| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
914
   |
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:28:07 -
[1] - Quote
Querns wrote:Agent Known wrote:
You're forgetting that many ganked freighters have a bunch of loot which is the whole point of the gank to begin with (unless you're bored and gank an empty JF).
Yes, more manpower will be required and it will increase the floor of when it's profitable to gank based on cargo contents (so, more than 1b in a freighter to maybe 1.5b before profitability? Not sure how many extra ships). Suicide ganking is a zero-risk exercise, so there should be more of a cost to essentially get billions in loot that's still quite an amount even if split between more people.
Far be it for you to exercise a modicum of restraint in your cargo value when transiting known dangerous areas, or *gasp* not transiting them at all. Limiting your loot value not only reduces the likelihood that you'll be targeted, but it also reduces the potential payout to the gankers. You can also use the humble Jump Freighter's built-in jump drive to transit past the choke points to reduce your risk further.
Maybe you just need to pick better targets?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
914
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:00:47 -
[2] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:FW LP store DCU, did you not make it to the list!?
Now there's a good point.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
914
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:21:51 -
[3] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:By the way, what is going to happen to reactive hardeners? Will they still maintain the same level of resists? If so it will certainly make it an interesting choice now between a DC and a reactive hardener for armour ships now.
I'm thinking RHs are going to become the new DCs for armour fits as long as the ship can handle the capacitor drain.
Adding in variations of RHs would be nice, it is about time we had a T2 version.
ENAM would be better than a reactive hardener. Since the RH adjusts each cycle to damage taken during the previous cycle. Really only works if you're taking constant consistent damage, so pve mainly. ENAM gives you that nice, reliable, flat bonus with the same fitting requirements as a DCII.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
914
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:26:57 -
[4] - Quote
Globby wrote:the whines and cries still haven't stopped.
Well, you keep posting.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
915
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:37:55 -
[5] - Quote
Jin Kugu wrote:Aiwha wrote:Globby wrote:the whines and cries still haven't stopped. Well, you keep posting. NCdot just ran 50+ invulnerable jumpfreighters between jita and their new staging. Hauling is too easy already.
Maybe you're just not dedicated enough to nail them?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
916
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:54:52 -
[6] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:
barge piracy extinct? wtf are code doing these days ? and doesnt some goon afk 24 hr multi boxer carrier ratter fund miniluv anyway? jus get a few more carriers, problem solved.
Code are not pirates, they are terrorists. The pirates would only attack barges that were profitable to gank. Code came into being because CCP made it impossible to turn a profit ganking barges, this had the added effect of making every barge a target which punished the people who used to fly and fit them well. Why exactly should piracy be removed from highsec?
So why are you not blaming CODE for the buffs to highsec hulls?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
916
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:58:58 -
[7] - Quote
Rowells wrote:damn, obelisk goes from 367k to 447k ehp. With just 3 bulkheads.
I'm pretty sure JF's clear 800k ehp with 3x bulkheads.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
916
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:04:12 -
[8] - Quote
Globby wrote:Aiwha wrote:
So why are you not blaming CODE for the buffs to highsec hulls?
Is all you have to do to get something buffed to kill it over and over again? You fail to realize that anti-gankers have more than enough tools in their toolbox to stop, and prevent a majority of ganks, and are either too lazy, too incompetant, or too stupid to do so. (Or they might have ulterior motives, like appearing useless and crying on the forums and waiting for the developers to buff them.)
Pretty much. CODE ganking barges with no regard for profit killed profitable barge ganking. Ganking freighters with no reguard for profit is killing profitable freighter ganking. The waters have been overfished. Maybe you should go play with Rocket_X? I'm sure even when watchlists finally get nerfed he's going to be whacking supers.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
916
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:15:43 -
[9] - Quote
Globby wrote:lol every response to me thus far has been "cry more" or "no you"
Because "bring more people" will just be met with even more tears.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
920
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:27:22 -
[10] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:baltec1 wrote:Moac Tor wrote:
Sorry but I am really struggling to have any sympathy. Go to 0.0/LS/WH space to PvP, or HTFU and bring a few more buddies if you want to gank a HS freighter. I don't mean to pick on your in particular Baltec as I know you are an experienced PvPer yourself, but I do get sick of these hypocritical HS gank whines, they just come across as self entitled rants complaining because they feel they have a god given right to be able to profitably gank a freighter in high sec with a couple of destroyers or battlecruisers.
