Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 44 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
2308
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
As discussed in the EVE Keynote at FanFest 2013, we are completely changing resource balancing in Odyssey. Here with two dev blogs to discuss these changes is CCP Fozzie.
In the main dev blog here, you can find a high level overview of the changes and our reasoning for them
In the companion dev blog here, you can learn all about the nitty gritty numbers.
Please post all feedback in this thread. New Eden Community Representative GÇ+ New Eden Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Hlynurth
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
420 bl4ze 1t |
Dirk Action
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
91
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
snigg#1 |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2658
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rivers of tears are going to flow. |
Eessi
Murderous Inc
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
looking forward to the preset probe formations.
edit: horde that ice maybe? |
Cass Lie
State War Academy Caldari State
68
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Seriously Hilmar, this Fozzie guy deserves a raise. |
Jeidan Fallstaff
Nyota Heavy Industries
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ejaculoot! What if your sole reason for being is simply to serve as a warning to others? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4726
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
Welp my thread was premature. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Graygor
1kB Realty 1kB Galactic
23940
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
I love these changes. "I think you should buy a new Mayan calendar. Mine has muscle cars on it." --áKenneth O'Hara
"Something I don't say very often: The welshman is right." - Marcus Gord |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8843
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Rivers of tears are going to flow.
The surest sign of a good change. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13837
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Grendell
Technologies Unlimited Superior Eve Engineering
678
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
Fun times for the market!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5550
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:11:00 -
[13] - Quote
Hey guys, just checking in to say I'm gonna go party hard at the pub crawl tonight, so I'll be doing most of my responding to feedback early next week instead of right away. Don't worry, I will read every single post in this thread while nursing my hangover.
I hope you guys enjoy the spoils of the huge amount of work Team Five O has put into these changes, and have fun on the markets. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
Bottom line, another massive transfer of wealth from high sec to null sec and wh's. Demand for high sec mins was just wiped out as null sec now is overflowing with low end mins in high sec ores.
And wh's no longer have a trit / pyerite scarcity issue. |
David Kir
Pixel Navigators Hostile Work Environment.
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ok, so hubs are getting scramming rats and frigates.. Not sure if i like this or not, but hey, at least lowsec'll be full of explorers now. Oh, and my Vagabond is getting some love, too. All of this makes for quite an... ahem... explosive combination, doesn't it? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5550
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:14:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2658
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:14:00 -
[17] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Rivers of tears are going to flow. The surest sign of a good change.
Indeed. |
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
75
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:15:00 -
[18] - Quote
Need more graphs, pictures or MS paint! |
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
188
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:15:00 -
[19] - Quote
You mean...I'll be able to land on miners in w-space without ever having to drop probes?
It's...beautiful... |
Graygor
1kB Realty 1kB Galactic
23942
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:15:00 -
[20] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined.
I approve of scarcity.
Have fun on your drinkies. "I think you should buy a new Mayan calendar. Mine has muscle cars on it." --áKenneth O'Hara
"Something I don't say very often: The welshman is right." - Marcus Gord |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4727
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13837
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:18:00 -
[22] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. GÇ£Fully minedGÇ¥ meaning 23.5/7, and every anomaly sucked dry, presumably?
Sounds reasonably scarce.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8844
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:18:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tippia wrote: Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there.
Agreed. These changes will help a little, of course, but they'll still leave sov 0.0 pathetically under-resourced to become even partially self sufficient. Going from 3% of the slots of hi-sec to 5% isn't really going to change anything.
And outpost upgrades are still insanely overpriced. Drop them down to the 2-4-6B range so we can actually use them plx.
EDIT: But the extra office space WILL help. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
534
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:19:00 -
[24] - Quote
inb4 the threadanaught - Nulla Curas |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
358
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:20:00 -
[25] - Quote
What about wormhole ice anomalies ? G££ <= Me |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
52
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
First. Please fix the Gallente station undock. Shadoo > whoever was the first nyx on grid Shadoo > THANK GOD YOU ARE A SMART MAN and fitted the best tank in PL Shadoo > (ie. cyno) |
David Kir
Pixel Navigators Hostile Work Environment.
