Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 [50] 60 .. 69 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |

Valterra Craven
366
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 17:52:54 -
[1471] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote: Put another way, had those changes had any real affect then the amount of people in here asking for more HP on the bowhead would be drastically reduced
Go and look at what M0o got up to a decade ago. Then go look up what gankers were using as gank ships 5 years ago. You will find there has been a huge change over time.
Right, but his argument was not in relation to what MOo were doing (which if memory serves was in low sec/null sec space). He was talking about recent changes to crimewatch etc that related to hi sec affairs. You are correct there has been a huge change in the game over time, since it was first released. However to say that any change has had a real curbing affect on ganking would need to be backed up with data, and everything I've seen suggests this hasn't happened. The fact that gankers just adapted to whatever change has come like using different ships merely proves that while the game has changed, the order of business has not. And until it does, people are still going to complain about it. |

Dreiden Kisada
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
21
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 17:53:04 -
[1472] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:
Incursion ships die too. Freighters die. Sure titans die - but extremely rarely, and almost always due to gross stupidity. With triage carrier support, they virtually NEVER die. And that's fine. The game doesn't require every ship to be at significant risk of dying whenever it flies. So if Goonswarm titans can mosey around Deklein and NEVER die...that's fine for the game. Same thing if Bowheads would be able to mosey around highsec and NEVER die, the game would be perfectly fine. In no way does Eve require ships to constantly be at risk.
Yes, ships with large EHP buffers supported by triage carriers are nearly unkillable.
That shows more about triage carrier's rep ability than it does anything else. |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2167
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 17:53:10 -
[1473] - Quote
Querns wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Querns wrote:There are plenty of uses for the ship outside of the "I need to be able to haul extremely expensive battleships" niche in highsec. The ability to haul fitted ships is just more versatile than this. Trying to pretend that the extreme edge case being less viable when a perfect storm of circumstance arises somehow makes the ship worthless is a pretty terrible position from which to argue. i am eager to hear of use cases where you would need to haul rigged hulls in hisec so badly that you invest ten digits and a month of training time into it. Investing a month of training time? The bulk of the training time for the Bowhead is Advanced Spaceship Command 5, a skill which has significant overlap with Freighters, Jump Freighters, and is a gateway to all capital ships. Pretending that it's some sort of burden shouldered only by the Bowhead aspirant is disingenuous. Also, 1b is hardly a large amount of money. PLEX are a doghair from this value right now. And if you use a little bit of brainpower to limit your exposure, you can safely move around the universe while fearing no gank bogey man. As for use cases, here's some:
- Mercenaries transporting large numbers of ships-of-the-line to stage towards a new target.
- A common way for corporations and alliances to provide ships for their members is to pre-fit them and put them up on contracts. The Bowhead allows them to move the ships easily should the staging point for the corporation/alliance change.
- Consolidation of personal assets.
With a little creativity, a lot of things come out of the woodwork. none of the use cases require hauling rigged ships, in fact the first two decidedly favor hauling packaged hulls and assembling in place. as for consolidating items, like i said, i have quite a few hulls lying around myself, but when given the choice of training for, buying and flying the ship (and then selling it once i'm done), i would rather spend a few hours moving them manually and be done. i will not comment on the cost issue, this is something every EVE player (with a median wallet of 2bil) can decide for himself.
I should buy an Ishtar.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 17:54:50 -
[1474] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:
Right, but his argument was not in relation to what MOo were doing (which if memory serves was in low sec/null sec space)..
No, yours is.
Also no, M0o operated in high sec in their most destructive phase.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2167
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 17:55:19 -
[1475] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Querns wrote:There are plenty of uses for the ship outside of the "I need to be able to haul extremely expensive battleships" niche in highsec. The ability to haul fitted ships is just more versatile than this. Trying to pretend that the extreme edge case being less viable when a perfect storm of circumstance arises somehow makes the ship worthless is a pretty terrible position from which to argue. i am eager to hear of use cases where you would need to haul rigged hulls in hisec so badly that you invest ten digits and a month of training time into it. Transporting three battleships, two logi boats, a command ship, a hauler with ammo and a scout frigate for incursion running is a little over twice as fast using a bowhead than manually transporting them. (ship list taken from a poster earlier in the thread that stated that incursion runners own these ships. Time was calculated over having to move 30 jumps of an average of 50au) two times longer (assuming you have one char) and infinitely more safe.
I should buy an Ishtar.
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2167
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:00:48 -
[1476] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:
two times longer (assuming you have one char) and infinitely more safe.
If people fit several billion to their ships like they say then no, they are at more risk because the battleship they are flying is much easier to gank than a bowhead. it is easier to gank once you know which one of the 200 machs passing through is the shiny one. as for the 'accessory' ships, their chance of being ganked is essentially 0 unless they are buried in a giant cargo-coffin with a 'kick me' sign on the rear.
I should buy an Ishtar.
|

