|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17987
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 11:10:39 -
[1] - Quote
Hulk and Mack:
Cant use the slots they have due to not enough CPU, they require a mod/rig/implants to actually fit. Tank is fairly poor not becaue of the base stats but because of the lack of slots, CPU and powergrid.
Covetor and retriever:
1 mid and 3 lows does not a good ship make. Zero fitting room on them simply due to the lack of slots let alone, this makes then fodder to anything.
skiff and procuror:
Overtanked for their class (battleship base tank on a cruiser sized hull) means they effectively invalidate the other 4 barges.
All together this barge change is making all the same mistake that last two made. We need a radical rethink.
Skiff and proc should get their base hp brought back down to normal levels, keep the combat bonus to drones, get a few more slots and fitting room to open up options and allow for a decent combat fit. They are now perfect mining escorts/defence boats for both fleet work and solo.
Retriever and mackinaw both need a good deal more slots and CPU/PG so they can actually have options when fitting them. CCP need to get creative here so I would say go radical. Give them two utility highs and a small bonus to remote shield boosters. Alter the cap to compensate. Again, they need the ability to actually fit a decent setup, 1 mid and 3 lows are next to useless.
Covetor and Hulk should be the go to strip miners, they also need more fitting slots and CPU/PG to actually fit things.
I would also alter the cargo expanders to also impact the ore hold and reduce the hold on barges to compensate. All barges would be able to hold at least two cycles as a base with the option of improving that if they so wish.
T1 barges need fitting slots and CPU/PG on par with cruisers with similar potential defenses.
T2 need to have fitting slots and cpu/pg somewhere between force recons and heavy assault ships with similar potential defenses.
One of the oldest complaints about mining is how boring it is so lets inject some fun into it. Lets have mining fleets that can defend themselves rather than have miners forever relegated to prey and victims. Lets have miners able to support eachother and fend off a small gang that attacks them, let mining have actual skill involved ranther than everyone picking the skiff because it have a big base tank and mining AFK all day. Give miners content. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17987
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 11:41:17 -
[2] - Quote
Andrea Cemenotar wrote:
personally I don't think that BB tank on cruiser sized ship is that bad - considering that ship already have severly limited offensive capabilities
It gets that tank from the base stats, under my plan you still get an 80k tank with (t2 mods) only now you have to actually fit it. There is nothing balanced with the way the skiffs tank works, no other subcap works that way.
Andrea Cemenotar wrote:
as for all mining barges receiving fitting possibilities of combat cruiers.... I disagree - they are mining barges, not combat fighters - as fro miner fleets being able to defend themselves - the single barge type in a role of escort barge would be good thing actually for that... of wait we have that one already....
We have a logi barge already? where? Also where is the escort miner?
There isn't any. The barges as they are can't defend themselves from anything right now. Hell, 4 of them either cant fit much of a defense or fit any defense at all. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17989
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 17:24:40 -
[3] - Quote
FT Cold wrote:Grognard Commissar wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
[quote=FT Cold]
increase the probability of profitable ganking under ideal conditions. .
i think we got enough of that already. Under the correct circumstances it is possible to make a profit ganking barges, however is is absolutely minimal and not the primary motivation for gankers. I think it would fit the central themes of EVE better to shift that from trolling to reasons of economics.
A hellstorm of outrage is heading your way. I'm getting abuse just for asking for the skiff to get its tank from actually fitting the ship rather than having CCP bake it into the hull. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17992
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 00:36:03 -
[4] - Quote
Grognard Commissar wrote:
so... you want to give skiffs like 6 mid slots, and the cpu and pg to go with it? otherwise, you'll nerf it to the point where it is pointless.
I want the skiff to have a similar slot layout to a HACs and the cpu and powergrid to go with that. Same goes for the other exhumers and the barges to be similar to cruiser in terms of slots, cpu and powergrid.
