EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2003-05-09 00:54
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 14:56
  • Number of Posts: 147
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 186

Fuujin

Security Status -1.7
  • GoonWaffe Member since
  • Goonswarm Federation Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • AFK Cloaky alts in EVE Communication Center

    Oh my sweet summer child, you're almost adorable.

  • Should Live Events be Live Cutscenes? in EVE Communication Center

    Sepherim wrote:


    Picked one randomly, you can probably exchange that line for most of your post following Powers Sa's first post.


    Well, from that random quote, does that materially differ from Verone's statement? A bit simplified and boiled down, but that's the essential heart of it: what you do matters, except when we don't want you to do it. Removing a delegate from this meeting should matter, but we gave our ships LOLEHP to prevent it.

    When our legitimate concern is met with a trite response (however dressed up it was), it deserves an equally trite reply to indicate that we see through the BS cloud, and are not having any of it.

  • Should Live Events be Live Cutscenes? in EVE Communication Center

    Sepherim wrote:

    And I agree, Fuujin, you can check my first post on the issue, I too believe that making a ship "indestructible" is not the right way to go, as much as it may be understandable.


    Then you've been arguing against that position, since you were sniping at the goons replying here.

    We're not complaining about the RP (as novice-level as it was provided here). Our complaint was all about the presentation and ability to affect the outcome. Eve has ALWAYS had destructible NPCs during its events. Hell, the Miner II BPO incident was a famous example of an "oops" moment with that.

    The leviathan in Luminaire should also be killable. Nothing is sacred in eve. Especially people.

  • Should Live Events be Live Cutscenes? in EVE Communication Center

    Forget it was Goonswarm.

    What if it was a group actively signed up for Amarr faction warfare? They hear of these upjumped slaves having a meeting, seek to send a little message, careen through Minmatar space in force with the Republic Fleet on their heels, fly in to take their shot....


    ...and have precisely zero chance of killing the ship, because it's a battleship with devhaxed supercarrier level EHP. That is literally impossible to exist without GM mods and implants.


    How, precisely, is that enabling player content? Just run your little events with polaris frigates next time. At least then the invulnerability will be telegraphed.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

    I have seen these feats done by professional quality players at cash sponsored PvP tournaments.
    Quite amusing you pretend an entry "class" player of EvE is meant to react within 2 seconds in the middle of any random multiple hours sessions of repetitive activity (read: granted to lose attention).

    .


    You're so deliberately disingenuous you should be in politics.

    You use "entry class" to imply anyone sitting in a hulk is a fresh faced newb, and skirt around the fact that (to sit and use the hulk effectively) they've been playing this terrible game for over 6 months.

    You then claim you've seen trick ganks done by highly skilled players, and intend to use this as the benchmark for systems balance.

    I've seen some bombers take down a bunch of BCs solo. However, most people who attempt to replicate that just wind up with an expensive wreck--it's not indicative of the typical scenario.

    By your logic, if I can get a hulk to 70K+ EHP, that should be used as the benchmark for whether the ship should be buffed or nerfed.


  • Whatever............... in EVE Communication Center

    Patrakele wrote:
    Please quit. In fact I hope you win a Darwin award, because you would certainly do humanity a favor. By god, how do you look in the mirror in the morning and not die from what you see?


    What is dead may never die.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Dave stark wrote:
    Richard Desturned wrote:
    Xercodo wrote:
    I always loved the look and feel of that little skiff, I'm excited to see the future of null sec mining....everyone in tanked up procurors and skiffs doing ninja ops to help build the next titan :P


    nobody tanks mining ships in nullsec because the prevailing mindset there is "if you get in a situation where a tank matters you're dead anyway"


    ah but that's not so true in a skiff with it's +2 warp stab bonus (which i think is still there on sisi... infact i should go and check that)



    It's not.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Suqq Madiq wrote:


    A properly tanked Hulk can now survive solo ganks from 10mil ISK Destroyers? This surprises you from a 300mil ISK Hulk? Should a 300mil ISK Hulk NOT be able to survive a solo gank from a 10mil ISK hull? I'll assume you're intelligent enough to answer with an emphatic no. In which case, at what point should the profit ratio for gankers be? Should they be able to gank a Hulk with 2 Destroyers or 20mil ISK in hulls? How about 10 Destroyers or 100mil ISK in hulls? Or, following your logic, it will require 15 Destroyers at 10mil ISK apiece to match the magical 150mil number you threw out as the point where "the incentive to do so (to gank a Hulk) drops off precipitously". Except it won't take anywhere near 15 Destroyers to gank any of the new Mining hulls, with the possible exception of the Skiff which has terrible yield to compensate for it's tank.