Valterra Craven
366
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:01:08 -
[1477] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:
Right, but his argument was not in relation to what MOo were doing (which if memory serves was in low sec/null sec space)..
No, yours argument is.
If his argument wasn't in relation to hi sec ganking then what relevance would it have in a discussion talking about the HP level of a ship in relation to hi sec ganking? |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:05:08 -
[1478] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:
Right, but his argument was not in relation to what MOo were doing (which if memory serves was in low sec/null sec space)..
No, yours argument is. If his argument wasn't in relation to hi sec ganking then what relevance would it have in a discussion talking about the HP level of a ship in relation to hi sec ganking?
Are you trying at this point to not understand what anyone is saying?
I am responding to YOUR argument that ganking hasn't gone down due to changes.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:07:46 -
[1479] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:baltec1 wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:
two times longer (assuming you have one char) and infinitely more safe.
If people fit several billion to their ships like they say then no, they are at more risk because the battleship they are flying is much easier to gank than a bowhead. it is easier to gank once you know which one of the 200 machs passing through is the shiny one. as for the 'accessory' ships, their chance of being ganked is essentially 0 unless they are buried in a giant cargo-coffin with a 'kick me' sign on the rear.
There arn't 200 machs running through a system at any one point. Each and every pirate battleship will be scanned and if gank worthy, blown up in the next system. You are lying to yourself if you think its safer.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2167
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:10:53 -
[1480] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:baltec1 wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:
two times longer (assuming you have one char) and infinitely more safe.
If people fit several billion to their ships like they say then no, they are at more risk because the battleship they are flying is much easier to gank than a bowhead. it is easier to gank once you know which one of the 200 machs passing through is the shiny one. as for the 'accessory' ships, their chance of being ganked is essentially 0 unless they are buried in a giant cargo-coffin with a 'kick me' sign on the rear. There arn;t 200 mack running through a system at any one point. Each and every pirate battleship will be scanned and if gank worthy, blown up in the next system. You are lying to yourself if you think its safer. i prefer to always be honest, with myself at least. as for being ganked, you should ask people who actually run incursions. so far, they seem to be quite fine despite the permanent scanning (and so are my mission alts).
I should buy an Ishtar.
|

Valterra Craven
366
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:13:44 -
[1481] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
I am responding to YOUR argument that ganking hasn't gone down due to changes.
Ok, then lets go off that basis. Relative to amount of players that existed back then compared to now, what data do you have that shows that ganking has gone down? I basically asked him the same question I'm now asking you. Again, I'm not saying you are wrong, just that I haven't seen anything to suggest that this is the case. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:16:29 -
[1482] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote: i prefer to always be honest, with myself at least. as for being ganked, you should ask people who actually run incursions. so far, they seem to be quite fine despite the permanent scanning (and so are my mission alts).
So why is it that you are in a fit about a ship with near three times the tank of your battleship? If you only have a single mach and you stick it in your bowhead with a basic t2 tank with t1 rigs it will cost the gankers a lot more to gank you than they could possibly earn. With a max tanked bowhead with logi support they would require more firepower than is needed to alpha a neuted chimera. That simply does not exist in high sec.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:19:10 -
[1483] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:So why is it that you are in a fit about a ship with near three times the tank of your battleship? If you only have a single mach and you stick it in your bowhead with a basic t2 tank with t1 rigs it will cost the gankers a lot more to gank you than they could possibly earn. With a max tanked bowhead with logi support they would require more firepower than is needed to alpha a neuted chimera. That simply does not exist in high sec.
People seem to be continually neglecting to factor in that a ganked mach has 0% chance of dropping a mach hull in their comparisons thereby leaving only the modules as potential loot. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:19:56 -
[1484] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
I am responding to YOUR argument that ganking hasn't gone down due to changes.
Ok, then lets go off that basis. Relative to amount of players that existed back then compared to now, what data do you have that shows that ganking has gone down? I basically asked him the same question I'm now asking you. Again, I'm not saying you are wrong, just that I haven't seen anything to suggest that this is the case.
M0o killed thousands of ships in choke systems over the span of a few days in high sec to the point where CCP had to step in and teleported their fleet to the far corners of null sec.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:20:43 -
[1485] - Quote
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:baltec1 wrote:So why is it that you are in a fit about a ship with near three times the tank of your battleship? If you only have a single mach and you stick it in your bowhead with a basic t2 tank with t1 rigs it will cost the gankers a lot more to gank you than they could possibly earn. With a max tanked bowhead with logi support they would require more firepower than is needed to alpha a neuted chimera. That simply does not exist in high sec. People seem to be continually neglecting to factor in that a ganked mach has 0% chance of dropping a mach hull in their comparisons thereby leaving only the modules as potential loot.
When the mods are worth several times the value of the hull that point doesn't matter.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Valterra Craven
367
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:20:53 -
[1486] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
M0o killed thousands of ships in choke systems over the span of a few days in high sec to the point where CCP had to step in and teleported their fleet to the far corners of null sec.
And how does that differ from events like hulkageddon? |

Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:22:03 -
[1487] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:M0o killed thousands of ships in choke systems over the span of a few days in high sec to the point where CCP had to step in and teleported their fleet to the far corners of null sec.
I'd be interested in reading more about this, got any links?
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:22:48 -
[1488] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
M0o killed thousands of ships in choke systems over the span of a few days in high sec to the point where CCP had to step in and teleported their fleet to the far corners of null sec.
And how does that differ from events like hulkageddon?
They caused more damage with less than a dozen pilots
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Valterra Craven
367
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:31:02 -
[1489] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
This happened before much of what we have now. No KMs, few external sites and a smattering of info on the eve wiki.
So what you are saying is that you are too lazy to validate the claims you make? I only had vague inklings of memories of mOo, but I still managed to find some information on them instead of waving my hand and saying it couldn't be done.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:33:38 -
[1490] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
M0o killed thousands of ships in choke systems over the span of a few days in high sec to the point where CCP had to step in and teleported their fleet to the far corners of null sec.
And how does that differ from events like hulkageddon? They caused more damage with less than a dozen pilots In low sec. Undefended, and un-patrolled space. Just because a majority of lonetrek exists as a high sec region does not mean it all is. I can find no data to support your claims that this happened in hi sec and therefore unless you have something else then I fail to see how they are relevant.
You could tank concord back then.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:34:41 -
[1491] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
This happened before much of what we have now. No KMs, few external sites and a smattering of info on the eve wiki.
So what you are saying is that you are too lazy to validate the claims you make? I only had vague inklings of memories of mOo, but I still managed to find some information on them instead of waving my hand and saying it couldn't be done.
M0o is the single most influential corp to have ever existed in EVE. I shouldn't have to go hunting around for you.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

S'No Flake
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
43
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:38:54 -
[1492] - Quote
Querns wrote:The disconnect here is that the calls for seven digit EHP and other forms of invincibility assume a position where attempting to evade or out-think the gankers in question is never broached. In a pure PvP game such as Eve: Online, you must keep death in mind at all times. There is no safety. You are prey at all times until you choose to become a predator, and even then you're only not prey if you are at the top of your game.
With this ship, you can't evade anything.
While you can do that with an orca by using mwd+cloak or, drop some ecm drones and get a lucky break and warp away from the tackler (if they have one only) with bowhead you can't do anything at all. Just hope and prey they do a mistake and concord arrives while you are still alive. |