This is the third attempt by CCP to balance barges under the tank, ore hold, yield mantra and it just isn't working. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17994
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 01:44:54 -
[5] - Quote
Coralas wrote:[ In the baltec scenario, there are 6 generic exhumers in the belt, that you can't tell apart without them sitting there long enough for you to shipscan all of them. IMO thats entirely against the way that the rest of EVE is designed, and dull because it promotes only 1 strategy - always bring enough firepower to kill a generic exhumer that is fully tanked.
They have different names in the overview. 3 skiffs with 2 macks would mean 3 dps and 2 logi. Its also perfectly in line with the rest of EVE to not know how people might be fitting their barges due to them having options. Just look at the thorax, it has a rather large number of ways of fitting it.
CCP fitting your ships for you is a very poor way of doing things, its basically saying you are incapable of doing it for yourself. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17995
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 08:55:07 -
[6] - Quote
Coralas wrote:baltec1 wrote:Coralas wrote:[ In the baltec scenario, there are 6 generic exhumers in the belt, that you can't tell apart without them sitting there long enough for you to shipscan all of them. IMO thats entirely against the way that the rest of EVE is designed, and dull because it promotes only 1 strategy - always bring enough firepower to kill a generic exhumer that is fully tanked. They have different names in the overview. 3 skiffs with 2 macks would mean 3 dps and 2 logi. Its also perfectly in line with the rest of EVE to not know how people might be fitting their barges due to them having options. Just look at the thorax, it has a rather large number of ways of fitting it. CCP fitting your ships for you is a very poor way of doing things, its basically saying you are incapable of doing it for yourself. Which is a recognized fact, and a game design problem CCP had to contend with, which is why the exhumers do their roles reasonably, straight out of the box. Skiff EHP works for you every day (everyone knows what hitpoints the skiff will have at a minimum), logi will fail for you nearly every time you use it in highsec in a mining fleet, ie you are promoting a design with a role bonus that will not be used frequently, and will reliably, routinely fail to save ships when it is used. Nothing worse than an EVE ship with a useless role bonus.
Logi works fine in highsec in both pvp gangs and with very blingy incursion gangs, it will work just as well for miners. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17995
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 09:25:29 -
[7] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
No it won't, simply because no miner would fit it. They're mining barges, stop trying to make them something they aren't.
If you don't like them as they are, don't use them, it's that easy.
ps...Are you related to Lucas Kell or Dracvlad? An alt maybe?
So because some people might be bad every other miner should be screwed?
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17995
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 09:55:35 -
[8] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:baltec1 wrote:Drago Shouna wrote:
No it won't, simply because no miner would fit it. They're mining barges, stop trying to make them something they aren't.
If you don't like them as they are, don't use them, it's that easy.
ps...Are you related to Lucas Kell or Dracvlad? An alt maybe?
So because some people might be bad every other miner should be screwed? I don't care, most miners won't care, we want a good mining barge, to mine with..not a sodding transformer/swiss army knife do it all barge.......
So you don't want choice? Its posts like this that are the reason why miners are considered nothing more than lambs to the slaughter, when someone from the very corp that invented the gank catalyst and brought about the mining interdictions puts forwards an idea to make barges actually able to defend themselves your response is "don't give miners the tools to protect ourselves, we might not use them!"
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17995
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 10:20:49 -
[9] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
We have choices now, that's what you won't accept..
We can fit for yield or tank, or a mixture of both. We have a choice of drones to use, we have a choice of rigs to use.
We'll have other option with the changes, if a miner wants to utilise a high slot for something else that's fine too.
Ok there'll be some lol fits about, but that comes with the game.
But you're going to keep harking on about it even though you have virtually 0 support for your ideas, how many have jumped in so far screaming YES YES YES, THIS'LL SAVE US ALL? Either I ain't seen any, or my glasses need cleaning.
Ok, give me the options the covetor has. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
17996
|
Posted - 2016.08.24 18:30:41 -
[10] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
With the changes it'll have an extra low, so armour rigs, lows can be a choice of tank or yield, mid for a survey scanner, a flight of t2 light drones, a couple of ecm drones and salvage drones. How is adding a utility high going to help a solo miner, or even 2 slots?