This change is good for the game as a whole and makes PvP fitting a lot more interesting, that is what really matters.
Pirates go where the cargo is and the cargo is in highsec.. And so hopefully this will shift the balance with the profitable cargo now going to be in low/null/wh space, and so those HS gankers will have to step out of high sec and create some content in <0.5 space where they can be killed. Sometimes you can roam around null and low sec and struggle to find anything to shoot at, then you go to high sec and realise why, because all the pirates are camping high sec gates whoring on juicy high sec freighters. Pirates have got fat and out of shape, they need to come back to low sec like the real pirates of the times gone by. *chuckles*
Trump is making lowsec great again.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
923
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:46:55 -
[11] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:baltec1 wrote:bigbud skunkafella wrote:
also does it matter whether its profitable or whether uncle jimmy /mittens writes the welfare cheques , barges are still going pop in hisec on a regular basis.
Yes, the removal of entire professions and vast amounts of content in highsec does matter. Yes, it does. And it's good. Because now people will be more bored in High sec and move out to Low sec or Null sec to make these boring places more interesting and exciting.
Please. As if gankers will ever leave highsec. They'll run isk doubling before that happens.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
923
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:51:52 -
[12] - Quote
That's because transporting goods around highsec is not very profitable. In fact, its actually a pretty terrible way to make money considering you can put an alt in karma fleet and afktar. I only do transport stuff to support my corp/alliance.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
924
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:58:16 -
[13] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:Aiwha wrote:That's because transporting goods around highsec is not very profitable. In fact, its actually a pretty terrible way to make money considering you can put an alt in karma fleet and afktar. I only do transport stuff to support my corp/alliance. I certainly make a lot out of buying goods in one place in high then selling them in another. I just don't share much of that with the useful idiots that do courier work.
I group that sort of thing with market pvp vs just plain hauling. You're taking on the increased risk of general market instability.
Not my cup of tea. I prefer trying to keep my nerds productive and happy.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
924
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:59:21 -
[14] - Quote
412nv Yaken wrote:it goes to show the squeaking wheel gets the most love.
If that were the cease, gankers would get everything they wanted.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
924
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:01:48 -
[15] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:That's because transporting goods around highsec is not very profitable. In fact, its actually a pretty terrible way to make money considering you can put an alt in karma fleet and afktar. I only do transport stuff to support my corp/alliance. RFF made 2.475 trillion in profits.
How many haulers do they have? If every one of them ran an afktar they'd probably make double that easily.
Take the goon out of CFC, can't take the CFC out of goons I suppose.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
924
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:06:29 -
[16] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ylmar wrote:baltec1 wrote:You are removing my playstyle. You mean I don't accept your playstyle being forced on me. Right now I am the only one having someone elses playstyle forced upon me.
Oh! Damn! I got a good one for this!
Might you say they're... Ruining your game?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
927
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:10:23 -
[17] - Quote
IF CCP were removing ganking they would just disable combat outside of duels.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
927
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:13:13 -
[18] - Quote
Makoto Priano wrote:Fozzie;
Would it be worthwhile or interesting to provide factional damage controls that shift the armor/shield bonus? For instance, an Imperial Navy one with 19% armor/10% shield, and a Caldari Navy one with 18% shield/12% armor? I notice there's a bit of variance between shield and armor resistances, so used the Brynn's and IFFA for seed numbers, just as an example.
I've always viewed that as the DC becoming more effective the more trouble you're in.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
930
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:57:11 -
[19] - Quote
Tippia wrote:baltec1 wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Lowest priced Anshar on EVE-Central is 7.5B (in Derelik) and a bit more in Jita. At least at the moment of this post. Nomad is 6.85 in jita Not that it matters; the underlying argument is hideously wrong-headed to begin with. Even if they cost north of 10bn, you shouldn't need more than maybe 1GÇô2bn worth of ships to kill them as a worst-case scenario. You should be easily able to get away with far less with a bit of forethought. ISK tanking is an abomination that needs to get shot in the face at every opportunity.
