EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2010-01-14 00:44
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-14 03:12
  • Number of Posts: 51
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

MinutemanKirk

Security Status -8.5
  • The Scope Member since
  • Gallente Federation Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • I'd like to hire MERCS to counter RZR alliance blobbers in EVE Gameplay Center

    Leto Thule wrote:

    So, I am wrong how?


    Wasn't trying to suggest that you are somehow gravely mistaken about something, however, the tone of your previous post suggested we were "blobbers" and "frequently flew" in fleets with 20+ people. Just wanted to clarify. :)

  • I'd like to hire MERCS to counter RZR alliance blobbers in EVE Gameplay Center

    Leto Thule wrote:
    You know, Aideron Robotics, Wise Human Sword, or QCats? They all like to roam around in 20+ fleets.


    Uhh... what? Of course QCATS will occasionally have a fleet op or have pilots in a large fleet op, but by and large we are solo/small gang PvPrs. Feel free to scroll through our kills if you think otherwise.

    http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=corp&name=Quantum+Cats+Syndicate&page=1#kills

  • Neutrals in FW Plexes and Security Status Hits in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I approve. I'm not sure how many militia pilots are "only" pirates because it's not PvP free in plexes, however, I think the overall concept is sound.

  • Faction Warfare mission changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I agree with moving all the agents to lowsec. However, I disagree with sending them ONLY into enemy systems. I understand the logic behind it, but I think you would choke off the entire point of upgrading a warzone past a certain point if it is next to impossible to actually profit from it (especially in light of the recent tweaks to plexing making afk, 3 day old alts almost impossible to use).

    If it is a "contribution" you are looking for, I would suggest keeping mission locations as they are (perhaps randomize them a little more) but then allow the completition of a mission to act like a plex: make it give the same number of victory points as a large plex (since that's essentially what they are) that would contribute to the capturing or defense of a system.

  • LvL 4 FW Mission Imbalance: Issue? in EVE Gameplay Center

    1. Yes. As missions are often a primary source of income for FW players this is something that has needed addressing for some time.

    2. Damage type and EWAR. Missile spam is a problem because it is impossible to speed tank or get out of range of. Add to that the EWAR aspect (in particular ECM from Caldari) and you get the magic combination that makes it impossible for anything smaller than a cruiser to run and anything less than an Ishtar or T3 to run with any effectiveness.

    3. Bigger than bombers (or at least solo bombers) but it should not require a ship with such a high skill level as HAC or T3's. Even if it took a BC it would be more acceptable (both in ISK and skill points) than the current requirements.

  • [Gallente FW] The most active PvP Community in all of New Eden in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    SmokinJs Arthie wrote:
    Just a little something that someone from JUSTK put together. People pray to have this much pew. I'm sure these numbers are similar for the other GalMil corps.

    Bodaaa wrote:


    Data as of March 16, 2014; ships destroyed in the last 90 days

    Shiney charts http://cl.ly/image/3x2Q2Z0j0L3t

    Rank Corp Ships Destroyed Members Average / member
    1 Red Federation 23,390 3,689 6.340471673
    2 GoonWaffe 22,800 4,307 5.293707917
    3 Blue Republic 22,350 3,458 6.463273569
    4 Brave Newbies Inc. 21,790 6,252 3.485284709
    5 Justified Chaos 15,320 106 144.5283019
    6 Sniggerdly 14,540 559 26.01073345
    7 SniggWaffe 14,100 255 55.29411765
    8 EVE University 13,360 2,121 6.298915606
    9 EVE Corporation 987654321-POP 13,010 ?
    10 Wildly Inappropriate 12,370 1,063 11.63687676

    That is 144 kill per member on average for all 106 members of JUSTK. Shocked

    The gap is still mind-blowing when plotted against all the big leagues corps (BNI average of 3.5 kills per member, Goons 5.3).

    o/



    It's not 144 kills per member, it 144 ASSISTS per member. This is why Zkill sucks, tag along on a kill with a target painter from 100km: get an extra "kill" for the corp.

    When using Battleclinic (which only looks at final blows when counting corp kills), since the start of the year the number for JUSTK is 101 per member.
    Is this still an absurdly high number in comparison with null sec? Of course.
    Do most Gal Mill corps get this high? Absolutely. (BLFOX for instance has 133 per member)
    Are your numbers off by 30%? You bet. :p

  • Dev blog: More Deployables from Super Friends in EVE Information Center

    CCP SoniClover wrote:


    * Interacting with the ESS now puts a warp disruption effect on the ship interacting with it. Ships immune to bubbles are not immune to this effect. This is to reduce the feasibility of using ships immune to bubbles for stealing purposes.




    WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THIS ON PLEX SITES!?!?!?!?

  • Faction Warfare farming has to end - we want war instead of the Cloak & Stabs -game in EVE Communication Center

    Terranid Meester wrote:
    While I share some of the op's concerns regarding manticores and day old executioners spinning around, it might be considered that the reason there are lazy farmers is that the people who are supposed to be defending the systems are themselves too lazy to defend them.

    The recent change in that you have to get in decloaking range to activate a gate is a plus for those trying to defend against such people. Smartbombs can kill bombers and the fact that an interceptor is faster than a bomber means you can beat them to the punch when it comes to getting in front of them. You could also have some patience and wait in their missions for them to appear. Maybe even use a stealth bomber of your own with its 0 retargeting time after decloaking. Time = isk after all.

    Maybe even track to where their home base is and use some insta-lock thrashers to scare them.


    Umm.... what?

    First of all, it has nothing to do with how lazy people are when defending a system. If you take a look at the FW map on any given day, you will see that Nisuwa and Notoras are stable (or at the worst within 5% of it). This is because the people that live there care about the systems. Does this mean that farmers don't go there? Not at all. It just means that instead of being able to roam around or go on road trips, we have to spend absurd amounts of time chasing farmers and then deplexing any that slip through.

    No idea where you are going with the smartbombers and Stealth bombers as they are irrelevant for plexing (farmers don't use bombers, nobody in their right mind would sit a SB BS on a plex gate for hours at a time).

    We don't need to track the farmers to their home base because they are constantly in ours (hence the farming).

  • Faction Warfare farming has to end - we want war instead of the Cloak & Stabs -game in EVE Communication Center

    I was also working on a post regarding this issue and will contribute my thoughts pertaining to lowsec as much as FW here instead.

    As many know, QCATS is one of the best individual PvP corps in the game right now. We passed over 5k kills last month, are #2 on Battleclinic and are going to become #1 in short order (seeing as how we are generating 3-4 times the number of points per week as the Tuskers). Obviously, we find things to shoot. I say this in this context: we are very active PvPers and have numerous pilots who would qualify for the top ten in individual skill.
    We are in FW so money is (generally) not an issue for those who can play with any frequency. We have excellent forums, logstics, corp doctrines so our members will always have something to do. We have about a 50-50 EU to US TZ presence now, and as such pilots will almost always have someone to fly with.
    Recent;y, a member posted on our forums reflecting an attitude I have come to see as fairly prevalent not only among QCATS, but other groups in lowsec as well. In a vocal particular, Rixx (and his new corp Stay Frosty) has tweeted numerous times in recent weeks about this same thing. I wanted to give the above background to help clarify that it wasn't simply something wrong with the corp that influenced his desire for a break.

    Here is what he had to say (with a few things edited out):
    "Taking a vacation trip to some distant star far away from all the [crap].
    I'm quite thoroughly pissed and tired about blobs, cloaks, stabs and smartbombing [punks] currently prevalent in our neighborhood, and will take the rest of the month off from regular service. I thought about quitting FW for a while, but with my sec status it doesn't actually make any difference whether I'm enrolled or not."

    Now obviously there are parts of that text that will never go away, things like smartbomb camps and blobs will always be a part of Eve everywhere you go. But the part I want to make the most light upon was the stabs and cloaks. Not just from a FW standpoint (in dealing with AFK plexers) but from a general lowsec context as well: there are absurd numbers of people in lowsec that are affecting the game by making isk with little to no risk to themselves and, furthermore, are doing so in ships that cost almost nothing to replace.

    This is not only forcing PvP corps to change how they fight, but it's also changing how making ISK works. It's hard enough for the pirate corps to fight over DED sights or clone tags without also trying to drive out farmers using say, drakes with a cloak and stabs who is making the same ISK without anywhere near the risk-ISK ratio.
    The plain and simple fact is: people who don't want to get shot, who don't contribute anything to Eve except sapping resources from people who want to actually enjoy Eve without abusing the intent of certain mechanics are becoming more and more difficult to counter in any way.