No I didn't use a fitting tool. But then again I can't remember the last time I saw a Covetor mining, in HS the much better choice is the Retriever, and where I am now they are cheaper than the Covetor anyway.
So while the procurer gets both a great tank and good yield the covetor needs to either sacrifice its yield for tank in which case the procurer is better both in tank and yield or go all yield and die to a knats fart.
That's all the hallmarks of a terrible ship and that is before we get to the part where we point out the madness of a shield tanker that has one mid slot. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18000
|
Posted - 2016.08.25 08:39:11 -
[11] - Quote
Penance Toralen wrote:
Under the new fitting layout;
2x Strips + Crystals Survey MLU2 x 3
Med Mining Drone Aug2 x 2
Dies to anything, cant be used outside of highsec due to rats being able to kill it.
Penance Toralen wrote: 2 x Strips + Crystals Survey Bulkhead2 x 2 + DCU2
Med Transverse1 x 3
(thats 22k ehp)
Still cant be used outside of highsec due to rats, out classed by the procurer in every area. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18000
|
Posted - 2016.08.25 08:56:52 -
[12] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:Rubbish, the reason for them is ore hold flexibility. You have to make a choice right now between yield, tank and hold capacity etc. The skiff is the go to ship in null where tank is preferred, the hulk the fleet ship everywhere and the Mack in hs, yes they do go other places, that's all the flexibility they need. They don't need a rack of utility slots, I ain't ever going to turn up at a battle with a Mack full of logi...it ain't ever going to happen. Mining ships mine, Industrial ships haul, Logi ships provide logi support (thats why they were made) Exploration ships explore, Cov-Ops ships cloak etc etc etc, or do you want every ship in the game to be able to fill every single role? Miners use mining ships to mine, it's what they were made for, nothing else. I don't know where the **** you are all coming up with these weird ideas right now, but I think you need a fresh batch of whatever it is you're using
Because these ships are bad.
Im going to use a mining fleet that was caught in O-JPKH (Branch) / 2016-08-21 14:00.
The fleet consisted of 14 exhumers and a jump freighter and faced off against 12 mixed pirate cruisers, 2 sabres, 4 interceptors. The 14 exhumers all died within 2 minutes, the attackers lost nothing.
The is the reality for miners with the current and proposed changes. They cannot do anything to protect themselves and even if they had the old defense fleet that used to be in deklien (multiple titans, supers and carriers on constant standby) by the time the call for help goes out the mining fleet is dead.
Why exactly should a fleet worth 5.6 billion be so utterly helpless and easy to kill? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18000
|
Posted - 2016.08.25 10:28:12 -
[13] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
I don't dispute it, but at the end of the day you had mining barges and a freighter against a fully capable battle fleet, it was always going to be a slaughter....(why was a jump freighter on grid anyway)
Which brings it around very nicely to keeping local and intel channels open, unless someone got arrogant and overconfident? In which case they deserved what they got.
It doesn't change anything, mining ships are for mining, warships are for battle. You can show a thousand like that, it doesn't alter anything. Do you honestly think the outcome would have been any different if the barges had say 3 logi slots each?
Frankly yes. if half of that number were logi, the ships themselves were able to actually fit a decent tank and it had a few combat skiffs then they could have stood a decent chance. At the very least they would have taken out a good few of them with them and bought time for help to arrive.
Miners should not be faced with just the options of running away or getting killed. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18000
|
Posted - 2016.08.25 10:51:28 -
[14] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Drago Shouna wrote:
I don't dispute it, but at the end of the day you had mining barges and a freighter against a fully capable battle fleet, it was always going to be a slaughter....(why was a jump freighter on grid anyway)
Which brings it around very nicely to keeping local and intel channels open, unless someone got arrogant and overconfident? In which case they deserved what they got.