A rifter can solo a JF given enough time.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:A rifter can solo a JF given enough time. GǪin the parts of space where ISK tanking has been properly shot in the face. But since we're talking about ganking in highsec, and about the mindblowingly idiotic notion that the cost of the ship lost should in some way be on part with what's needed to kill it in that part of space, no. They really can't.
That's ********. You're ********. The entire point of CONCORD is to make killing random ships in highsec risky. If you want to blap a freighter, you'd better be willing to match the 1.2b that the owner put into their ship hull. If you want to gank a JF, you'd better pony up 5-7b to match what they gambled by undocking their ship. You want all the reward without having to take any risk of isk loss whatsoever.
Carebears gonna carebear.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:10:32 -
[21] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:A rifter can solo a JF given enough time. GǪin the parts of space where ISK tanking has been properly shot in the face. But since we're talking about ganking in highsec, and about the mindblowingly idiotic notion that the cost of the ship lost should in some way be on part with what's needed to kill it in that part of space, no. They really can't. That's ********. You're ********. The entire point of CONCORD is to make killing random ships in highsec risky. If you want to blap a freighter, you'd better be willing to match the 1.2b that the owner put into their ship hull. If you want to gank a JF, you'd better pony up 5-7b to match what they gambled by undocking their ship. You want all the reward without having to take any risk of isk loss whatsoever. Carebears gonna carebear. Isk tanking is the shittiest of ideas.
Whatever you say luckbear.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:19:31 -
[22] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:
Whatever you say luckbear.
There is a megathron hull in game that under your idea would have the tank of 100 titans. Yes, isk tanking is a terrible idea.
That value is due to rarity, not due to the base hull cost and you should know that. A hull that requires 6b to build should require 6b to suicide gank. The fact that you don't understand value vs. isk cost says a lot.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:24:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:That's ********. Welcome to the fundamental flaw of ISK tanking as a concept. Quote:The entire point of CONCORD is to make killing random ships in highsec risk]. No. The point of CONCORD in its various forms is that it ensures that aggression comes at a cost, be it in ISK or in assets. Quote:If you want to blap a freighter, you'd better be willing to match the 1.2b that the owner put into their ship hull. No. That's called ISK-tanking and is one of the most horribly fucktarded failures of game balancing possible. The cost of a ship should at no point have any relation whatsoever to how much you have to spend to kill it. If such a connection exists, the game is inherently and irreparably unbalanced and needs to have the connecting mechanic removed, immediately. Only then can the game be repaired and restored to any semblance of balance. A ship that cost 7bn must be killable by a ship that costs a tiny tiny fraction, or you will end up with a WoW-style level system where lower levels are prohibited from being effective against higher levels, and where higher levels are immune for no sane or sensible reason other than that they are a higher level. Only in this case, the GǣlevelGǥ is cost. This is very similar to a classic P2W setup. The sheer lunacy of such a system becomes very apparent if you turn the table. Ok, so a 1.2bn ship should be safe from a 100M shipGǪ but then, a 12bn ship should be able to utterly annihilate scores of 1.2bn ships without even breaking a sweat. An Etana must be untouchable by CONCORD; a Sin must be able to solo a Fenrir; a Tribal Tempest must be able to instagib a JF. Arguing that cost should be a factor means you must accept the other side of that coin, and I highly doubt that anyone is willing to actually do so.
As I said, a rifter can easily take a JF or any larger expensive ship if it has the time.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:25:22 -
[24] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:
Whatever you say luckbear.
There is a megathron hull in game that under your idea would have the tank of 100 titans. Yes, isk tanking is a terrible idea. That value is due to rarity, not due to the base hull cost and you should know that. A hull that requires 6b to build should require 6b to suicide gank. The fact that you don't understand value vs. isk cost says a lot. The base hull cost is 10 trillion. You cant build it.
Care to link the 10 trillion in minerals that we're spent on that beast luckbear?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
931
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:27:38 -
[25] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:As I said, a rifter can easily take a JF or any larger expensive ship if it has the time. GǪexcept that, as mentioned, it can't.
You can't do more than 10dps in a rifter?
Did you do the tutorial up to the "skill-queue" part? That's important.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
933
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:40:30 -
[26] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:You can't do more than 10dps in a rifter? You have 20 seconds to chew through 32k EHP. Kindly show the Rifter fit that is capable of doing so. I can tell you right now, 10 DPS will not cut it.