    As the QCAT member's post has (I hope) put in a fairly understandable light, simply the mentality of trying to deal with said groups is becoming a poison for the game and I doubt that this is the mentality that CCP wants emulated. I recall from various discussions regarding highsec that there should ALWAYS be risk and that while, the level of risk should be determined, in part, by the pilot (I.E. don't jump blind into lowsec, don't fly around in an officer fit ship in dumb ways, don't put your titan all by itself on a nullsec gate, etc.) there should always be a risk inherent of simply undocking. Sadly however, the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction: Pilots are abusing methods of loss prevention in order to completely remove themselves from risk without proper balance or counters. There have been suggestions for specific modules and how to balance them, for instance, making a ship with WCS unable to activate (or fit) any kind of systems that could damage another ship or item (smartbombs, turrets, drones) or make it impossible to target NPC's with a non-Cov Ops cloak etc. While I would support something so drastic as a stopgap measure, I also know that's now what CCP wants. In FW specific situations, I know there are other options to discourage that kind of behavior as well such as rollback timers for plexes, prohibiting cloaked ships from entering plexes etc. But again though, as I understand it, these issues abound elsewhere as well.

    I feel that this is something that has long been making itself manifest within Eve itself for some time and, TBH, there will ALWAYS be people who want to play the game in such a way and, as a sandbox game, there is nothing wrong with that. But when it begins to drive out players trying to do what CCP has designed and intended a certain feature to do (again in this case, FW for small gang fighting and plexes to aid in that) then I think that the problem is greater than the intent.
    And the intent of FW? Combat. As mentioned here and here, the intent of FW from the beginning was combat. And, as has been mentioned already in this discussion, a vast majority of the raw number of pilots within FW are farming alts.
    The intent of DED sites and other forms of lowsec wealth? Risk vs Reward (and maybe funding for those pirates who can't get into highsec anymore) and not just a different way to make more money with as much risk as highsec.

    Just my .50 cents.

  • [Rubicon 1.1] Sisters of EVE Battleship in EVE Technology and Research Center

    If it's supposed to be an "aid" ship I don't see how giving it a turret bonus fits that role....
    I'd suggest swapping it for the Remote Repair Range Bonus mentioned in previous posts.

  • [Beyond Rubicon] What Mobile Structures would you like to see? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    A tech 2 version of the current mobile cyno jammer that would make it's effects system wide.

  • Happy 5th Birthday Quantum Cats Syndicate in EVE Gameplay Center

    Apollo Eros wrote:
    Congrats guys. I <3 you all.....

    No

    Yes I do...

    No

    YES I DO!!!!

    LOL Later kirk?



    Apollo, this would be much easier to accomplish if you gave up that boring WH stuff and joined us. :)

    Also, happy birthday to QCATS, gad to be a part of such a legacy.

  • [Rubicon] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Kagura Nikon wrote:

    Well they do sacrifice a LOT of dps between HAMS and rapids.

    The fact is peopel are thinkign on the HAMS as the standad missiel to use and the rapids as the specialization, but currently eve is the other way around. You want to b versatile, use rapids. You sure you huntign a BC? get hams.



    Fair point. I was actually thinking of HMLs when I mentioned DPS difference.

  • [Rubicon] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Michael Harari wrote:
    MinutemanKirk wrote:
    I have no idea if it will be HML or RLML fit.


    Have you tried looking?


    *is shocked* I can actually look at other ships?!

    Of course I do (and I usually engage anyway) but that's not the point. The point is that on almost no other cruiser do I have to do that. Not to mention that the reverse is true as well: if I'm in a lightweight cruiser, I don't know if if will be RML with a 100mn AB or if it will be a brawling HAM fit.

    I'm of the opinion that in lowsec, especially in 1v1's or small gangs and especially in cheaper ships, if you have to sit and look at a target and weigh the options for 2 minutes before engaging, you are doing it wrong. :)

  • [Rubicon] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I for one would like to support the change.

    First, if flying in a frig, one of the few cruisers I won't tackle by myself as soon as I see it (QCATS has a 10% ROE) to wait for friends is a Caracal simply because I have no idea if it will be HML or RLML fit. Almost no other weapon system has as much potential for DPS against both frigs AND cruisers. Even other medium systems that do work can usually be countered by range or transversal far more easily than RLMs.

    Furthermore by using RLML in their current state, most cruisers sacrifice very little DPS but then have the capacity to greatly enhance their defensive EHP (or allow for easier fitting of things like oversized AB's).

    Finally, I would like to support it because it allows small frig gangs (2-6) a chance to actually take on a weapon system designed to counter them (again, like using better transversal or range on other medium weapon) because of the reload time. While this will suck for a single, roaming cruiser because it will have to choose one way or the other as to what missiles it will bring, even then there are ways around it.