It doesn't change anything, mining ships are for mining, warships are for battle. You can show a thousand like that, it doesn't alter anything. Do you honestly think the outcome would have been any different if the barges had say 3 logi slots each?
You are applying modern world mechanics to an era of rampant piracy. If you want to look at the cargo vessels of era's where piracy on the high seas was a real thing. Viking longships. They were the cargo vessels of their age. They also were filled to the brim with raiders ready for a fight. Spanish Galleons. Some of the heaviest armed & armoured ships of their days as well. They were what was used to get treasure back to spain past all the pirates and the british. Modern cargo vessels are only so defenceless because we live in an era where piracy is almost non existent, and what piracy does happen is a few men with guns boarding you, not other ships aiming guns at you. EVE should be drawing it's inspirations from the eras of real piracy & raiding. Not from current industrial/modern age concepts primarily rooted in peace.
EVE haulers have been known to kill impressive things. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18009
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 14:19:58 -
[15] - Quote
Coralas wrote: Also, any concept of a barge formation being any sort of genuine competition to a well supported pirate cruiser formation is ridiculous. You'd surely expect the apex combat cruisers to be massively superior to mining cruisers at combat. The one thing I've never ever wanted from the skiff was for it to be any sort of headsup competitor to a real combat cruiser.
Why is it that you want to be defenseless? Miners keep on moaning about how they get treated as second class citizens, how they are continually getting killed easily and how pvp should be nerfed to make their lives easier yet when someone puts forwards a plan to provide all the defenses and options you want you turn around and demand to be helpless victims. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18009
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 15:23:52 -
[16] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
I haven't seen one post like that, what I have seen is players saying ganking should have more consequences other than losing a cheap ship and taking a 15 min tea break.
As I said, nerf pvp.
Drago Shouna wrote: How would utility slots possibly help a solo miner anywhere?
Neuts, smartbobs, cyno, probe launcher and for when you are in a group, RR support (hence my calling for a remote shield rep role bonus for the mack and retribution to go with those two utility highs) |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18009
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 15:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:
He's not the only miner that feels that way
Those miners can choose to not use the new tools then. Miners as a whole should not be screwed over just because some vocal minority wan't to die to anything that catches them. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18009
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 15:59:58 -
[18] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote: Sounds great on paper. Until now you have ships with fitting and bonuses which have nothing to do with mining and the miners are all 'THis is useless and more broken then ever, CCP you have to fix it' for the next 3 years.
I would say having logi, DPS and the ability to fit a tank in your mining fleet will be far from useless and will have everything to do with running a successful mining operation.
Again I have to ask why is it that you want to be helpless? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18012
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 20:14:30 -
[19] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
or we can just do what decent groups do now and have other ships built for those roles do that and keep our miners spect to mining
if you cant lower you m3 to put a pilot into a basi for RR or a falcon for e-war that's your choice.
Its not the fact you lower your M3 per hour its the fact that you have people sitting with the miners doing nothing and earning nothing. This is why nobody flys logi in a mining fleet or parks a combat fleet with them, they have nothing to do. Giving the ability to the miners themselves means the defense and the logi are the very people who are mining.
Drago Shouna wrote:
I just don't see this thread inundated with hard done by miners crying out for joy at the suggestion. You'd have thought that might be a big hint.
More support than for the current CCP plan. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18016
|
Posted - 2016.08.27 06:00:05 -
[20] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what do you mean? we have managed it plenty
It has never been managed. Even at the height of the Imperium/CFCs power nobody guarded mining fleets because it was both boring and unworkable. Again I will point out an entire mining fleet of 14 exhumers will be killed in just 2 minutes by a similar sized gang of cruisers.
Right now you are arguing for your entire profession to be helpless in EVE, that you are so incompetent at EVE that CCP has to pre fit your ships for you and that you outright refuse to have any skill involved in mining rewarded. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18017
|
Posted - 2016.08.27 07:54:05 -
[21] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
I'm sorry if the CFC could never manage that but try dropping on an active fleet in Provi you have about 45 seconds from when your cyno de-cloaks to the first responders showing up on grid. (something that will be made irrelevant with the rorqu changes
The CFC in Dek had by far the best response times and firepower, they could dump a supercap fleet on your head fast enough to save ratting ishtars. The problem with the mining fleets is that they are so squishy they even by the time the call for help has gone out half of the fleet is well on way to being dead. A single solo bomber will rip apart 4 of the 6 barges before help can arrive.
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: put your miners at the end of the pipe go run anoms further down and have the miners keep an eye on the probe scanner for potential WHs
what you want is akin to letting haulers hold there own against attackers
And what exactly is wrong with miners being responsible for their own defense? Everyone keeps on saying mining is boring, well no wonder if all they can do is chew on rocks or run away. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18017
|
Posted - 2016.08.27 08:06:33 -
[22] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote: You keep asking why we're choosing to be helpless. I'll answer you for the final time, then if you ask again, I'll have to re-assess my opinion of your reading comprehension: We are not helpless. We use the tools we have and protect our stuff. The exact same thing we've been telling 'Oh I got ganked nerf ganking threads' for years. That is the cost of business. We do not require ships that can do everything under the sun and in the ocean too. Ships like that will only become a future problem that we'll still be talking about in 3 years because now they can't be fit for max yield with all these 'useless' high slots and whatnot.
You want to fix the problem with mining?
Let's start by talking about the Bzzzzzzzzttttttttttttttt for hours on end.
You have no tools to use. Two of the ships have literally no fitting options. All miners are doing is whining for more and more nerfs to keep them safe rather than demanding the ability to keep themselves safe. These ships are bad and promote the very attitude you are showing which is one of complete disconnection to the rest of the game. You are not having to make choices that everyone else has to make when fitting your ships, you are not working together because the ships simply do not promote working together. You do not actively look to join groups outside of highsec because you think null and lowsec organisations look down on you and you are right they do, but that is because as miners you have no understanding of basic game mechanics simply because the mining barges don't allow for you to learn them.
In six months time we will bright right back here with a 4th attempt at a barge rebalance. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18017
|
Posted - 2016.08.27 08:53:29 -
[23] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
even if that were true (it maybe if you are not using skiffs)
it will no longer be an issue once the rorqu changes hit
It will in highsec, and every time you don't have a rorqual. These ships should not have to rely on a capital to actually work. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18017
|
Posted - 2016.08.27 09:16:53 -
[24] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:
Where's the whining threads from miners? Where's the demand for others to be nerfed?
Every week somewhere on these forums someone makes a nerf ganking thread or turns another thread into one.
Drago Shouna wrote: You, by this very post presume all miners are in HS. I'm in Null......Along with a lot of others.
You also presume that all that miners do is mine, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
The last couple of days have been spent manufacturing Frigates, Destroyers and Industrials for the corp along with a bit of mining. Last night was spent in a defence fleet chasing a couple of annoying reds, and podding them.
Stop presuming you know about miners, you know nothing.
We have had 10 years of more or less the exact same posts from miners bitching about how boring it is while at the same time demanding ever more CCP provided safety. Miners have garnered a reputation as the most useless players in EVE. I say alter the bargers so not only are they all useful but can also defend themselves. Your response? No don't give us options!
Right now you are calling for miners to be left in their current ****** position while someone from the corp that brought about the mining interdictions is trying to help them with better fitting options, ability to defend themselves and provide more content. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18026
|
Posted - 2016.08.28 08:10:33 -
[25] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote: When CCP changed mining sites to anoms, didn't they reason it was because miners shouldn't have to skill probing and appropriate frigates to get access to ores? Well, if you're in a wormhole, you're probing already!
If only there was a barge that could fit one in a utility high.