    Hi, we use brutixes and tier3 BCs as well, which cost 50-70M depending on fitting. While you CAN scale up with destroyers, the level of coordination required to avoid getting concord on grid prematurely scales precipitously (And once it is, you need a LOT of destroyers since you need to alpha the target).

    You guys and your myopic focus on destroyers is humorous, but ultimately counterproductive to serious conversation.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:

    Not really protected since you can gank them. However if you really think it's a good game balance to be able to kill 300M ships (some times more) with a simple 3M T1 fitted destroyer, then this is an endless discussion with fake arguments.


    Just going to address this terrible fallacy real quick.

    A hulk should never die to a catalyst.

    If you take your 220-250M ship, remove most of its armor/structure with expanders and rigs, don't even bother with a token tank, you might get killed by a very high skilled, all t2 fit catalyst. Which runs about 20M, not 3M.

    Macks are a different story, but they are fairly easy to make immune to catalysts if you fit a tank. Untanked macks are much softer, however. They are also well under 200M in cost.


    By your logic, a rifter shouldn't be able to kill a tornado. Cost is irrelevant.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    arcca jeth wrote:
    Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
    A pr0 tanked hulk RIGHT NOW can reach 30-40k EHP even without dumb faction mods. After the buff, it's easily double that. The other ships are going to be even better. I am fitting a battle skiff as we speak.


    you reap what you sow. Maybe Goons shot themselves in the foot here. And if they didn't, what are you doing here arguing with miners for then? You stomped around in the sandbox long enough and CCP recognized that GOONS do not make this game nor do they determine what CCP's development plans are. So they started to cater to the other players that have been screaming for these changes for years. And here Goons are complaining about it? It's about time the shoe was on the other foot and you don't like it. This is what happens when you **** in the wind, it sprays back into your face and some of it gets into your mouth. All of you should go find another game to try to wreck, so you can go stroke your e-peens a bit more on your lame forums.


    This man appears to be mad.
    So, so very angry.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Dave stark wrote:

    the difference is, concord is the only defense that high sec miners have. high sec will never have intel on par with alliance intel channels in null, rarely will you have people ready to warp to you in combat ships if you really mess up and get tackled, etc.

    Lol

    Thanks for illustrating how little you understand nulsec operations.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Suqq Madiq wrote:

    Another myth. They're increasing EHP, not making the ships indestructible. You speak of "guaranteed surivival(sic)" as if there is some magical bubble of immunity surrounding ships in highsec resulting in no risk whatsoever. Undocking is always a risk, no matter what ship you're in.


    A hulk, properly tanked NOW, can survive solo ganks. A mack can shrug off all but the highest firepower attacks.

    With the buffs, they'll require multiple people to kill. The incentive to do so drops off precipitously when you need to spend 150M+ to kill a target. At no point did I claim it was an absolute impossibility to gank barges in hisec--but as a practical matter, it will become the pastime of the rich who don't care about sustainability.

    But in any case, what's done is done (or will be done), so oh well. I just await your next round of plaintive cries and whines to CCP when "mining is too unprofitable" or "bots are all over!"

    Edit: I will go so far as to say that the new skiffs will be nigh-ungankable in hisec. And they'll now mine as much as a covetor.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Suqq Madiq wrote:
    Richard Desturned wrote:
    i mean this change literally benefits me because i have isk invested in high-ends which will actually be used in manufacturing when lowends drop back down, but i dislike the idea of risk-free hisec mining


    If this change really benefited you as much as you claim, you wouldn't be depositing vast quantities of your tears all over every thread involving Barge and Exhumer buffs. And nobody actually believes mining is risk-free. Every ship in the game is gankable if you use the right tools and have enough friends to pull it off. The upcoming changes do nothing to alter that, except maybe forcing people to make more friends. Which is just madness in an MMO. Roll



    The difference being that freighters and orcas haul billions, and the only other hisec ships to warrant the effort are blinged out incursion/mission runners, also worth billions.


    As for the proof of the bot population: That's easily answered. Ice Interdiction: in the beginning, there were 30+ macks in an ice belt, mindlessly working away. After a few days of concentrated ganks, the bot population went away--they migrated to other regions where their ISK generation wouldn't be encumbered. The remaining population was the humans too dumb to realize this basic economic reality. It went from exhumers so thick you couldn't swing a cat around without hitting one, to ghost belts.

    Our opposition to this is twofold: One, ganking is fun. Won't deny it. This nerf all but removes it. Sad, but oh well.
    Two, and more importantly: this creates a virtual risk-free activity in eve. Low/Nul barges can still be killed, but hisec gets concord, so EHP past a certain level means guaranteed surivival. Low risk/reward? Try no risk for reward.