Why the time limit? Oh, wait, its because you're afraid of lowsec. EVE is about risk and reward, the freighter pilot risks their cargo plus the cost of their ship, the ganker risks RNGesus plus the value of their ship. If you spend 1b, and the target spends 7b, that's ALL the risk on their end. Quit being a carebear and take some risks in the game.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
933
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:48:18 -
[27] - Quote
If you have a problem with concord, come to nullsec! There is no concord here! Or, you know, accept that ganking's inherent risk is from the fact that the profit margins are slim and based entirely on whether the loot fairy likes you or not. Option C, staying on the forums to whine is also available I suppose.
Again, it requires a little more risk than humping gates in highsec, but I'm sure you guys can get there!
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:57:45 -
[28] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:If you have a problem with concord, come to nullsec! So you agree, then that ISK tanking is a profoundly stupid idea, seeing as how you can't think of any argument to support it, and instead point to a part of space where it has been rightly shot in the face as an example of how things should work. Good, that's settled then.
Its ridiculous because of the isk ratio. I'd trade 1b to kill 7b in a heartbeat.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:02:27 -
[29] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Aiwha wrote:
Its ridiculous because of the isk ratio. I'd trade 1b to kill 7b in a heartbeat.
The ratio is only there is the person piloting the freighter makes a series of bad decisions. But then that's what carebears are all about, that there shouldn't be any penalties for playing the game wrong. Well, now there really aren't.
Just undocking an empty freighter in highsec isn't a bad decision.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:07:09 -
[30] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:Its ridiculous because of the isk ratio. I'd trade 1b to kill 7b in a heartbeat. What's ridiculous about it? And you should be able to make that trade (well, actually, you'd have to make it 1:9 or so before it makes any sense), but you'd be really hard-pressed to do so because of the horrible balancing in place at the moment.
So you won't do anything without a 1:7 edge? That's not carebearish at all.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:13:03 -
[31] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Aiwha wrote:
Just undocking an empty freighter in highsec isn't a bad decision.
Not escorting your billion isk capital ship is. And besides, we were talking about seven billion, not one. If it's empty, then why are you crying about the isk ratio?
Because if it dies the pilot is out 5b after insurance. If somebody is risking 5b in highsec, I expect their attackers to match that risk before they can reap any rewards.
To kill bigger ships, you need more smaller ships. That's how ganking works. If this displeases you, come down and fight with the rest of us in lowsec/nullsec. You don't even have to be part of a tidi blob like mine to enjoy null, fucktons of smaller groups doing fun things out here.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:21:50 -
[32] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Aiwha wrote:
Because if it dies the pilot is out 5b after insurance. If somebody is risking 5b in highsec, I expect their attackers to match that risk before they can reap any rewards.
Oh, I get it, you're crying about the already nigh invincible jump freighters. You do realize that they're supposed to die, right? Just because you spent a bunch of money on it shouldn't stop you from dying if you behave stupidly. Especially with something that is almost completely invincible anyway. Quote:
To kill bigger ships, you need more smaller ships. That's how ganking works. If this displeases you, come down and fight with the rest of us in lowsec/nullsec. You don't even have to be part of a tidi blob like mine to enjoy null, fucktons of smaller groups doing fun things out here.
No. Risk is supposed to exist in highsec, especially for playstyles that would otherwise have zero risk at all. Or at least it was supposed to, but then we'll see how well that works out for them in the end.
I know that. I've lost JF's to stupidity before. Poor descisions make for dead ships.
And EVE always has risk. I'm saying that gankers need to take risks to reap rewards. You want to kill a freighter in highsec, you'd better be willing to risk a bunch of ships to do it.
I understand risk fine. You don't want any of it.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:27:10 -
[33] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Aiwha wrote:
The isk ratio is ridiculous because 1:7 fights are considered noteworthy achievements.
Why should your e-honor have any reflection on game balance? Quote:
If every suicide gank is 1:7 in value, there's a problem with suicide ganking.
So then there isn't a problem with suicide ganking. Nevermind that how profitable it is comes down to bad choices being made on the part of the haulers, the single most lazy, effort free playstyle that exists in the MMO industry. Why should we be nerfed because people keep handing us profitable cargo? Why should deliberately playing the game badly be justification to nerf the other guy? Quote:
You're riskaverse as ****.
