EVE Search - Sticky:[Rhea] Introducing the Bowhead

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Rhea] Introducing the Bowhead

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5477	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:23:49 - [1] - Quote My thoughts on the tugbowtieheadthingy... Needs more capacity - both cargo and SMA space - maybe 20k / 2000k - enough for 4 smaller battleships but only 3 of the over 500k variety. Maybe let the skill level affect both holds too. This is your "I'm a solo pilot and need to move all the things at once" ship. 4k isn't enough space for me to move all my fittings/loot. The max EHP level is about right, but giving it fitting slots but only (mostly) structure is a reeeeally limited choice. Go with ~18k/18k/18k spread and 4 mids, 4 lows for some actual variety. Make the difficulty of ganking the ship in the figuring out what to expect after scanning the fittings. Give it a 25/25 drone bay for giggles and mediocre defense ability. C'mon, live a little... I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5479	Posted - 2014.11.11 15:42:16 - [2] - Quote If your webbing alt is getting popped and/or missing the target on regional gates, perhaps you're using the wrong ship to web with. A Hyena is just a low cost option with longer range... its not the only option, nor the best. If you realize that a webbing ship is critical to your success, wouldn't it also be wise to use a ship with some EHP for this task too? I swear, some people have to have all their thinking done for them... I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5479	Posted - 2014.11.11 15:52:57 - [3] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Alright, added quite a bit of base hp (mostly in shield, some in structure) and changed the max velocity bonus to agility. OP is updated with new numbers. What? No drones? No increased capacity? I am disappointed. I still think you should've gone with a more even split of shield, armor and structure and made tanking it any of 3 ways viable. Doubling shield AND more structure is overkill I think. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5479	Posted - 2014.11.11 16:24:10 - [4] - Quote S'No Flake wrote: War Kitten wrote: If your webbing alt is getting popped and/or missing the target on regional gates, perhaps you're using the wrong ship to web with. A Hyena is just a low cost option with longer range... its not the only option, nor the best. If you realize that a webbing ship is critical to your success, wouldn't it also be wise to use a ship with some EHP for this task too? I swear, some people have to have all their thinking done for them... If you have to move 2 incursions ships, why using a web + bowhead instead of moving the ships by themselves with much more tank and cloak+mwd? DPS ship + Orca with your choice of logi ships inside it's much much more safer :) If you have to move 2 ships, you don't have a problem that this ship solves. Move along. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5479	Posted - 2014.11.11 19:03:03 - [5] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Slap Chop wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Things always catch up to you IRL Oh come on, that's just naive. No, its statistics. No, its naive... here's some statistics: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/clearances I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5479	Posted - 2014.11.11 19:06:06 - [6] - Quote Lickem Lolly wrote: Highsec is not the place for non-consensual PVP. It should be restricted to lowsec and nullsec, where people who are there have chosen to accept the risk. You've accepted the risk of pvp by undocking in any security status. You're in the wrong thread if you think otherwise... wrong game in fact. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5481	Posted - 2014.11.11 19:29:35 - [7] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Slap Chop wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Things always catch up to you IRL Oh come on, that's just naive. No, its statistics. No, its naive... here's some statistics: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/clearances Now come back to me when you've run the numbers for people that are not caught after repeatedly doing the same activity for decades or more. Keep in mind that those numbers are for all crimes, which a lot of them could be once or a few times. Keep in mind that as capsuleers, we're like superheros (or super-villains) to the average citizen in the Eve universe. We're Bill Gates-rich - even the poorest newbie that started the game last week has more money and more earning capability than the top 1% of standard citizens. We have the means to nearly any end. Concord can only hope to punish, not prevent. Death does not stop us - we have clones. So yeah, throw me in jail... give me the death penalty... I'll be back... EDIT: Oh, and there probably aren't many statistics to run for people that repeat the same crime successfully for decades.... because they're successful at it by definition. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5483	Posted - 2014.11.11 19:49:09 - [8] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Rowells wrote: Maybe you could supply those numbers then? Or do you not have them? Well that might be hard for modern crimes, but if you look at things historically for example at lets say pirates: "Most pirates didnGÇÖt last very long. It was a tough line of work: many were killed or injured in battle or in fights amongst themselves, and medical facilities were usually non-existent. Even the most famous pirates, such as Blackbeard or Bartholomew Roberts, only were active in piracy for a couple of years. Roberts, who had a very long and successful career for a pirate, was only active for about three years from 1719 to 1722" Or we could look at something like mob crime that used to be a big problem back in the day, but the laws changed and today things are different (for the record I've had a lot of experience with "conspiracy" laws and just how easy it is to prosecute someone under them, but if on the other hand you've also gotten to visit your friends in prison, then please don't let me step on your toes) (As an aside The Daily show just did a skit on this recently about how ineffective the FBI is at actually tracking things http://redalertpolitics.com/2014/10/08/daily-show-searches-one-police-shooting-statistic-doesnt-exist/) That's not data, those are anecdotes. Also, medical technology has seen a few improvements in the Eve world of piracy compared to the 18th century. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5483	Posted - 2014.11.11 20:43:21 - [9] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: Keep in mind that as capsuleers, we're like superheros (or super-villains) to the average citizen in the Eve universe. We're Bill Gates-rich - even the poorest newbie that started the game last week has more money and more earning capability than the top 1% of standard citizens. We have the means to nearly any end. Concord can only hope to punish, not prevent. Death does not stop us - we have clones. So yeah, throw me in jail... give me the death penalty... I'll be back... EDIT: Oh, and there probably aren't many statistics to run for people that repeat the same crime successfully for decades.... because they're successful at it by definition. Keep in mind that as capsuleers we aren't in actuality goods. Clones can be destroyed. The process can fail. The lore is there that this can happen, its just not exploited. So you would be in favor of a game mechanic that would let someone hunt down and permanently destroy a clone, or prevent reanimation? Or are you saying this game based on player interaction should just have a magic threshold where it says "Poof, you lose because of too much killing"? Quote: As to your comment, actually there can be. There's a reason serial killers are found, their patterns are studied and people realize the crime is connected to the same person. Yes things can be copied. But my point is this, given enough time and enough activity you will be caught. Put another way, if you are familiar with the pirate bay story, they recently just caught another founder after he skipped his country. He pissed off the wrong people and they were willing to track him down. In any case my point remains. Things do catch up to you as a matter of statistics and no matter of hand waving discounts this. Again, 1 or 2 examples of people getting caught is not data on the number of unsolved crimes. You're the one hand waving with anecdotes instead of numbers. Regardless, that line of reasoning isn't relevant to ganking. We know who committed those acts - there's proof on the killboards. The issue goes back to the punishment, or lack thereof. As much as possible, the Eve world is about player interaction - players building, players destroying, players conquering, players policing. I'd be all for more mechanics that let players hunt other players for the atrocities they commit - real or imagined. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5483	Posted - 2014.11.11 20:59:21 - [10] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Question for gankers. How much do your Gank Talos's cost? And how much damage do they do in 30 seconds. Because if the Bowhead is carrying Pirate BS/Marauders like it will be if used for it's intended High sec purpose, thats 2-3 billion in pure hull value sitting in it. Plus possibly some more in some logi cruisers. Say if it's an Incursion runner moving their hulls from one focus to another, they will have a DPS, a Sniper, at least 2 logi, and possibly a second DPS or Sniper as well. All of which will be T2 rigged. So 2 Bil+ is the minimum realistic value to expect the Bowhead to move. This T2 Fitted T1 BS stuff is absolute rubbish as far as it's use in highsec goes. So I'm curious to see how you cost/loss maths actually work out against the Bowhead when you use a realistic hull value for it's contents, even if we assume they stripped the modules and moved those in a blockade runner. Go back and read / search for Warr Akini's posts. He's rather authoritative in Goonswarm's ganking for profit division. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.