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
Forlorn Wongraven wrote:First. Please fix the Gallente station undock.
lol |
Hoarr
Asgard. Exodus.
139
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Altrue wrote:What about wormhole ice anomalies ?
Do you currently have them? No? then probably not. WHs should not be self sustaining for everything, that's been a pretty basic design direction from CCP since they were implemented. |
darmwand
Repo.
115
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:24:00 -
[29] - Quote
Quote:pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment
I'm sure that's going to encourage people to mine in low-sec
Sounds promising though, good to see that our industrialist friends get some love. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
358
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:25:00 -
[30] - Quote
Not permanent Ice belts, but add an ice belt to the list of mining anomalies that can spawn. So that we have a small chance of getting one of them from time to time. G££ <= Me |
|
Ziphis
Aegis Consolidated
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:26:00 -
[31] - Quote
Firstly Team Five-O needs a raise.
Secondly HOLY SH*T All this stuff looks fantastic and cant wait to be playing with all these new features.
Hilmar in underpants haha! brilliant. |
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
1323
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:28:00 -
[32] - Quote
No credit?
dayum.
=/ Dual Pane idea: Click!
CCP Please Implement |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8847
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ahahah those ore changes
Oh god this is like christmas Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
935
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:29:00 -
[34] - Quote
Altrue wrote:What about wormhole ice anomalies ?
Simple, you don't get them. WH's where never intended to be lived in. That you guys decided otherwise is what some call "emergent" game play. Doesn't mean you should be hold your hand. Actually you're doing fine against what CCP thought was possible. |
Draconus Lofwyr
EntroPrelatial Industria EntroPraetorian Aegis
42
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:29:00 -
[35] - Quote
any fomula or reasoning why some systems in amarr /kahnid got to keep their ice spawns and others were not? and any way to alter those choices? |
Karak Terrel
As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions
197
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:29:00 -
[36] - Quote
DJ P0N-3 wrote:You mean...I'll be able to land on miners in w-space without ever having to drop probes?
It's...beautiful... my first thought exactly! |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3284
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:31:00 -
[37] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there.
I would hope that the remaining slots can be made up for through POSes. Sure, they suck right now but with boosts from Surface Installations they'll be a bit better. And then when CCP get around to rebalancing activity slots throughout empire and lowsec, POSes should be better.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1656
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:31:00 -
[38] - Quote
if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:33:00 -
[39] - Quote
Also, nice to see that moons are getting MORE valuable, as the new R64 materials are embedded in moons. Sure, tech itself goes down in value, but it is conceivable, depending on this random seeding of R64 mins, a tech moon might be worth MORE than it is today. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
858
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:35:00 -
[40] - Quote
Oh wow, that's like the best thing ever, you are my hero fozzie, time to dust off the hulks, We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:36:00 -
[41] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. Please quote where it was said that frigates (specifically) were going to be added. All that was mentioned was that warp disruption will be added to anoms that lack it. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8849
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:36:00 -
[42] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Also, nice to see that moons are getting MORE valuable, as the new R64 materials are embedded in moons. Sure, tech itself goes down in value, but it is conceivable, depending on this random seeding of R64 mins, a tech moon might be worth MORE than it is today.
tech is an R32 Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
LanFear TyRaX
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
24
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:36:00 -
[43] - Quote
How is increasing production slots on POS-es beneficial when refining arrays are in this shameful situation.
Oh guys btw you can now mine more ore, and make more at towers. But we forgot that you have to refine them in stations. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:37:00 -
[44] - Quote
LanFear TyRaX wrote:How is increasing production slots on POS-es beneficial when refining arrays are in this shameful situation.
Oh guys btw you can now mine more ore, and make more at towers. But we forgot that you have to refine them in stations. Outposts != POS's |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
353
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:37:00 -
[45] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do.
I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance! |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1753
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:38:00 -
[46] - Quote
Tippia wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. GÇ£Fully minedGÇ¥ meaning 23.5/7, and every anomaly sucked dry, presumably? Sounds reasonably scarce. In my experience, not all ice fields were occupied, let alone 23/7.
Some systems with multiple ice belts only had one belt commonly used.
[Farewell to my quiet Amarrian systems.]
I imagine a great deal of pressure on belts closest to hubs, and an initial shortage of ice products. Miners don't like to move, and might find other things to do with their time as a result. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3284
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:38:00 -
[47] - Quote
CCP, what about replacing the 11 Nocxium in a refining batch of Pyroxeres with about 400 Pyerite?
I can't see that putting lowend minerals into high end ores is really going to help anyone: if they want tritanium they'd focus on veldspar. If they're mining ABCSG those folks are surely trying to maximise ISK/hr and are willing to trade surplus high ends for the vast quantities of lowends that they will need? Keep the numbers on the refining spreadsheet on that nice diagonal.
And moving grav sites to anomalies? Really? You guys probably didn't read my Mining is Boring blog post, so I'll give you the link here and you can reconsider the monumental mistake you're making. Perhaps you can rectify your thinking before releasing Odyssey? I'll try to put my skepticism aside and approach this with an open mind (thus consider this post to be a purge of that opinion, though I will mention it in the rebalancing round table tomorrow)
Thank you for at least looking at the mineral-to-ore distribution problems, even if you are going at it arse about Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
1109
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:38:00 -
[48] - Quote
Those Ore changes... so the high end ores will be now hybrid ores |
Gladi
Liga Freier Terraner Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:38:00 -
[49] - Quote
I like! |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:39:00 -
[50] - Quote
Also eagerly awaiting the Akita T thread detailing where CCP has ****** up the new T2 moon mineral requirements to move the bottleneck to (say) Mercury. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4729
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:39:00 -
[51] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. Sanctums are apparently being rebalanced though for higher isk/hr. We'll just have to wait and see what that means. Hopefully it's a good rebalance and you can make more decent isk than you can now. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
islador
Frontier Explorer's League Sadistica Alliance
36
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:40:00 -
[52] - Quote
Randomly adding high value materials to moons. I like that you're being random about it, but was there really no other way? Those of us that keep moon databases now have to rescan our entire database. That is a HUGE amount of work and isk. Could the production not be balanced further somehow? |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
936
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:42:00 -
[53] - Quote
allEVE's tears are FROZEN BECAUSE OF IMPENDING LACK OF ICE due to depletion An' then [email protected], he come scramblin outta theTerminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system'scrashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children' |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1753
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:43:00 -
[54] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Also eagerly awaiting the Akita T thread detailing where CCP has ****** up the new T2 moon mineral requirements to move the bottleneck to (say) Mercury. I was sure you were gonna say Thulium. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots.
50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). |
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
38
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:43:00 -
[56] - Quote
meh, nothing about actually making mining at least a little bit interesting. Bringing "hi-sec" ore to low sec sounds a good thing though. Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
427
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:43:00 -
[57] - Quote
Congratulations Guys!!!! The content on fanfest was awesome!!!!!! You guys are on the right path!!! and the next expansion, if features what he hope for the pos, I ensure you that I will be a subscriber of eve for the rest of my life! Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
Sir SmashAlot
The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:44:00 -
[58] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. All you are only allowing for a 25% growth in consumption before things get really interesting? Can you smell topetec just around the corner?
Off to the pub crawl!! |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2659
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:44:00 -
[59] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs.
Behold, the nullsec griefalanche will start here.
I fly BC and deal with scrambling frigs all of the time.
The key is to be properly equipped to operate in the environment. Given that, the use of drones, or if using a missile ship, go to precision missiles when needed and use an AB to deal with the speed loss and cut down on damage from the heavies. Naturally one could expect to take out the scrambling frigs first.
This of course requires that someone actually be at the keyboard and make decisions, plans, etc, and possible even bring extra players as enti-frigate support - emergent gameplay and all that.