No we're not, that's just projection on your part. The risk averse are, and continue to be, the people who think that being afk in a billion isk ship should not have consequences just because it's expensive. You.
Yeah, I don't afk in anything but a noobship or shuttle in a noobcorp. Even then I don't afk unless I'm not really concerned whether or not I get to where I need to go today. You're a highsec player whining about highsec being too risky for you. You might lose isk doing something! THATS BAD!
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:38:05 -
[34] - Quote
AFK flying is unsafe as it always has been. Not only do you have to sit bumpable for your align time like a normal person, but then crawling to your out gate? One bumping stabber and you're not going anywhere till you're dead or they get bored. Highsec is getting a little less risky for freighter pilots, a little more risky for gankers. Gankers are throwing a shitfit because they can't stand risk. Hence, this thread.
God, if CCP turned off CONCORD for a few days, you guys would lose your marbles.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
934
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:54:21 -
[35] - Quote
ValentinaDLM wrote:ITT delicious ganker tears over the fact they need to get a few more catalysts or talos.
What is more worrying is another buff to the tristan, now even the non DC full kiting version probably has as many HP as most brawling frigs. In the frigate PVP meta even a tiny change to HP is substantial to the outcomes and this is basically a buff to gallente while being a nerf to Minmatar unless structure HP is going to be changed to be more in line between races or shield/armor HP adjusted to compensate.
Yeah, but that's the sort of thing you need to test/play with on sisi. Especially when paired with the point re-balance. The frig meta kind of just got thrown in the blender. (Mr.Hyde strikes before he's even on the CSM)
Can't say I'm going to miss scram kiting frigates though. I prefer a straight brawl.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
938
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:00:19 -
[36] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Aiwha wrote:AFK flying is unsafe as it always has been.
No it isn't. It's demonstrably more safe now than it ever has been before, and it's about to get a whole lot safer. Quote:
Gankers are throwing a shitfit because they can't stand risk.
Do you think that if you repeat this lie often enough, it will stop being a lie? Or do you really totally discount the decade of tears from haulers who think they should have even less risk in their functionally risk free gameplay? The problem is that sloppy, lazy gameplay is already too safe, and it's about to get a lot safer.
I don't have to lie, this entire thread has been 90% gankers whining about having to undock a few more Talos. Its like the CODE AT ragequit on steroids. The people really suffering are those trying to give feedback on the actual meta implications of ships no longer needing to fit a DCU. Which I'm guilty of too, but ganker tears are just a little too delicious. I assume the thread will get trimmed and their stuff will get back to the devs though.
:tinfoil: "Highsec is 100% safe for freighters" is a false flag to lull people into a false sense of security!
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
938
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:05:16 -
[37] - Quote
Jin Kugu wrote:Aiwha wrote:AFK flying is unsafe as it always has been. Not only do you have to sit bumpable for your align time like a normal person, but then crawling to your out gate? One bumping stabber and you're not going anywhere till you're dead or they get bored. Highsec is getting a little less risky for freighter pilots, a little more risky for gankers. Gankers are throwing a shitfit because they can't stand risk. Hence, this thread.
God, if CCP turned off CONCORD for a few days, you guys would lose your marbles. What are you talking about? Anyway, removing concord would remove ganking.
Yeah, because gankers wouldn't undock.  Most highsec people wouldn't either, but there's a reason they're in highsec.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
938
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:13:32 -
[38] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:My biggest question after reading this, and digging through forum posts, is this:
What do you hope to achieve with this update? What does it really do for us? Aside from being a make-work project, with the potential for breaking some very well-established and not-at-all-problematic game mechanics, why change this (and is the reason good enough to justify going through with it).
The primary beneficiary of the change are your general combat ships. The first bit of fitting advice most people get is "fit a DCU". DCU's are ridiculously good, and a must have for so many pvp fits. By halving the amount of resists they give as a module, and just building it into the ships hull, it makes choosing to fit or not to fit a DCU in favor of another damage mod, or a more specialized tank mod (for example, an ENAM) much more viable.