  • [Rubicon] Marauder rebalancing in EVE Technology and Research Center

    baltec1 wrote:
    MinutemanKirk wrote:


    Make a second T2 BS (using the old "tier 3" hulls) for PvP and let Marauders be a purely PvE ship


    CCP do not want a PvE only combat ship. Hence why this change is happening.



    Then I'd like to see when the changes to Cov Ops happen so I can lead a fleet of them in glorious combat. Oh wait...

    I think what you meant is to say CCP doesn't want a purely PvMISISON ship. As far as CCP not wanting them, I'm assuming you are referring to this:

    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

    Marauders were initially released during the Trinity expansion in 2007 and were aimed for PvE activities. However, as time passed and we rebalanced other classes, especially the Pirate Battleships, they lost appeal as a whole.

    We also believe that designing them for a very specific activity doesn't fit the emergent nature of EVE...


    Because this is entirely contradictory... If they aren't meant for a very specific activity, then almost EVERY T2 ship that has been re balanced to date is outside of that statement making it irrelevant.

  • [Rubicon] Marauder rebalancing in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I'm sure it's been stated before but I'm not wading through 250+ pages to find posts.

    Make a second T2 BS (using the old "tier 3" hulls) for PvP and let Marauders be a purely PvE ship. Without a significant cap bonus in their current form, the bastion module will simply be a death sentence for anyone (even in small gangs) who use them. A curse with 3 med neuts will drain a single rep Kronos dry in 3 minutes with the Kronos running two heavy NOS' and a heavy cap booster with Navy 800's. Even a Paladin (with the cap bonus only gains an extra 30 seconds. This cap weakness WITH the sensor strength hole will mean that even a couple of T1 cruisers can find multiple holes in what is supposed to be an OP tank ship.

    T2 ships are about specialization. Why are we trying to specialize a single ship to accomplish two ENTIRELY different objectives? We don't see recons being balanced to run incursions nor do we see black ops being considered for their mining potential. Could both those shiptype do those things? Sure. But that's not what they are being DESIGNED for. In just the same way, I can't think of putting over a bil into a small fleet ship that isn't "designed" purely for combat when other alternative are available (like pirate ships). There is nothing about either proposed design that I can't get from other ships except for a module that makes my ship look cool and gives me moderately more range and tanking ability.

    This is, of course, speaking from a PvP point of view, however, trying to make one horse pull two carts at once will only end up in killing the horse. Shoot, even just pulling one cart can be too much at times...

  • CSM Guest Blog: "Reasonable Things" Voting Phase in EVE Information Center

    MinutemanKirk: 21,83,64,13,4,8,14,3,66,28,26,20,42,81,48

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers - round two in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Marlona Sky wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:
    [SACRILEGE

    We wanted to get rid of the cap recharge bonus, as it is both kind of dated and strange


    Glad you saw the wisdom in not wasting a bonus slot on a useless bonus.

    CCP Rise wrote:
    Deimos

    We did look closely at the MWD cap use bonus and in the end decided that there wasn't any replacement compelling enough to warrant a change.


    You have got to be shitting me. X



    I was about to say the same thing.

    Here are a few "compelling replacements" to this absolutely outdated and worthless (especially with the 4th mid and increased cap recharge rate) bonus:
    Tracking bonus. If it's too OP than make the ship slower so it can't apply that DPS (blasters) as well.
    An MWD SPEED bonus. Again, if it's too OP in the current form then tone down the total base speed.
    An AB speed bonus. Something that none of the other HAC's would have while still fitting in current meta.
    (I can't believe I'm saying this) An Armor repair bonus. Fits with current Gallente designs, within the parameters of the new Minmatar philosophies, and might encourage more solo work with them. This should, I believe, be the last considered as armor repair bonuses have been proven to be weak in the past.

    On a positive note, I do like most of the other changes. Ishtar has some fitting space and had an outdated bonus removed. Vaga should be useful again and I should finally have a reason to fly Caldari HACs.

  • [Odyssey] Navy Battleships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Samas Sarum wrote:

    Welcome to all Amarr BS's (can we retire the unlimited ammo meme, no one uses T1 crystals).


    So because Amarr have cap hungry guns that justifies Gallente having them also?

    Gallente have enough cap problems as it is since we have to burn prop mods longer just to be able to use our preferred guns. Not being able to maintain as much cap, not to mention the ineffectiveness this would lead to that utility/neut high slot everyone keep talking about, would make the mega that much less desirable.