War Kitten Panda McLegion 5484	Posted - 2014.11.12 12:31:19 - [11] - Quote Basil Pupkin wrote: Flying it doesn't need to be risk free, but it sure as **** shouldn't be MORE risky than any other option. Actually, yes it should be more risky. It should be more convenient, and the price for that is more risk. As it currently stands, it is over-tanked and under-sized. One side of the equation claims they wont use it, the other side claims they wont gank it. Clearly it is pointless in current form - CCP Rise, you're not there yet.... I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5489	Posted - 2014.11.12 19:00:36 - [12] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Dave Stark wrote: if people choose not to use all the tools at their disposal it pretty much disqualifies them from making a complaint. if i crashed my car and told the insurance company "no, i didn't try to avoid the other car, it was his job not to hit me" they'd laugh at me. your safety is your responsibility, if you choose not to do everything you can to keep yourself safe - the blame for being the victim of a gank is yours and nobody elses. So basically your argument boils down to the fact that a tool was given to the players that can't be used to its fullest potential because they have to protect themselves against douchewaffles? confirming that the afk ratting tool that is the ishtar should be made invincible because I can't use it to its fullest potential when it is being exploded This seems entirely reasonable. Along the same lines, interdictors should have more range and as much EHP as the Bowhead - probably more EHP since an interdictor tool being used for its purpose cannot even receive reps. And catalysts... they need more EHP and alpha. Their purpose is clearly only to destroy. It's even their ship class name. For these tools to complete their purpose, it shouldn't require multiple ships. What other overkill can we justify in the name of tools needing to be easily used to their fullest potential? Because this is obviously a good way to balance things. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5489	Posted - 2014.11.12 20:36:30 - [13] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: Considering that your group just ganked a Jump freighter in Uedama with only a couple hundred million of cargo, costing you well over a billion in gank ships, does it really matter? I mean this freighter ganking is not being done for ISK, hence the joy of ganking even empty ships! The idea that putting less cargo in, or being unscannable, will actually deter the 2 major freighter ganking groups seems farfetched. What makes you think there was no reason to gank this freighter alt? Aha! I've found the flawed assumption on your part Baltec. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5489	Posted - 2014.11.12 21:00:56 - [14] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: baltec1 wrote: Every single ship in EVE works better when used in a group. Also a bit disingenuous. A freighter can't physically hold more cargo when its used with a group. A velator can't do more dps when its in a group. A raven can't hold more torpedoes when its in a group. Better is relative. A freighter can align faster and be safer in a group. A velator CAN do more dps in a group due to fleet bonuses. A raven also performs better in a group due to fleet bonuses. Better can fit more than your narrowly defined criteria. You're the one being disingenuous with those silly arguments. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5493	Posted - 2014.11.13 13:07:29 - [15] - Quote Anonymous Forumposter wrote: Primary This Rifter wrote: Anonymous Forumposter wrote: Warr Akini wrote: And here I thought I might actually like you. You do realize you're saying that to the guy bringing you a shiney new loot pinata for christmas right? So Mike works for CCP now? Sure he does. He helps facilitate communication between the playerbase and the devs and consults on concepts being developed. If he still thinks this thing needs more EHP, he won't be getting my vote for the next term. His views aren't in line with mine on when it comes to ship balance. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5493	Posted - 2014.11.13 13:17:26 - [16] - Quote Lady Rift wrote: War Kitten wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: baltec1 wrote: Every single ship in EVE works better when used in a group. Also a bit disingenuous. A freighter can't physically hold more cargo when its used with a group. A velator can't do more dps when its in a group. A raven can't hold more torpedoes when its in a group. Better is relative. A freighter can align faster and be safer in a group. A velator CAN do more dps in a group due to fleet bonuses. A raven also performs better in a group due to fleet bonuses. Better can fit more than your narrowly defined criteria. You're the one being disingenuous with those silly arguments. sorry no fleet bonus for dps. also doesnt increase ammo holding ability. Brainfart there - sorry. I was thinking EHP. Which in the long run extends DPS a bit, but doesn't increase it. A Raven could hold more torpedos with cargo expanders, but then a good group would hopefully discourage that kind of silly idea. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 13:28:31 - [17] - Quote Maybe what really needs to happen here is a rebalance of reinforced bulkheads. http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Reinforced_Bulkhead for reference. Tech II 25% is a big jump from the 15-19% of meta 1-4, considering these aren't stacking penalized. That could be cut back a bit. Maybe the penalty should also be reduced warp speed too. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 14:15:49 - [18] - Quote Xindi Kraid wrote: You people talk about suicide ganking like ever freighter gets blown up the first time it undocks. I know, right? I've flown a freighter into lowsec and all over hisec. I've flown a JF in several areas of null. I've never lost either, despite jumping through Uedama and Niarja with both on several occasions. I plan to own a bowhead too - especially if it gets stupid-high EHP. It's not hard folks, nor is it common that ganks happen to pilots that are flying smartly.* * - except during Burn Jita - then all bets are off :) I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 15:03:29 - [19] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: Maybe what really needs to happen here is a rebalance of reinforced bulkheads. http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Reinforced_Bulkhead for reference. Tech II 25% is a big jump from the 15-19% of meta 1-4, considering these aren't stacking penalized. That could be cut back a bit. Maybe the penalty should also be reduced warp speed too. IMO bulkheads are already over penalized. Think of it this way, what if you actually had to make trade offs when you fit tank on your PVP ship (aka the mods had a dps reduction added). This is basically what bulk heads do for freighters, they give you more tank at a penalty of your primary stat: cargo hold. Fair point - they do hit freighters pretty hard there, but not other ships that can benefit from the boost in structure - like the Bowhead or combat ships. Maybe that penalty should be to warp speed instead of cargo capacity. Personally I have yet to fit a freighter of any kind for tank... if you're having to tank damage, you've done it wrong already with a non-combat ship. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 15:35:00 - [20] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Warr Akini wrote: I'll have to ask you to retract that claim of disingenuity (not a word)? I see three responses to Mike, mine being one of them, and although the answer you were looking for (Talos = more DPS = less need for manpower) was not directly stated to him, it is both obvious and I'm fairly certain I mentioned the painstaking nature of gathering craploads of manpower in Catalysts to gank something big earlier in this thread. Don't go throwing mud, please. Request denied. I was referring to this post: baltec1 wrote: for ganking you never try to alpha something this big. Talos use DPS to take down targets before concord can respond just like cats. As far as tank goes you can hit 600k ehp without boosts. I don't think it did a good enough job of stating the full picture clearly. Therefore I added what I thought was important. The original question was directly about Taloses from Mike Azariah - there was nothing disingenuous about his reply about the Talos. You're just being argumentative. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.

