I can make this judgement because gankers won’t use talos*** for ganking a large majority of targets. It isn’t profitable so they will resort to cheaper ships like the catalyst. It is not rocket science. As for tank, it is easy to estimate what they will need for a max tank. Plus they can just scan it real quick if they absolutely need to.
Ganking will not change much. Mining is no safer against gankers than before. The cov/hulk and retriever/mack just wont die to rats as fast anymore is all.
That is because the math is already been done, gankers already know what they need. Gankers are going to continue to use catalyst like they’ve always done. You go look at Zkillboard. The majority of mining kills are done with catalyst not talos. Freighters will see talos usage but majority are usually done with catalyst.
You talked about how the double EHP is going to end ganking and make HS mining safe.
I’m telling you it wont. It just means there will need to be 3-6 more catalyst instead of the normal 1-2 per hulk/cov/retriever/mack. HS miners are still going to die. This update does not change that.
At this point I hope your game style is destroyed. You guys and that princess whatever are up here all the time talking ■■■■ to people complaining about mining changes. Now CCP had turned the stick on you and started beating and I love it. I wish they would have stuck with outlawing the pulling of Concord. Not because I think it’s good or bad for the game but because it hurts your gameplay and I love that.
I hope they completely destroy your chosen style of play so you can feel the same way all that miners you keep telling to calm down feel.
Actually . No i am not a ganker. I am just a player who embrace different gameplay styles . And these play styles contribution to eve eco systems balance .
These spitefull messages for me nothing but the words of people who had been digestion problems and biases towards the different playstyles which has been totally suitable to game mechanics .
No need to say i see this kind of attitude as weakness and immature.
Not every ganker is a griefer… i have seen so far every gameplay style have some lvl of corrosive players .
I got ganked many times in last 10 years and only one of them attempt to grief. Rest were nothing but simple executions of game mechanics by the pilots who enjoy that game play .
If you think you are different . @Oshiya , Just read your own posts. You are very alike the griefer ones inbetween them . Not even a descent representative of that gameplay style .
That’s because that is how most ganks are. Just simple executions of a gameplay that is allowed and a way to turn profit. Either by extorting a “mining permit” or by the loot.
Granted some gankers will try to get you riled up, but usually if you stay cool then they will as well and won’t egg on bad behavior.
Ganking is fundamental to the game and it has not changed. At least not in this update.
I do believe , if CCP remove half of the profit of all indy activities from table instantly , after it has acquaired… all indy players have some words here right ?
So we tell them : nothing changed… you still mine and produce, we are just halfing it . So you need to double your efforts to get same results.
What do you say ?
What did the indy players do recently in jita for the less than this ?
Now CCP says gankers …ganking has not changed you will just double your efforts and your numbersto acquaire same result .Like that ??
Notably absent from all the threads on these changes is the new asteroid field changes as well as the changes to align time for miners.
I use to solo farm belts with an Orca in high sec. The horseshoe shaped belts allowed me to easily stay in an alignment to a safe spot and negate the horrific align time for an Orca.
Between alignment time changes and the new align time adjustments (nurfs) it’s currently looking like multiple trips in a hulk are going to be the best way to go. For myself I’m just going to spin BPs for awhile and monitor zkills while this all sorts out.
Gankers, while they are going to need to modify their tactics (piloting skills) a bit, have actually gained some advantage due to the new design of the belts and these aign time changes.
Both gankers and miners are going to have to develop real piloting skills and tactics. I believe this was the actual goal of these changes.
I usually gank folks that appear AFK. No profit motive at all, its not needed. Also, after the gank, I try to have a pleasant convo with the target. The more engaged they are with the game, the more likely they’ll stick around.
I had a benchmark, it was simply how many characters did a prolific miner ganker run when ganking mining barges and exhumers, the answer used to be 13, it is now 9. My view is that you have to have one of each of the mining barges and the exhumers to be a struggle for that player in even a 0.5 system if tank fitted. After all rock paper scissors… At the moment the Skiff barely meets that, the Procurer does not.
As for the other mining barges and exhumers, they were paper thin and woefully inadequate they have been improved which is good, because doesn’t it get boring to just see Orca’s, Skiffs and Procurers? Still it only required one Catalyst for a Covetor and two for a Retreiver even if fitted with a tank prior to this change.
I find it difficult to accept this concept that it has to be possible to take down a mining barge or exhumer with a solo character in a time limited CONCORD reaction system. In lowsec and nullsec and WH space a single destroyer can take all of the barges or exhumers down, it is just the choice of where it happens is the issue. If you want to take it down in hisec within time constraints, you need friends, is that an issue?
@Brisc_Rubal don’t be overly swayed by the whining of Aiko and people like that. They have had so many buffs over the years it is silly, take tags for example, and now you see many alpha gankers that loiter.
So … you are all fine if there is no risk to mine in high sec with barges and exhumers…lets say they all stop …
And what is the possible outcome of this ?
Have you think about that ?
Lets a little bit breake down your mentality here…
In low sec and null sec , these ships can be killed with one destroyer you said….
In high sec … there are constraints, there is a concord…
In null and low a destroyer can kill these ships and nothing happen to a destroyer.
In high sec as result of mechanics …you loose the ship that you used to kill other ship %100 result of concord response.
And now you need to double this efforts up…
Lets say ,… today CCP announce that … to have same amount of yield you have today… you have to double up the time energy and amount of ships accounts you are using … to sustain your income and gameplay…
IMHO ganking is a necessary mechanic in HS. Much as wolves/predators are needed to balance an ecosystem with deer/herbivores (and rodents). The key is always to provide the means and resources to adapt within predictable boundaries that maintain some form of balance. Choices, risks, and rewards. There is very little risk outside of wardecs, the occasional FOB rats, or Triglavian/Edencom systems. All of these can be easily avoided or mitigated.
Overall the spectrum of mining barges/exhumers just got alot narrower (the EHP range from Covetor to Skiff). Is this a good thing? Time will tell. As long as CCP keeps the boundaries within a reasonable range then a new balance will be found that accommodates a healthy game experience. It looks like the minimum bar just went up, and the maximum went down.
We gank for control. If you come into our area to take resources you will find it difficult to compete. Other groups also come and hunt and this isn’t a problem even if they cause losses to ‘friendly’ pilots because it all weeds out the weak, the uninformed or the inattentive. Such is Eve.
While it was a kick in the gut to realize just how much adaptation would be required of me, once this all plays out I believe it will have been a successful release for good for the game.
For all those slamming CCP’s work… We’re all in this together. This is a major release (not just ‘a patch’). Microsoft became a giant using end users as QA. If you care about the game/platform, approaching bugs as a community instead of with harsh criticisms would be the more logical choice. Just say’n…
That being said, While Dev blogs and vids were shared adequately before hand and Sisi opened for testing/opinions I would have liked to have seen some type of holistic summary explaining what the intended consequences were expected to be. Nothing really clearly summarized the direction well.
Ending Scarcity and getting on the path to Prosperity actually comes off more as deceptive marketing than transparency.