Any fit that didn't fit a DCU before gets a buff, any ship that fit it before loses... I think its like .2% of their ehp. So that's really only a nerf to solo. (I'm so sorry solo DCU users) Pair this up with the scram re-balance and the frigate meta is going to get a small shakeup. Although I don't think its going to dethrone any of the current meta picks for solo frig work at all, only change up a few fits that might have needed a DCU before the nerf.
The second change, is making it passive. People have been asking for that since they made DCU's a thing. Slight nerf to neuts, but since DCU's are only going to be half as effective as before, its not really THAT big a deal. (cycling them on right after neut cycles was pretty simple anyway since it was a 1gj draw)
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
938
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:15:20 -
[39] - Quote
Stalker Ofeveryone wrote:Where are all these 'ganker tears'? I'm just seeing pubbies agreeing with themselves back and forth that that there are 'tears', but no said angry comments.
I'll say it again, we'll continue to gank like normal. 90% of my mining ganks don't even have DCU's fit...
Don't worry, we all know you'll still be there. That's why I keep my web alt close.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
940
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:20:50 -
[40] - Quote
Stalker Ofeveryone wrote:Aiwha wrote:Stalker Ofeveryone wrote:Where are all these 'ganker tears'? I'm just seeing pubbies agreeing with themselves back and forth that that there are 'tears', but no said angry comments.
I'll say it again, we'll continue to gank like normal. 90% of my mining ganks don't even have DCU's fit... Don't worry, we all know you'll still be there. That's why I keep my web alt close. Not everyone uses Web alts. After DT at Burn Jita minutes into the event there were untanked freighters undocking from Jita autopiloting. You can't patch idiots.
Yeah, betting on stupid isn't dumb. Or something like that. You know what I mean.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
940
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:25:13 -
[41] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:The primary beneficiary of the change are your general combat ships. No. The primary beneficiary from this are ships that couldn't or often wouldn't fit DCUs and that have huge amounts of hull HP. For everyone else, it's pretty much just business as usual. The secondary beneficiary is a group of pilots who often fly AFK and who therefore get a lot extra out of a module that doesn't need to be activated. Coincidentally, there is a fair amount of cross-over between this group and the previous one.
You've got a point there on the actived DCU thing. But I'm going to err on the side of "I'm really, REALLY sick of having to click it every single goddamn time I jump/bridge" Then it just sits there taking up space that I could use for something that I actually have to manage heat or capacitor draw on. Hell, the whole reason CCP made it active in the first place was because of their spaghetti code.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
943
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:43:00 -
[42] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:You've got a point there on the actived DCU thing. But I'm going to err on the side of "I'm really, REALLY sick of having to click it every single goddamn time I jump/bridge" That's not so much erring as just making **** up wholesale and ignoring the reality of the situation. You don't have to click it every time, and the people who fit it aren't sick of it. So no, the only ones who actually benefit are AFK:ers.
Do you even undock? People have been complaining about DCU's being active modules since day 1. I'm one of them. Its annoying. Its also annoying that they're so necessary to so many fits. Now they're not. This is good. I'm going to enjoy having a little more freedom with my lowslots now that one isn't almost always pegged for a DCU.
Even if they nerfed DCU's across the board without buffing all base hull resists I'd be pleased.
News flash, highsec isn't the only place to play EVE. Most of the DCU changes are for the benefit of pvpers south of .5 sec space. The bonus EHP to freighters (and ganker tears) is just a bonus.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
943
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 03:56:34 -
[43] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:Do you even undock? Do you even have an argument? Rhetoric question GÇö you don't. That's why you have to rely on this constant use of fallacies. Quote:People have been complaining about DCU's being active modules since day 1. GǪwhich doesn't actually change the simple fact that you don't have to click it every time or that people who fit it are sick of it. It certainly doesn't change the fact that the ones who benefit from it becoming passive are the AFK:ers. Suggesting anything else is ignorant, not a case of erring on the side of anything. Quote:News flash, highsec isn't the only place to play EVE. Most of the DCU changes are for the benefit of pvpers south of .5 sec space. No. The DCU changes make no difference for those players. In fact, most of them lose a very tiny amount of EHP from this. So that's just a convenient sales pitch that covers up the fact that the ones who actually benefit from this change are the ones who previously wouldn't and couldn't fit one GÇö doubly so if a large portion of their EHP was already in their huge piles of hull HP. Your pathetic attempts at hiding this fact and being a massive troll is not a bonus, just moronic.
So you admit that you have no idea what you're talking about ingame. Good. That helps anybody reading this threadnaught. Good change, longtime QOL request from pvpers, shakes up the meta for EFT warriors, makes gankers cry. A+ CCP. A+.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
943
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 04:19:50 -
[44] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Aiwha wrote:So you admit that you have no idea what you're talking about ingame. Your reliance on fallacies just proves your complete lack of an argument, and your inability to actually address the points being made suggests that you are wholly unfamiliar with the mechanics in question. The facts remain unchallenged, and you just further prove that you're just trolling. So again, the change does one thing and one thing only: it pointlessly buffs a set of ships and pilots that are the least in need of such a buff in the entire game. For everyone else, it's a minor QoL change. You are happy because you get to troll people who can identify the negative consequences of this ill-conceived change. Arthur Aihaken wrote:The only real downside I'm getting from this discussion is that it's going to be harder to gank certain types of ships. And this is a problem exactly because...? GǪit further unbalances an already insanely unbalanced part of the game and does so for no sane or sensible reason. If anything, this would be a good opportunity to rebalance those ships in the opposite direction.
Ah, the fallacy fallacy. Not to be confused with my fallacy fallacy fallacy, but I digress. The point is, you don't play the game, and are dismissing outright people who do. You have no idea what you're talking about. The negative consequence is tiny. AFK freighters are slightly harder to whack. AFK DST's are slightly harder to whack (although afk' ing a DST is a waste, that overheat bonus is so amazing) Bring more people and make AFK'ers suffer enough and they won't afk anymore; Is what I'd say to somebody who actually undocked.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
948
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 04:40:35 -
[45] - Quote
The last time you bothered to undock was 2013. That's not a fallacy, that's you trying to deflect from the fact that you're not qualified to discuss anything outside of ship spinning. Trying to discredit my entire argument, which is that the EHP buff is not bad, is in itself a fallacy. Play distraction games all you want, fact is, these changes are overall good for the game, and the real problems that they present won't be apparent till we see how they affect various fits on sisi.
The freighter issue is literally only an issue to lazy gankers.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
951
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:09:56 -
[46] - Quote
You have zero credibility, so why do you expect everybody to respect your opinion? Your entire argument is that buffing freighter EHP will end suicide ganking. It will not. You're pulling **** out of your ******* and demanding we acknowledge it. I'd take anybody with a red as blood killboard as more credible than your opinions, because they actually tried something ingame rather than whined on the forums.
Freighter get a 30% hull EHP buff. So you need 30% more ships to gank them. That's it. A gank takes 15 pilots now, you bring 20. 30 pilots, you bring 40. Ganks can range from 80m up to 1b in costs. This buff moves it to 100m to 1.3b. That's a pittance.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
953
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:20:04 -
[47] - Quote
Almost all the freighters currently dying are over 3b isk in cargo (aside from CODE ganks on empty freighters for lulz). Pray to RNGesus like the rest of the ratters for a good drop.
You're fine.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
953
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:25:23 -
[48] - Quote
Subotai Khan wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:adding a base 33% hull resistance to ships by default.
Why add base hull resistance, and not raw hull HP instead?
Damage controls give resists, so CCP is just moving it from the module to the hull itself. If you just gave a raw 33% hp buff to hull, then adding a DCU on top of that would multiply it again.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
953
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:35:41 -
[49] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:Almost all the freighters currently dying are over 3b isk in cargo (aside from CODE ganks on empty freighters for lulz). Pray to RNGesus like the rest of the ratters for a good drop.
You're fine. No we are not. See your lack of knowledge here is glaring, you cant turn a profit on a less than 1 bil margin, the loot drop chance simply wont allow it. If you increase our costs then we have to target more expensive cargo and that means far fewer potential targets. You are effectively strangling the pirates of targets in the same way barge ganking went.
So why are more than a dozen freighters dying every day worth WAY above your profit margin?
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
953
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:45:19 -
[50] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:Almost all the freighters currently dying are over 3b isk in cargo (aside from CODE ganks on empty freighters for lulz). Pray to RNGesus like the rest of the ratters for a good drop.