Valterra Craven
367
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:39:14 -
[1493] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
This happened before much of what we have now. No KMs, few external sites and a smattering of info on the eve wiki.
So what you are saying is that you are too lazy to validate the claims you make? I only had vague inklings of memories of mOo, but I still managed to find some information on them instead of waving my hand and saying it couldn't be done. M0o is the single most influential corp to have ever existed in EVE. I shouldn't have to go hunting around for you.
Oh I'm not saying that you should. I'm just saying I didn't try to pass it off as an impossible task to someone else, nor did I try to make claims that I hadn't looked into myself. I merely validated your claims as false for myself. Though I'm not sure I'd agree that they are the single most influential corp, given the likes of your alliance and founding. I'd easily put money down on goonswarm as being the most influential and I'm saying that as a former BoB member! Whether or not that thats a good thing, *shrug* don't really care either way. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:40:22 -
[1494] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:baltec1 wrote:
This happened before much of what we have now. No KMs, few external sites and a smattering of info on the eve wiki.
So what you are saying is that you are too lazy to validate the claims you make? I only had vague inklings of memories of mOo, but I still managed to find some information on them instead of waving my hand and saying it couldn't be done. M0o is the single most influential corp to have ever existed in EVE. I shouldn't have to go hunting around for you. Oh I'm not saying that you should. I'm just saying I didn't try to pass it off as an impossible task to someone else, nor did I try to make claims that I hadn't looked into myself. I merely validated your claims as false for myself. Though I'm not sure I'd agree that they are the single most influential corp, given the likes of your alliance and founding. I'd easily put money down on goonswarm as being the most influential and I'm saying that as a former BoB member! Whether or not that thats a good thing, *shrug* don't really care either way.
We didn't change the way concord works.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

Valterra Craven
367
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:41:12 -
[1495] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
You could tank concord back then.
And your point would be what? You still haven't addressed the core of the argument, mainly that you have no evidence to back up the statement that all of the changes that have occurred over the years have curbed ganking in any meaningful way. |

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
278
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:42:20 -
[1496] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Because its a freighter without a cloak + mwd...and it's slow enough to be trapped by bumping. That makes it vastly easier to gank than a mach.
Mach can be alpha'ed rather easily. The same cannot be said for a well tanked bowhead.
You are never locking it up because of cloak + mwd...not to mention that travel fit is close to 300k ehp and basically never gets suicide ganked. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:42:57 -
[1497] - Quote
S'No Flake wrote:Querns wrote:The disconnect here is that the calls for seven digit EHP and other forms of invincibility assume a position where attempting to evade or out-think the gankers in question is never broached. In a pure PvP game such as Eve: Online, you must keep death in mind at all times. There is no safety. You are prey at all times until you choose to become a predator, and even then you're only not prey if you are at the top of your game. With this ship, you can't evade anything. While you can do that with an orca by using mwd+cloak or, drop some ecm drones and get a lucky break and warp away from the tackler (if they have one only) with bowhead you can't do anything at all. Just hope and prey they do a mistake and concord arrives while you are still alive.
No ship can evade everything. The cloak mwd trick doesn't work on an orca vs anyone competent and ECM drones also wont work with the tactics used in high sec gate camps.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

S'No Flake
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
43
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:44:15 -
[1498] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Incursion ships die too. Freighters die. Sure titans die - but extremely rarely, and almost always due to gross stupidity. With triage carrier support, they virtually NEVER die. And that's fine. The game doesn't require every ship to be at significant risk of dying whenever it flies. So if Goonswarm titans can mosey around Deklein and NEVER die...that's fine for the game. Same thing if Bowheads would be able to mosey around highsec and NEVER die, the game would be perfectly fine. In no way does Eve require ships to constantly be at risk.
We lost one in Dek the other week.
Compared with how many freighters you killed in HS? |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:46:21 -
[1499] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Because its a freighter without a cloak + mwd...and it's slow enough to be trapped by bumping. That makes it vastly easier to gank than a mach.
Mach can be alpha'ed rather easily. The same cannot be said for a well tanked bowhead. You are never locking it up because of cloak + mwd...not to mention that travel fit is close to 300k ehp and basically never gets suicide ganked.
Feel free to post this fit.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13898
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 18:48:28 -
[1500] - Quote
S'No Flake wrote:baltec1 wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:
Incursion ships die too. Freighters die. Sure titans die - but extremely rarely, and almost always due to gross stupidity. With triage carrier support, they virtually NEVER die. And that's fine. The game doesn't require every ship to be at significant risk of dying whenever it flies. So if Goonswarm titans can mosey around Deklein and NEVER die...that's fine for the game. Same thing if Bowheads would be able to mosey around highsec and NEVER die, the game would be perfectly fine. In no way does Eve require ships to constantly be at risk.
We lost one in Dek the other week. Compared with how many freighters you killed in HS?
If freighters had the same security as our titans you would see the numbers ganked drop to near killed titan levels.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 [50] 60 .. 69 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |