Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[CSM8] Ripard Teg for CSM8

First post First post
Author
#261 - 2013-03-04 23:26:44 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Since a 5M ISK frigate can still easily kill an exhumer in 0.0, a better question might be to ask why this ISK ratio argument should only apply in hisec. Why should hi-sec miners be privileged to require expensive ships to kill them, when lo-sec and 0.0 miners get no such protection.

Lord knows it's not because of the quality of the ore...


If the quality of the ore were the issue, why are you arguing for more lowends in null? You can't build ships out of highends alone. (And have you looked at the price of Scordite recently?)

To put it another way: if you take your question and flip it around, maybe that's one reason why nobody mines lowends in null despite the fact that they're relatively plentiful, albeit in places where nobody sane would park a mining barge because any random ship could easily catch it and kill it?

Also, with a bit of preparation, lowsec and nullsec miners do have one small and conditional advantage: They can send their drones after a ship well in advance of being in that ship's weapon range. In high sec, the ganker gets to unilaterally choose both the engagement distance and the price CONCORD will charge them for aggressing well in advance.

These are the main reasons why I'd like the Skiff to take a page from the Venture and swap its tank for more subwarp speed, a better align time and a bit of extra warp core stability. A gigantic tank on a barge is most useful in high sec. The ability to move at a decent speed and GTFO relatively quickly (for a barge--I'm not arguing for interceptor speeds here) could make belt mining more feasible outside of high sec. The trade off would be the Procurer/Skiff's worst-of-breed mining yield.

quality of the ore = Spodmium. Look up its mass and the minerals it contains, just for starters.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

#262 - 2013-03-05 01:03:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jeremy Soikutsu
Angry Mustache wrote:
the tritanium problem

I wish people would stop saying this. There is no "trit problem" in null. Belts in null are flush with trit, and most other lowends depending on the system. Just because people don't know how, or just don't want to, mine properly in a belt doesn't make those rocks not exist. The problems with lowends in null are difficulty of transportation in high volumes, which isn't something that needs fixing really, it should be hard to move a lot of stuff. And the realer problem of inability to do anything with the volume of mins even a pretty small mining operation (like a 50 account corp) could churn out.

Angry Mustache wrote:
The best way to fight miner gankers is not to "fight back", or organize a resistance, or worst of all cry on the forums or in local, the best thing to do is fly a skiff.

I'd say avoidance is the better route, but to each their own.

"Of course you would choose the fun, but you don't lead a relevant entity which has allies." - Colonel Xaven

Shadow Cartel
#263 - 2013-03-06 02:49:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ripard Teg
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Surely it's CCP's job to organise corps to do this, though? How would you suggest that CCP provide incentive for corps to take in and train newbies?
Two things that occur to me are
* PLEXes taken from the confiscated PLEX pile for corps whose members stay subscribed to the game and in that corp for a year or more straight, on a one-for-every-twenty or so scale; and,
* increasing the cost of starting a corp so that it can't be done quite so casually, thus encouraging players into established corps.
But I'm sure there are other ways. It's something that's begging for a Trebor-style crowd-sourcing effort.

Jinrai Tremaine wrote:
Heh, I'm dancing? You're the one who got philosophical with that "you're objecting to real life" stuff.
Not at all. I've answered your question several times: I disagree with you on this issue. You asked me what I thought about this, and I said that I don't think it's a major problem. I believe you are allowing yourself to be victimized by one person, particularly if you have twenty or more allies in system. You're trying to turn my opinion into a personal failing on my part. I assure you it is not. People of good conscience can disagree.

Aesil Maril wrote:
Why should this rule apply in certain types of combat and in others not? I fail to see the reason. What is the difference between an interceptor or assault frigate killing a Talos battlecruiser and a destroyer ganking a Mackinaw?
Show me an example of an interceptor suicide-ganking a Talos in high-sec, and I will agree with you.

If you prefer it put this way, the interceptor pilot (presumably in low or null) requires skill and experience. The destroyer pilot only requires process. The right fitting, the right pilot character, and a step-by-step guide will suffice to make anyone a successful ganker on their first day. You can find such a process on James's blog. That's the difference.

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.

Amarr Empire
#264 - 2013-03-06 03:35:32 UTC
I'm surprised Ripard cannot see the problem behind such simple issue of AFK cloaking.

It is not the cloaker itself who poses the threat, its the fleet on the titan/bops with unpredictable numbers/ship compositions/time to strike.
No home defense would ever be effective, because attackers DO have eyes in system (and prolly nearby ones too), and defenders dont have slightest idea where or who they will fight with (e.g. try to guess who i might drop for). Theres might be 5 bombers coming though cyno, or 50 bombers, or 50 tengus, or 150 battleships, or 500 titans. Recent blackops buff doesnt help the situation either. All of this happening in system that people constantly PAYS for, and put EFFORT to keep it upgraded, and of course they have right to grumble about inability to do anything about attackers who did nothing but looked at map and dropped some cloaky afk alt into recently upgraded system. And dont even start about cynojammer which for all its worth cannot jam covert cynos....