See this is the problem I keep on going on about. Miners have by far the most simplified and dumbed down gameplay in EVE. Even their ships come pre fitted with little to no options. The ships are the core of the problem, if we fix them so that they each have a role to play and are able to stand their ground vs a similar sized gang of cruisers then CCP can change up mining itself. They can bring about ore sites that need to be probed down, ice sites such as comets that need to be probed down, give the rorqual the ability to bridge mining vessels so mining fleets could roam around looking for these sites.
I simply do not understand why some of you here are so dead set against miners being able to defend themselves and having actual fun content. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18026
|
Posted - 2016.08.28 09:54:32 -
[26] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:... whats wrong with the venture/prospect/endurance utility highs? or a mobile depot
If its good for them why is it not good for the mack? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18026
|
Posted - 2016.08.28 10:51:38 -
[27] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:... whats wrong with the venture/prospect/endurance utility highs? or a mobile depot If its good for them why is it not good for the mack? cov ops frigs get a probe bonus why not blops and recons?
Problem with your argument is all of those ships have the CPU, PG and slots to fit a wide range of fitting on them. Once again I point out you are arguing for very poor ships for miners. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18052
|
Posted - 2016.09.17 04:05:56 -
[28] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:Guys guys guys.
You need to understand the present Risk vs Reward scenario...
Come the November changes, we RISK a 2-3 BILLION ship, on grid....
So that the players favoured by CCP can reap the REWARDS.
It's all about killmails now, nothing else. We get absolutely nothing out of it.
It's blatantly obvious that that's the direction the game is going, I suppose what we need to be thinking about is where it's going next.
You say this yet at the same time miners are dead set against any changes to the ships to make them actually able to defend themselves.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18057
|
Posted - 2016.09.17 11:52:05 -
[29] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote: Thanks for speaking on behalf of miners.
What miners are concerned about is the reasonable relationship between risk and reward.
Seems that some folks think mining vessels should be PvP ships with a slightly expanded cargo or ore hold.
Given you are playing a pvp based game it makes sense for mining barges to be pvp capable. We have miners here bitching about having to put assets in harms way while at the same time arguing their ships should be helpless if caught. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18065
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 04:52:51 -
[30] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote:
That makes no sense. Miners aren't "bitching" about having it both ways, we're stating that we want the risk reasonable, something more reasonable than fielding a 2-billion ISK squishy target for pseudo-PvP.
You just did it again.
A Rorqual with a mining fleet that can provide logi and firepower is a lot harder to kill than what we are getting. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18065
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 06:26:50 -
[31] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote: As did you. Harder to kill doesn't make the risk reasonable.
Of course it does.
Being able to go toe to toe with a similar sized cruiser gang is a hell of a lot better than getting slaughtered by a gang a fraction of your numbers. As it stands four of the barges are entirely helpless when caught and the other two holding the mantel of last to die simply because they have an over sized tank.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18073
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 10:52:39 -
[32] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote: You either miss the point or are simply trolling.
Because it might be able to go toe-to-toe with a particular gang size and composition doesn't mean the risk becomes reasonable because folks hunting for Rorqs will come with a crew to do the job and the key point is that with the Industrial Core green it will be a sitting duck, regardless of how long it has to sit.
Seems to me you are not going to be happy until CCP give you an I-win button.
Having an even chance of success vs a similar sized gang of cruisers/hac/pirate cruisers is more than enough. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18074
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 11:20:34 -
[33] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Resa Moon wrote: You either miss the point or are simply trolling.
Because it might be able to go toe-to-toe with a particular gang size and composition doesn't mean the risk becomes reasonable because folks hunting for Rorqs will come with a crew to do the job and the key point is that with the Industrial Core green it will be a sitting duck, regardless of how long it has to sit.
Seems to me you are not going to be happy until CCP give you an I-win button. Having an even chance of success vs a similar sized gang of cruisers/hac/pirate cruisers is more than enough. As if you can sit there and await an arranged fight of a particular composition. An I-win button, no. Miners have always been at risk and that reasonable risk makes it more interesting. Unreasonable risk makes it stupid. You can't field the Rorq and predict what opposing force will appear while you're green. Pointless to posit ideal situations.
People are ratting in solo titans. A 3 bil rorqual is not a huge risk. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18074
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 11:21:48 -
[34] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:baltec1 wrote:Resa Moon wrote: Thanks for speaking on behalf of miners.
What miners are concerned about is the reasonable relationship between risk and reward.
Seems that some folks think mining vessels should be PvP ships with a slightly expanded cargo or ore hold.
Given you are playing a pvp based game it makes sense for mining barges to be pvp capable. We have miners here bitching about having to put assets in harms way while at the same time arguing their ships should be helpless if caught. A natural follow on to that is that my Epithal, Miasmos, Providence etc should all have a rack of turrets and fighter bay then? I'd love my freighter to have Capital sized Pulses with the ultimate in tracking speeds 8/4/6 should do it :)
T1 haulers are more deadly than most think. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18074
|
Posted - 2016.09.18 14:46:19 -
[35] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Ratting titans don't have to immobolise themselves, and also can't be tackled with a single long point.
They do when the fire the doomsday and if you are going after a titan then bubbles are going to be involved. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18085
|
Posted - 2016.09.19 05:37:13 -
[36] - Quote
Alexis Ford wrote:So ratting titans have no guns to shoot back ? Even now as you can fit High angel guns against subcap ships ? And you have to get a Booster on Grid to get more than 40% dps ?
Please stop comparing things that are NOT compareable.
When you go titan hunting you bring the firepower to render it dead in fast order. Its entirely comparable because we have people running around in titan ratting away while you are terrified about putting out a 3 billion isk ship.
Alexis Ford wrote: And sorry .. as a member of PL talking about risking a ratting titan (with 30+ SC ready in the backhand.) 99,9% of eve doesnt have this luxury. And Titan Doomsday ratting is ******** - with a cooldowntimer 10 times longer than the Anom needs to finish. thats not a "we risk something" thats "haha i am bored to death" and for showing off.
Wrong again.
These things are popping up all over the place. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18088
|
Posted - 2016.09.19 12:15:12 -
[37] - Quote
Resa Moon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Alexis Ford wrote:So ratting titans have no guns to shoot back ? Even now as you can fit High angel guns against subcap ships ? And you have to get a Booster on Grid to get more than 40% dps ?
Please stop comparing things that are NOT compareable.
When you go titan hunting you bring the firepower to render it dead in fast order. Its entirely comparable because we have people running around in titan ratting away while you are terrified about putting out a 3 billion isk ship. Alexis Ford wrote: And sorry .. as a member of PL talking about risking a ratting titan (with 30+ SC ready in the backhand.) 99,9% of eve doesnt have this luxury. And Titan Doomsday ratting is ******** - with a cooldowntimer 10 times longer than the Anom needs to finish. thats not a "we risk something" thats "haha i am bored to death" and for showing off.
Wrong again. These things are popping up all over the place. Because some folks are ratting in a Titan without adequate precautions, it makes putting a Rorq in a belt or anom and going green with the Core a reasonable risk. Very poor thinking/trolling.
CCP have yet to show us the details on the rorqual changes. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18121
|
Posted - 2016.09.20 18:50:49 -
[38] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:baltec1 wrote:
CCP have yet to show us the details on the rorqual changes.
The details they showed us in the boosting blog say that you will have to immobile yourself with the core to get boosts worth risking the rorqual. Hence we have seen the detail that is relevant.
I don't have much faith in this going well, just look at these barge changes. But I'm holding fire till I see the package. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18152
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 16:59:26 -
[39] - Quote
Kuda Timberline wrote: Additionally I'm a bit confused by the additional lazor on the Skiff? Were these ships not expensive enough for Code. to gank before so now we had to make them harder to fit and add the additional cost of another lazor? This is only a buff to gankers and yet another nerf for miners.
