not going to change. If it does, we might as well all go play WoW. If you insist on hauling your own goods, then do so with an escort. Pay a high sec merc alliance for escort. Or use a freight service. Or do so with your 'goods' broken into loads small enough to not be worth ganking... or get an Orca and tank the heck out of it. You have almost as many options to avoid being a statistic in suicide ganks as gankers have in ways to gank you. It is poor balance to believe that your freighter should have no natural enemies. A suicide gank requires several people to do. The ships involved in the shooting, the looters, the scanners, the scouts. If 10 people(actual people or 5 people and their alts is w/e) plan to gank you, you should have to have people of your own to stop them. Stop telling the people here who are trying to help you NOT get ganked that they are wrong and freighters/etc should have free range of high sec, and listen to what they are telling you instead. Eve should NOT be 100% Safe anywhere, except docked up in station. That is the way Eve is, and how it should remain. The Law is a point of View
Psychoactive Stimulant 81	Posted - 2014.01.12 10:36:00 - [55] - Quote http://youtu.be/qS7nqwGt4-I
Mag's the united SCUM. 16447	Posted - 2014.01.12 11:05:00 - [56] - Quote Why shouldn't suicide ganking be profitable? Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mojo Joo Scrap Iron Flotilla 16	Posted - 2014.01.12 12:43:00 - [57] - Quote Kenrailae wrote: Concord's response time is adequate. were is the proof for your baseless statement? No, it's not adequate at all, and here is the proof: https://zkillboard.com/corporation/98185728/kills/ and this, 2000 billions of damage made with a destroyer in high sec: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=FauztX Is so huge unbalanced to be able to do more damage with a destroyer in few weeks than super-capitals pilots do in years of combat in 0.0... Next killmail is from a very experienced pilot who pvp most of the time and FC in low sec and 0.0 in many fleets, participated in EVE Tournament as FC for Obsidian Front team, so have much more xperience than many of EFT warriors who come and post here a lot of nonsense about tanking big fleets of destroyers in PVE ships. He who lost yesterday his machariel to same gang of destroyers: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=21505287 He is not knowing how to fit a ship, to use a d-scan or survive attacks? No, is just no way to prevent what become a big plaque of high sec area.
Liafcipe9000 Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 13333	Posted - 2014.01.12 12:46:00 - [58] - Quote I was awoxed yesterday. the lesson I learned: stick to the ishtar. Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase Felicity Love >... was thinking "moar popcorn"... but now, seeing the truly awesome contribution this thread is going to make to the Greater Glory Of EVE.... imagonnamakkadapizza....
Gimme more Cynos Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 115	Posted - 2014.01.12 13:15:00 - [59] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Mojo Joo wrote: Danika Princip wrote: So, the guys who lose sec status, their ship and their insurance, and if they do it enough can be shot by anyone, anywhere, anytime, don't face a speck of risk. What they lose, a 800k destroyer when kill a ship who worth 1000-2000 times more? Insurance for destroyers?!?!?!? You are a free time clown or what? Explain why it should be impossible to gank a pimpfit ship. Now explain why a ship should be invulnerable purely because it's expensive. Not that I agree too much with the OP, but ganking should have a consequence imo. If the consequence is completely non existent, something is wrong. Imho, you shouldn't be able to: - gank a player - loot his stuff - sell the stuff - buy sec-status back - still having profit That's no consequence at all imho. That's pretty laughable to the point that average mission-runners have 10 times more consequences than gankers do. After all, they do get consequences for shooting stuff in missions (standing-loss), while gankers have a get out of jail card, which is paid by the victim.. Or do you seriously feel that buying sec-tags and moving them to a proper concord-station is an appropriate consequence? 5 minutes of flight-time in a cov-ops to make up for all the consequence? Really? I don't think so. Same is true for ganking frighters. Just that the issue is not the ganking, it's the out of jail card gankers can obtain.
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 2220	Posted - 2014.01.12 13:36:00 - [60] - Quote Mojo Joo wrote: Kenrailae wrote: Concord's response time is adequate. were is the proof for your baseless statement? No, it's not adequate at all, and here is the proof: https://zkillboard.com/corporation/98185728/kills/ and this, 2000 billions of damage made with destroyers in high sec: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=FauztX Is so huge unbalanced to be able to do more damage in high sec with a destroyer in few weeks than super-capitals pilots do in years of combat in 0.0... Next killmail is from a very experienced pilot who pvp most of the time and FC in low sec and 0.0 in many fleets, participated in EVE Tournament as FC for Obsidian Front team, so have much more combat experience than many of EFT warriors who come and post here a lot of nonsense about tanking big fleets of destroyers in PVE ships. He lost yesterday his machariel to same gang of destroyers: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=21505287 He is not knowing how to fit a ship, to use a d-scan or survive attacks? No, is just no way as a pilot to prevent what become a big plaque of high sec area. If they caught that mach with his hardeners off, he's got 43k EHP and ZERO EM resist. From the looks of the damage taken thing on the killboard, that's exactly what happened. Now, if he's as big a name as you say and these guys recognized him, they could have ganked him for that reason alone. The 500+ million ISK profit they gained is incidental if this was a prestige gank. And that fit isn't very good. T1 ammo, T1 cap boosters, massive piles of faction mods, and while he has got nice tank against Guristas or Serpantis, he hasn't got any ammo to deal with them. Assuming this wasn't a setup in the first place, you can get BETTER tank, sustained for longer, and only ~40 less DPS out of a Maelstrom for a total cost of under 330 million. Is 40 DPS worth 1.4 billion?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: 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.