    And yes, our efforts DID result in hisec mining being worthwhile for the first time in...a looong time. Smart miners who fit something called "tanks" to their exhumers and were semi-active at the game could easily shrug off attacks and avoid them. And make isk hand over fist. Good luck with that once this nerf hits; trit's gonna fall like a rock within a few weeks.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Corina Jarr wrote:


    CCP fix ice mining... make it less mind numbing.Evil



    And this is why I pity human hisec miners. Their entire existence is grinding paltry sums and begging CCP for constant nerfs and buffs, which are never enough.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
    Werst Dendenahzees wrote:
    A pr0 tanked hulk RIGHT NOW can reach 30-40k EHP even without dumb faction mods. After the buff, it's easily double that. The other ships are going to be even better. I am fitting a battle skiff as we speak.


    So there's no problem but a well deserved balance.
    If you feel someone is botting you can use report button or just decide to gank them witch will FINALLY require some effort and not the pathetic mindless mongoloid activity that is atm.


    You fail to see motivations. Destroying mindless bots is fun and profitable now. Post-ganknerf, it will be too much of a hassle.

    Reporting them would be :effort: and actually counter to our best interests--indeed, letting them run is quite good for us! Bots reduce the price of minerals and ships. They hurt miners, but not PVPers; so it's actually all up to you to report them. We'll just shake our heads and move on to find some nice fool hauling his life around in a badger.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Dave stark wrote:


    i'm sure you can find a ship that can gank the new hulk before concord arrives, i'll wager a naga/nado/whatever will suffice. those that you can't gank as easily will have lower yield anyway; like a currently tanked hulk.

    between now and then nothing will change except that you need to be less lazy about ganking hulks. really no big changes from now.


    The difference is cost. A fit tier3 will run about 65M, uninsurable, and you'll lose some/all of the fitting. (assuming lowend price collapse).

    Right now, a tier3 can crack most exhumer tanks. Most. With the buffs, the same tank will likely result in multiple ships being required. Now you need two characters with good skills and 130M+ in ships to kill a single exhumer.

    Barge Ganking won't go away, but it'll become akin to unicorn sightings.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    Dave stark wrote:
    Fuujin wrote:
    On the one hand, I'm against these changes since hisec mining with these ridiculous tanks now redefines "risk-free activity," which to me is antithetical to the design of eve (a risk-filled universe).

    Now the balm to this is that with the return of the mining bot (they never really left) to full strength the cost of low ends will plummet. Enjoy your 10-15M per hour grinding existence.


    it's not risk free, we can still get suicide ganks. it just won't happen as much as the goons want it to unless you offer bigger rewards to make it worth people's time. we're getting more ehp not an undestroyable ship. we've only been made safer because gankers are going to be lazier.

    let's face it goons stopped paying out bounties on exhumers people would stop bothering to gank them as much and prices would go down again even without the new mining barge changes.



    You don't have to be undestroyable, you just have to be tough enough to last until the invincible NPC comes and pops your attacker.

    Barges are getting over 5x their current level of EHP. To suicide one now would require an uninsurable tier3 BC (or multiples), which is vastly unprofitable economically. If you are in an NPC corp (or corp-hop after a wardec) you're utterly safe from being ganked unless you're fitting pricey modules.

    So, yeah. Untouchable fleets of bots will blot out the belts. Guess I'll just have to take solace in the cheap ships I'll be able to buy once lowends crack the floor.

    Edit: ^My primary objection to afk mining is that it runs counter to the risky universe theme of the game. Suicide ganking was an effective counter to this; at the least the miner would have to fit a decent tank if he wanted reasonable protection. Now a token tank will prevent all but the most determined suicide attack. The net result is a pastime lost for many, but the real loss will be to human miners who will spend hours to make a paltry sum that I can do in a single anomaly.

    Like I said, enjoy your grinding existence.

  • CCP - promoting AFK mining and botting with the new barges. in EVE Communication Center

    On the one hand, I'm against these changes since hisec mining with these ridiculous tanks now redefines "risk-free activity," which to me is antithetical to the design of eve (a risk-filled universe).

    Now the balm to this is that with the return of the mining bot (they never really left) to full strength the cost of low ends will plummet. Enjoy your 10-15M per hour grinding existence.

  • New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p in EVE Information Center

    Nooooo!! My Macherial reimbursement! :negative:


    I'm going to have to slum it in a Nightmare or a Bhaalgorn or...downgrade fully to cynabals and vigilants. Damn you CCP! :mad:

  • Goons 4x4ing through the Sandbox - Market Manipulation on a Grand Scale in EVE Communication Center

    I hear if you fit a destroyer or battlecruiser for maximum dps, you can shoot people and blow them up in high security space before CONCORD gets there.

    Why, if enough people do this they could even destroy entire freighters! CCP, please investigate and ban!