An extra laster will do nothing to make you worth ganking. Its impossible to turn a profit ganking skiffs.
Kuda Timberline wrote: I'd like to list the nerfs we miners have seen in the past few years (I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones I've thought of off the top of my head)
Circus reprocessing nerf (Thanks for making Scrapmetal V uselss) Removal of team (these teams gave a bonus to reprocessing... CCP removed them w/o an alternative) Reallocation of minerals included in ore. This was mostly just a buff for Null sec. Mining boosts soon to be removed. (CCP hasn't fully nuked these yet.. but I can hear them drooling over it)
Maybe CCP could take a few min to make sure a 1.2M isk Catalyst is more balanced with 25M isk barges too.
Go look at the nerfs made to ganking over the years, they dwarf the nerfs made to mining by a long way. Oddly enough, the nerfs to ganking have made it worse for miners as it used to be a case of gank miners for profit. Now after yeas of nerfs its impossible to turn a profit so every miner no matter how they fit is game for gankers.
Kuda Timberline wrote: The state of mining is just absurd and I realize part of this is CCP's attempt to raise mineral prices so that people have to buy a PLEX to purchase a doctrine ship... This is something they need to happen so they can justify the new Free-to-play model.
With 10ISK trit imagine the number of PLEX they will sell?
Actually this mantra keeps prices of minerals low. If you want higher mineral prices (and thus higher earnings as a miner) then we need to return to what we had 6 years ago. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18158
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 20:40:12 -
[40] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
I think you mean 9 years ago. 6 years ago, gun-mining was at its height and mineral prices were in the dumpster.
I was more thinking of the ice interdictions. They proved that injecting a lot of violence into mining meant ice prices rose rapidly and the smart miners made bank. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18161
|
Posted - 2016.09.23 10:23:58 -
[41] - Quote
Penance Toralen wrote:baltec1 wrote:An extra laster will do nothing to make you worth ganking. Its impossible to turn a profit ganking skiffs.
CCP Soundwave: Sucide Ganking is not intended to be profitable. Sounds like working as intended then.
By making ganking not profitable he turned it from pirates targeting the bad miners to gankers targeting every miner. So you are less safe not more. Plus a lot of content got thrown out the window. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18200
|
Posted - 2016.09.26 08:36:26 -
[42] - Quote
Ncc 1709 wrote:hulk has 7.4% more yield now than it had before the patch... you guys need to learn how to calculate your ore per second...
You need a fitting mod/rig to actually use all of the midslots though. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18227
|
Posted - 2016.10.01 12:36:26 -
[43] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:Penance Toralen wrote:Mariko Musashi Hareka wrote:So I'm getting 10,080 m3 less per hour per hulk and with 4 hulks that's lil over 40k m3 I'm losing
Now I could get more yield if I added a 2nd mining upgrade but that's not the point is we were supposed to be mining the same amount even after the change That's the whole point, the extra low slot with a MLU2 restores polarity of yield before and after. I tend to agree with you; other ship balances with the high slot bonuses were not linked to potential weapon upgrades in low slots. But I will side with CCP Fozzie because it would be power-creep not have set the ship bonuses are they currently are. But at the end of the day - where were you and just about every other miner who whinges now when this was originally posted back on the 22nd Sept? The opportunity for feedback is now past. Any opportunity for feedback that would even stand a remote chance of being listened to passed by on the 21st Sept..
Feedback hasn't been listened to for 5 years so... |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18256
|
Posted - 2016.10.04 09:40:12 -
[44] - Quote
Tattoo Bob Onren wrote:
I would like to move away from people opinions and assurances and get some raw facts!
Assuming we are putting 2x Modulated strip miner II fitted with veldspar mining crystal II on all 3 exhumers and fitting 2x Mining laser upgrade II with all skills to V (
Yield per second is as follows;
Hulk 28.4 Mackinaw 20 Skiff 20 Covetor 24 Retriever 18.04 Procurer 17.92 |
|
|
|