War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 15:57:24 - [21] - Quote Anonymous Forumposter wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: I'm not sure this is true. I haven't tried recently but I remember trying some time this year and getting a weird error about ships not being able to go in cargo that are assembled.. He's referring to the horribly broken exploit of using courier contracts to package up fitted and rigged ships that can then be carried in a freighter. Now that we have a dedicated high sec ship mover + Plenty of options in low/null, this needs to be addressed. If that was an exploit, you should be reported for discussing it on the forums. Seeing as how it is not an exploit, then you're just misguided or wrong or possibly trolling. Bad troll, no cookie for you. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 16:05:07 - [22] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: The original question was directly about Taloses and alpha from Mike Azariah - there was nothing disingenuous about his reply about the Talos. You're just being argumentative. Well its matter of phrasing really. He said "when taloses" are used. I read the question as why are you using taloses vs dessies. The "when" part implies there are more options available to do the same job and they are using taloses over something cheaper. In that case why aren't you using the cheaper method, and the likely answer is man power. I'm not being argumentative. I think that's an important part of ganking math because it means you can gank a ship with far fewer people thereby making it easier to get a group together to gank in the first place. You're still being argumentative - the question was about using taloses, not why. Your nitpick about catalysts is obvious - of course you use the cheapest alternative if you have the manpower. If you don't, you scale up. No one has tried to hide that or played dumb about it, which is more or less what you need to be doing to be disingenuous. Or to quote Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means." I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 17:20:11 - [23] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: You're still being argumentative - the question was about using taloses, not why. Your nitpick about catalysts is obvious - of course you use the cheapest alternative if you have the manpower. If you don't, you scale up. No one has tried to hide that or played dumb about it, which is more or less what you need to be doing to be disingenuous. Or to quote Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means." Oh, if the answer was so obvious and he had all of the information at his disposal, why was he asking the question in the first place? Information is power and giving him a more complete picture is not being argumentative for the sake of it. Fair enough - maybe he didn't know that Catalysts were cheaper and less dps than a Talos. I hope CSM representatives have at least that much knowledge of the game though. But I wasn't referring to that argument; you were still being argumentative about whether or not you were correct in calling Baltec disingenuous and not backing down from that stance, despite the pettiness of it. And for whatever its worth, and to get the discussion back on track - I like your idea of 100% drop from the SMB. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 17:39:16 - [24] - Quote For those of you that think hisec should be safe, ponder this... CCP recently revamped how the crimewatch criminal flagging system works. Can flipping disappeared, and hisec combat in general took a pretty big nerf with the new suspect flag making criminals vulnerable to all. If you commit a crime in hisec, everyone can shoot at you now - not just the person you stole from. If, as you say, hisec was intended to be safe, why would CCP have gone to the trouble to specifically leave in the possibility of criminal flagging and criminal activity in hisec? Crimewatch is a huge drain on CPU resources - it would be much more efficient to just make hisec safe and pvp-free and remove all that extra code (I'm not digging up the source for that, but it's been mentioned in a few dev replies that hardware performs better in large nullsec battles than in lowsec simply because crimewatch doesn't have to run in nullsec). So with all that understanding, why would you think hisec was intended to be pvp-free? Eve is not like other MMOs where you have happy sunshine pve land, safe from all aggression. That's not ever been the intention or inspiration of Eve Online. Ultima Online was was one of the inspirations - a game where criminal activity and pvp is possible pretty much anywhere in the game. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5494	Posted - 2014.11.13 17:42:45 - [25] - Quote Bertucio wrote: But again - you're sort of implying indirectly here that it's the "victims" fault that they are getting ganked in hi-sec. That I also disagree with. To make the assumption that all ships and freighters that have been ganked in Uedama have been only players who don't know how to fly a freighter correctly etc. is a weak argument at best IMO. That is a morality question between players. Eve is a game of interaction between players. The rules of the game don't dictate morality - that is up to the players. The rules of the game just need to give everyone enough tools to try and accomplish what they want to do. It is up to the player to use the tools at his disposal. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5497	Posted - 2014.11.13 19:02:12 - [26] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: For those of you that think hisec should be safe, ponder this... CCP recently revamped how the crimewatch criminal flagging system works. Can flipping disappeared, and hisec combat in general took a pretty big nerf with the new suspect flag making criminals vulnerable to all. If you commit a crime in hisec, everyone can shoot at you now - not just the person you stole from. Given the nature of the beast I'm not sure that you can factually make this claim. I'm not per se saying you are wrong, just that I don't believe their is enough evidence to make that claim. I see plenty of bait blinky yellows around minnie systems that have lots of traffic in it. All crimewatch has done is condition people not to be stupid enough to shoot those blinky players given the way the mechanics of assistance are so foolishly laid out. The quirks of crimewatch's implementation are secondary to my point. Don't be obtuse. If CCP intended hisec to be safe, they would have made it so by now. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5497	Posted - 2014.11.13 20:16:05 - [27] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: The quirks of crimewatch's implementation are secondary to my point. Don't be obtuse. If CCP intended hisec to be safe, they would have made it so by now. Frankly I think it seems more central to your argument than you are making it out to be. But other than that and "kill rights", I still don't think you have any real data to back up your point. I've seen no decrease in hi sec ganking/high sec griefing activity despite all the changes over the past year or two. You're making my point for me and don't even realize it in your rush to argue - follow along closely this time.... CCP did not try to remove hisec criminality, they only nerfed/tweaked/adjusted/whatever'd it. Had they wanted to remove criminal behavior in hisec, the crimewatch revamp would've been a really opportune time to do it. - feel free to insert whatever term you feel is most genuine here - again, it is not relevant to the point unless you use "removed", and then you'd be being disingenuous again. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5497	Posted - 2014.11.13 20:18:58 - [28] - Quote Jean Luc Lemmont wrote: Orchid Fury wrote: you can not effectivly take precautions against a gank. This is so misguided a statement that it's not even wrong. You can absolutely take precautions against a gank. Red Frog has a whole portion of their website devoted to them. These precautions may, however, require you to change the way you fit and fly your ships, or involve effort on your part to get friends to assist you. You said the E word. People don't like the E word. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5500	Posted - 2014.11.14 12:09:31 - [29] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: War Kitten wrote: You're making my point for me and don't even realize it in your rush to argue - follow along closely this time.... CCP did not try to remove hisec criminality, they only nerfed/tweaked/adjusted/whatever'd it. Had they wanted to remove criminal behavior in hisec, the crimewatch revamp would've been a really opportune time to do it. - feel free to insert whatever term you feel is most genuine here - again, it is not relevant to the point unless you use "removed", and then you'd be being disingenuous again. Sigh Why is it so hard to be civil to others when trying to make a point? As to your point, I've already stated numerous times that I don't believe high sec should be completely safe and I don't think criminality should be completely removed from the game. What I have said is that the balance for this activity is STILL not there and in my opinion needs work. So considering that I already agreed with the point you're trying to make and that I made it long before you even posted this response, it appears that you are the one that is arguing for the sake of it. You're the one that took issue with my point when you misunderstood it. If you agree, then why are you arguing with me? My post wasn't even addressing you, it was addressing others that feel hisec should be safe, and I didn't quote anyone. If you want to be civil, perhaps you could back down occasionally and take ownership when you're in the wrong instead of bull-headedly arguing just for the sake of arguing. You picked this argument, you misunderstood and now you try and put it on me? Yeah, that's civil. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5500	Posted - 2014.11.14 12:25:50 - [30] - Quote I like the solo pilot argument for balance versus a gang. It makes so much sense! I like soloing too - we need a ship that is capable of ganking freighters solo in hisec. I will gladly pay the hull price equivalent of the ship I intend to gank so it will also be isk balanced. Now how many solo freighter pilots think this is a good idea? It fits your need for isk equality and solo capability. Come on, step right up and either support the idea or admit you're being selfish in that you really only want your solo capability enhanced, not everyone's. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.

War Kitten Panda McLegion 5500	Posted - 2014.11.14 12:36:29 - [31] - Quote Ix Method wrote: Bagrat Skalski wrote: In a ship so huge, why there would be no drone bay? Small drone bay would even make this ship capable of repairing other ships outside the maintenance bay. Or even limited self defence. Why only hauling other ships?? In a hull like that, there should be secondary and tertiary activity build in for a limited small scale support. Another way to 'break free of the empires', etc, etc. A 25/75 bay for Logi Drones might be a nice touch without meaningfully improving its defence. But then I guess you could say the same for a high for an Improved Cloak, in the end you could lump all sorts of **** onto this for all kinds of reasons. Oooh, that gave me an idea (not a sarcastic one either)... The Bowhead could be allowed to repair other ships and make it a floating garage. Ships in the SMB could be right-click repaired by the pilot - including module overheat damage. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5505	Posted - 2014.11.14 15:57:02 - [32] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Now, the original point you made was that due to all of the changes over the years that high sec ganking and and other activities have been drastically cut down. This is where you went wrong - I'll ignore the rest of your post because your premise is flawed. That was not the point I made. I did say that the modification to crimewatch was a nerf to hisec criminality, but that was not my point. It was just to establish the fact that CCP visited hisec crime mechanics recently. You can argue that all you like about whether it is a nerf or not until you're blue in the face - it is not my point, as I've stated a few times now. In your rush to argue, you're still pants-on-head and head-in-the-sand wrong and being obtuse. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5507	Posted - 2014.11.14 20:18:43 - [33] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Querns wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: So you are saying its disingenuous to make an disingenuous argument to fight a disingenuous argument? Ok, fine, I get what you are saying. What I don't get is why its my burden to prove the claim false when I'm not the one making it in the first place. I don't get how you are supposed to fight an argument that has no disprovable or provable basis on which to fight on. I find the assumption that my arguments are disingenuous due to my alliance ticker to be pretty insulting. And, before you start, you've repeatedly mentioned "goons" throughout your discussions to imply a frame of reference to describe WHO is making the arguments, with the express purpose of character assassination. I, on the other hand, have made great pains to avoid the inclusion of posters into any groups, except where it is necessary (e.g.: talking about incursion runners when folks claim that the ship in question is tailor-made to incursion runners.) Including posters in groups is simply unnecessary to argue what I wish to argue. Well there's this saying about assuming things... I stated that I respect you because I've most often seen you rise above the actions of the majority of your alliance mates. My purposes were not to character assassinate you personally, but to merely build a frame of reference around how a majority of your affiliates argue. Like it or not Goons don't exactly have a sterling reputation for forum behavior and none of that is by my doing. If you are thus offended then perhaps you should rethink your affiliations. Whoa, hold on there... this sounds like a place where some actual proof is needed. Please come back with a statistical analysis of good vs. bad posting by Goonswarm members over the past ... oh... decade or so, and then you can start casting aspersions and somehow tie this back into the Bowhead discussion. Off you go! I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5507	Posted - 2014.11.14 20:26:46 - [34] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: Not sure what you are trying to say. That you think my fit is "terrible" shows that you just don't understand the game. Not sure you really belong in highsec. I only use it when...ehrmm....travelling...so undock....warp to gate, warp to next gate...etc....dock. Faction and Deadspace fittings are things more likely to make you a gank target, not less. Thus, it is a terrible travel fit. Mods that align you quickly will synergize with your MWD Cloak trick. 1600 plates work against that. Thus, its a terrible travel fit. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5507	Posted - 2014.11.14 20:38:32 - [35] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: War Kitten wrote: Veers Belvar wrote: Not sure what you are trying to say. That you think my fit is "terrible" shows that you just don't understand the game. Not sure you really belong in highsec. I only use it when...ehrmm....travelling...so undock....warp to gate, warp to next gate...etc....dock. Faction and Deadspace fittings are things more likely to make you a gank target, not less. Thus, it is a terrible travel fit. Mods that align you quickly will synergize with your MWD Cloak trick. 1600 plates work against that. Thus, its a terrible travel fit. Wrong...if cloak + mwd fails...you are getting pointed...fast align won't help....but a brick tank, which may make it impossible for the gankers to gank you with their numbers on hand (they don't often have 20 nados handy) will. And the point is to fit with your incursion equipment to obviate the need for multiple trips. Cloak + mwd only fails because of the brick tank preventing you from aligning quickly. If you don't get that, you've not used the maneuver when it actually matters enough to generate real experience with it. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5507	Posted - 2014.11.14 20:48:48 - [36] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: Now please explain why a bowhead should expose incursion runners to more than the 0% risk they face now???? Properly used, with this level of EHP, it won't expose you to more risk if you need the convenience of moving many ships in fewer trips. Stuffing it full of Pith-A and Core-X mods would be exposing yourself to the risk - not the ship's fault. If you just need to move your one pricey BS, then there's no need for you to use it. Others will find it handy. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.

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.