Also worth noting, that it is small alliances who suffers most from this. Large ones can easily move onto another system/have obscure counter-drop ready somewhere deep into their territory, while small ones usualy dont have that much territory to chose from, nor have the abilities required to counter-drop, and few afk cloaked alts+few successful drops will force such an alliance to move either back to highsec, or to join with any super alliance for protection/additional territory.

That is the main problem as i perceive it. NOT the cloaking mechanic itself, but its combinations with other factors. Ever tried to catch cloaked/nullified tengu? Now it can have covops cyno with it too.

Not advocating for either side btw, but current system could use some balancing.
Caldari State
#265 - 2013-03-06 06:37:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Wescro
Ripard Teg wrote:
No, not all combat. I'm say that this concept should apply to ganking. You should not be able to gank a 200m ISK ship with a 5m ISK ship. A group of 5m ISK ships fine; one such ship, no. The risk-reward is slanted much too far in favor of the ganker otherwise, because the ganker can try ten times, fail nine of them, succeed on the tenth and still come out ahead. Until the mining barges were buffed, ganking miners was a risk-free endeavor with a guaranteed profit.


Your lack of knowledge about suicide ganking shows in this post. Your initial premise is incorrect. You can almost never gank a 200m ISK ship with a 5m ISK one. In extraordinary circumstances, you may be able to pull it off. Perhaps, in 0.5, with concord pre-spawned, with a target Hulk that is untanked, has low skills, and has it's shields beaten down some by the rats, you may get it sometimes if you fit right and waste no time.

To engineer game changes to prevent a once in a blue moon gank that would require extraordinary lack of precaution on the victims part is just bad policy.

However, let's assume your premise was correct. Your justification for it makes no sense."There should be risk for the ganker." Sure, and there is. There is a 100% chance you will lose your ship. You lose sec status. You will inevitably fail ganks due to people successfully jamming you or bumping you off undock.

I just have to laugh when you say the ganker comes out ahead. The ganker doesn't gain ISK, they just make the target lose ISK. There is little reward for the ganker besides the entertainment they derive from watching things explode. In terms of ISK, the risk vs reward is out of balance, only because there is almost no ISK reward for most suicide ganking.

The idea of requiring one to put forward similar ISK to the loss they cause is absurd, to be honest. Personally I'd hate to see EVE become pay to win. It'd take out the resourceful craftiness that allows one to throw together effective, cheap fits with just the right set up for the task and take on poorly fit expensive ships. If all it takes to be tanked is to throw ISK at your fit, then why even bother with a system of fitting that requires thought, research and planning? Why not just remove slots and tanking modules and calculate EHP based off wealth?

Also how do you plan to achieve this in a player driven economy? I'm sure you are aware that faction/officer/deadspace modules, while only performing slightly better than their t2 variants, cost several orders of magnitude more. This is because the players have decided their ISK worth. A faction fit ship will necessarily be much much more expensive than the ship that ganks it due to the low drop rates of these modules. Do you plan on advocating changes to the drop rates to achieve ISK equivalency?
Shadow Cartel
#266 - 2013-03-06 07:18:21 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Wescro wrote:
Your lack of knowledge about suicide ganking shows in this post. Your initial premise is incorrect. You can almost never gank a 200m ISK ship with a 5m ISK one. In extraordinary circumstances, you may be able to pull it off. Perhaps, in 0.5, with concord pre-spawned, with a target Hulk that is untanked, has low skills, and has it's shields beaten down some by the rats, you may get it sometimes if you fit right and waste no time.

Like you yourself did just a few days ago, without the benefit of the "rats" or the "untanked" or the "low skills" part? Maaaate. You are not a good advocate here. You've already solo'ed one Hulk this month and are obviously trying for more, so it's no surprise that you don't like what I'm saying. That's fine. You've not mentioned how many New Order reimbursements you've collected, nor how many Hulks that you've salvaged. And that's also fine. I'm glad you found a play style that agrees with you.

snipped - ISD Suvetar

When you're ready to try something more challenging, you really should read my blog. It would help you. In the meantime, fly safe.

Removed killboard links as per the forum rules:

34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.
-ISD Suvetar

aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.

Caldari State
#267 - 2013-03-06 07:26:12 UTC
Wescro, your post explain in details the rational from CCP to the barges buff.

You want to have fun, make a point or have revenge blowing up a barge? You pay for it. Is not suppose to be cheap either. Any other PVP activity in EVE has a high cost, why should ganking be cheap?

Why should CCP allow you to treat other player like they were missions NPC?
Caldari State
#268 - 2013-03-06 08:09:19 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Ripard Teg wrote:

Like you yourself did just a few days ago, without the benefit of the "rats" or the "untanked" or the "low skills" part? Maaaate. You are not a good advocate here. You've already solo'ed one Hulk this month and are obviously trying for more, so it's no surprise that you don't like what I'm saying. That's fine. You've not mentioned how many New Order reimbursements you've collected, nor how many Hulks that you've salvaged. And that's also fine. I'm glad you found a play style that agrees with you.

snipped - ISD Suvetar

When you're ready to try something more challenging, you really should read my blog. It would help you. In the meantime, fly safe.


My God EVE players must really be bored if you can manage to write a blog that people can bear to read. Where to begin with this.

I suppose you're referring to a recent kill where he's almost untanked (no dcu, no invuls, no extenders). I had a perfect warp in, and I barely managed to kill him before the facpo scramble. Oh and my ship cost more than 5m ISK. Way to be wrong on all counts, as usual.

The New Order reimbursements aren't a game mechanic. Only a small subset of gankers can benefit from this arrangement. Please tell your base you want to nerf ganking for ALL gankers because the New Order manages to get people to donate to see ganks happen. I'm sure that will go over well. I don't salvage my hulks, the campers that crowd the belt trying to stop my ganks get to it first most of the time.

As for the killmails. Oh boy, it's come to this. I'd much prefer it if we stuck to the arguments about the game than about my skills or lack thereof. Any attempts to shame me don't constitute a valid argument for your platform.

Of course I've disabled my API, as people in my profession do to minimize the appearance of a threat, so the killmails you do see paint a one sided picture. I'm not going to sink to the level where I post the off-killboard killmails that make me look skilled or whatever, since I don't define success through killmails. I had a damn good time even when my ship got blown to bits and I'd do it again.

Yea I took an Orca into null looking to get into a wormhole. According to the Ripard Teg's of the world that makes me "remarkably terrible" at this game. I lost the ship, so I guess I must be bad. Nobody should ever take risks or lose ships. God I hate to see your vision become the standard in this game.

Removed killboard links as per the forum rules:

34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.
-ISD Suvetar
Minmatar Republic
#269 - 2013-03-06 08:15:53 UTC
You dont want to get ganked? Tank your ******* 200m ship. Idea
No Response
#270 - 2013-03-06 08:33:44 UTC
Wescro wrote:
Yea I took an Orca into null looking to get into a wormhole. According to the Ripard Teg's of the world that makes me "remarkably terrible" at this game.


Also, everyone in wormholes. Straight

http://www.wormholes.info

Goonswarm Federation
#271 - 2013-03-06 08:40:06 UTC
If an Exhumer is ganked, whether that be by a solo ganker, or a group, the fault is on the gankee; first and foremost.

Second, if I have 20m SP in Gunnery, I should be able to gank solo. I spent the time working up those skills and if a pilot in an Exhumer doesn't want to put forth the effort to watch out for criminal activity, or anyone for that matter, pirates included (although there's a good chance we would run toward the sounds of blasters), it again is the fault of the gankee.

What I hear in your posts is that Eve should be more like a pay to win game. The more ISK you spend, the better you are. This is not Eve. There are several other variables to take into consideration that I fear many players have veered away from; you included. Experience, skill (not SP), patience, networking, research are just off the top of my head. In the MMO community they don't refer to Eve as the smart players game for nothing. It takes time and effort, lots of it, to achieve your goal. However, you can jump in with friends/corpmates -through networking- and get involved in the professions that would take you months of training, trial and error, research, etc.

The Exhumers needed a buff and they got one. Now it's up to the pilots to actually pay attention to what's going on around them, not CCP.

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet

Caldari State
#272 - 2013-03-06 12:26:25 UTC
Agnar Volta wrote:
Wescro, your post explain in details the rational from CCP to the barges buff.

You want to have fun, make a point or have revenge blowing up a barge? You pay for it. Is not suppose to be cheap either. Any other PVP activity in EVE has a high cost, why should ganking be cheap?

Why should CCP allow you to treat other player like they were missions NPC?


In the context of high sec ganking, the ganker is forced to lose their ship every time. Any other kind of PvPer will keep their ship at least some of the time, no matter how much they suck. If non-gank PvPers also lost their ship every time they fought, then it would be ok for them to be cheap. By the same token, if gankers only lost their ship once in a while, it would be ok for them to be more expensive.
#273 - 2013-03-06 13:18:33 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Ripard Teg wrote:

Snipped - ISD Suvetar

When you're ready to try something more challenging, you really should read my blog. It would help you. In the meantime, fly safe.

Good Christ, you're remarkably full of yourself. Is the **** waving really needed?

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Minmatar Republic
#274 - 2013-03-06 13:44:58 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Karl Hobb wrote:
Ripard Teg wrote:
Snipped - ISD Suvetar

When you're ready to try something more challenging, you really should read my blog. It would help you. In the meantime, fly safe.

Good Christ, you're remarkably full of yourself. Is the **** waving really needed?


Ripard never puts himself in a situation where he and his buddies don't overwhelm their opponents, both numerically and in terms of firepower. Between him and the high sec miner gankers, the gankers take on a greater risk. It's ironic that Ripard would belittle the very quality he sorely lacks; the courage to tough it out without overwhelmingly favorable odds.
#275 - 2013-03-06 14:16:49 UTC
Hi Folks,

I'd just like to remind everyone of the forum rules, specifically:

Forum rules wrote:

34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.

More often than not, posts of this nature are made with inflammatory intent and are designed to promote trolling and flaming. Therefore, the posting of links to kill reports from any third party site, or the direct copy-pasting of kill reports from in game is prohibited on all forum channels of the EVE Online Forums, with the exception of the Crime & Punishment Channel.
Specific rules regarding the omission of pilot names apply in this instance. Further details can be found in the rules stickies in the Crime & Punishment forum channel.


Due to violations of this rule, I've had to edit a few posts in this thread.

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Caldari State
#276 - 2013-03-06 14:34:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Wescro
ISD Suvetar wrote:
Hi Folks,

I'd just like to remind everyone of the forum rules, specifically:

Forum rules wrote:

34. Posting of kill reports outside of the Crime & Punishment forum channel is prohibited.

More often than not, posts of this nature are made with inflammatory intent and are designed to promote trolling and flaming. Therefore, the posting of links to kill reports from any third party site, or the direct copy-pasting of kill reports from in game is prohibited on all forum channels of the EVE Online Forums, with the exception of the Crime & Punishment Channel.
Specific rules regarding the omission of pilot names apply in this instance. Further details can be found in the rules stickies in the Crime & Punishment forum channel.


Due to violations of this rule, I've had to edit a few posts in this thread.


Thanks for the tireless moderation! You have to cut Ripard some slack though, it seems he was trying to deflect the argument about his platform back onto my killmails somehow and overlooked the rules. Perhaps he can find something else about me to pivot to rather than giving us straight answers about his support for the concept of ISK tanking?
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2013-03-06 14:58:32 UTC
Nathan Jameson wrote:
Wescro wrote:
Yea I took an Orca into null looking to get into a wormhole. According to the Ripard Teg's of the world that makes me "remarkably terrible" at this game.


Also, everyone in wormholes. Straight


If you're not being terrible, you're generally not being interesting, either.

Which is fine for some people, but no one reads a blog about a really cautious guy who avoided fights he couldn't win.
If you're good at this game, you're bad at this game.   If you're terrible at this game, you're great at this game. ISK is nothing. Pew pew everything.
#278 - 2013-03-06 15:22:26 UTC
Wescro wrote:


Thanks for the tireless moderation! You have to cut Ripard some slack though, it seems he was trying to deflect the argument about his platform back onto my killmails somehow and overlooked the rules. Perhaps he can find something else about me to pivot to rather than giving us straight answers about his support for the concept of ISK tanking?


Absolutely - that's why I only snipped a few bits. We're sensitive to the mechanics of this sub-forum and are eager not to be .. ahem .. too efficient!

Thank you for your kind words, either way.

Now, back on with the topic Pirate

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Gallente Federation
#279 - 2013-03-06 15:52:37 UTC
Wescro wrote:
I don't salvage my hulks, the campers that crowd the belt trying to stop my ganks get to it first most of the time.


Sounds like a personal problem. Option is there. Option to loot the ship is there, especially if you have a ship dedicated to this standing by. If you lose money because you don't take advantage of this, its really not anyone's fault but yours.
Goonswarm Federation
#280 - 2013-03-06 16:13:35 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:


Sounds like a personal problem. Option is there. Option to loot the ship is there, especially if you have a ship dedicated to this standing by. If you lose money because you don't take advantage of this, its really not anyone's fault but yours.


Please have an idea about what you're talking about before you post. For a solo or 1-2 players ganks salvaging is almost guaranteed if there is no advisement; however, NO fleets always post the kills in local to warn the other miners about what's going on (interesting I know, who would have thought the gankers would warn potential gank targets). This attracts vultures and typically those vultures are there to jump on Concord KMs and salvage/loot all the wrecks... for obvious reasons.


Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet

Forum Jump