You're fine. No we are not. See your lack of knowledge here is glaring, you cant turn a profit on a less than 1 bil margin, the loot drop chance simply wont allow it. If you increase our costs then we have to target more expensive cargo and that means far fewer potential targets. You are effectively strangling the pirates of targets in the same way barge ganking went. So why are more than a dozen freighters dying every day worth WAY above your profit margin? There isn't more than a dozen freighters getting ganked per day.
So catch more. Upping your costs by 30% hardly puts ANY of your money making freighters out of reach. They're all +3b losses. More than half are +6b losses. To be honest, if you're losing money doing this, I question how you're managing your isk.
The income is there.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
954
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 05:57:47 -
[51] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:
So catch more. Upping your costs by 30% hardly puts ANY of your money making freighters out of reach. They're all +3b losses. More than half are +6b losses. To be honest, if you're losing money doing this, I question how you're managing your isk.
The income is there.
How do we catch more if you remove a large number of viable targets? Again, why do ships with a less than 0.1% chance of getting ganked over 2 million gate jumps need 157,000 more ehp on what is already the biggest buffer tanks in highsec?
It removes 1, maybe 2 targets. The whales are still there and still WAY profitable.
Don't complain just because you're bad at the game. Sheesh.
Anybody who wants to get a look at how poor gankers are, go to everybody's favorite killboard that starts with a zed in canada. Hit menu, hit freighters. Look at all the juicy killmails.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
954
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 06:23:45 -
[52] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Aiwha wrote:
So catch more. Upping your costs by 30% hardly puts ANY of your money making freighters out of reach. They're all +3b losses. More than half are +6b losses. To be honest, if you're losing money doing this, I question how you're managing your isk.
The income is there.
How do we catch more if you remove a large number of viable targets? Again, why do ships with a less than 0.1% chance of getting ganked over 2 million gate jumps need 157,000 more ehp on what is already the biggest buffer tanks in highsec? It removes 1, maybe 2 targets. The whales are still there and still WAY profitable. Don't complain just because you're bad at the game. Sheesh. Anybody who wants to get a look at how poor gankers are, go to everybody's favorite killboard that starts with a zed in canada. Hit menu, hit freighters. Look at all the juicy killmails. The only bads here are the people wanting more safety than 0.1% chance of being ganked in over 2 million jumps. The chance of an average person living in the US being struck by lightning in a given year is estimated at 1 in 960,000. You are more likely to be struck by ******* lightning than ganked in highsec.
Lets stop pretending gankers go anywhere but the trade routes and choke points. Udema, Niarja, and their adjoining systems are where freighter ganks happen. Ganks elsewhere are noteworthy simply for their oddity. Your odds of being ganked depend on how many other dumb whales are rolling through there at any given time. Which is much, MUCH lower than the "2 million jumps" that you're trying to hide behind. If you're going to count EVERY jump, its closer to 22k in a single day. WHich still includes that anything that's not a freighter is going to be left alone by gank teams. (since haulers are the prey of the much smaller teams or solo gankers)
The numbers don't lie. Gankers are not going away with this buff to EHP. All its doing is giving freighter pilots another 400-500m of breathing room.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
Aiwha
Infinite Point
Northern Army
985
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 23:50:33 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
The actual DCU feedback has been a bit challenging to sift out of the ganking debate, but I want to make it clear that the IFFA fitting requirements in the OP are not a typo. It's intentional that the new compact DCU have a slightly higher CPU cost than the previous best named versions. This will indeed require some fits to change, but the intention here is to create a balance enviroment between the different meta levels of damage control as well as making damage controls as a whole less important for many fits. There are plenty of options for saving the CPU from old IFFA and Pseudo fits, including the new compact damage upgrades and forgoing a DCU entirely for another lowslot module and taking full advantage of the new base hull resistances.
We will of course be keeping an eye on how these changes go as we being SISI testing and if we see evidence that the fittings need to change we have the ability to do so. Thanks!
Can you give us a comment on the "CPU creep" a lot of players are describing in recent patches, including this one? More and more it seems that CPU is becoming the main limiting factor in fittings with PG only being relevant with oversized fittings.
Sanity is fun leaving the body.
Aiwha for CSM XI
|
| |
|