Overall, I think the solution is to do what high sec players are told to do: team up with people, learn to adapt, etc.
|
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:45:00 -
[60] - Quote
does this mean that all T2 mods/ships will end up cheaper on the market to buy? and if so by how much roughly? 'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place..... where is the TD missile change?-á ,...projectiles should use capacitor. |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3284
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:45:00 -
[61] - Quote
And I'll echo the sentiment expressed in these pages about POS refineries needing some love.
My type of LOVE for POS refineries would be converting all refineries (NPC station, outposts, and POS alike) into activity lines with throughput versus efficiency trade offs. Thus you can have a 30% efficient refinery that has a dozen lines each capable of processing a million cubic metres per hour (which you would find in, say, mining corporation refinery stations) or a 60% efficient refinery with a half-dozen lines capable of processing a hundred thousand cubic metres per hour which you would find in, say, Logistics Support stations. I'd remove refineries from NPC stations that are purely administrative. Then a POS manager could choose between an intensive mining refinery that can actually process more ore per hour than a single miner in a boosted Hulk can produce, which still takes vast CPU and PG resources, or a less intensive refinery that can't keep up with a single miner, but allows other stuff to be online at the same time (such as, say, a CHA).
But for the moment I'm going to have a private moment with the tail end of Andie's presentation about building and destroying stargates. I think I am in love.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:45:00 -
[62] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Lord Haur wrote:Also eagerly awaiting the Akita T thread detailing where CCP has ****** up the new T2 moon mineral requirements to move the bottleneck to (say) Mercury. I was sure you were gonna say Thulium. Thulium is still gonna be relatively cheap. There has been speculation about CCP increasing the usage of Thulium for years. It's relatively cheap to stick a small gallente tower (or a tower you need to put up anyway) on a Thulium and stockpile it. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4731
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:47:00 -
[63] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but don't you get one advanced, two intermediate, and three basic? So 50 + 3*20 + 2*40 + 60 = 250? Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Arduemont
Rotten Legion Ops
1351
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:47:00 -
[64] - Quote
Oh God, yes.... Just yes. "In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." |
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
75
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:48:00 -
[65] - Quote
T2 Salvage Alchemy please.
100 T1 salvage + 100 PI or other thing = some number of T2 salvage
or with changes to scan sites it T2 salvage going to become more common? |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:48:00 -
[66] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but don't you get one advanced, two intermediate, and three basic? So 50 + 3*20 + 2*40 + 60 = 250? You can only install one of a particular upgrade. Which means you get one each of basic/standard Plant and Machinery, then choose the Improved based upon the build time bonus. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1753
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:48:00 -
[67] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Yes but will a monument upgrade platform still cost as nearly as much as an outpost?
|
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort Raiden.
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:49:00 -
[68] - Quote
who else sat on a coupel mil units of thulium jsut in case? i knwo i did lol |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:50:00 -
[69] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. Sanctums are apparently being rebalanced though for higher isk/hr. We'll just have to wait and see what that means. Hopefully it's a good rebalance and you can make more decent isk than you can now.
Sanctum isk/hr is fine, frigs have a serious unexpected effect on isk hour, it's why forsaken hubs are by far the most popular anomalies (most people use battleships, and even BS with webs and tracking bonuses and light drones can have a hard time)
Decreasing the number of frigs and adding more battlecrusiers to sanctums is nice, but any frigs in forskaen hubs will just kill Teir3 anom farming (nagas already have only just enough slots for tank, how do you add a web to that?).
The devblog doesn't actually say frigs it says pirates, so if it's not frigs being added to forsaken hubs, no harm no foul. But if it is frigs , that's a huge nerf to grunt player income which could have bad effects on null sec pvp. It's goingt o be iteresting to see what happens to null pvp with these changes in general.
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:50:00 -
[70] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Yes but will a monument upgrade platform still cost as nearly as much as an outpost? Something to ask in tomorrow's roundtable-come-panel I guess. I'm pretty sure they won't change it though. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4731
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:51:00 -
[71] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Sanctum isk/hr is fine, frigs have a serious unexpected effect on isk hour, it's why forsaken hubs are by far the most popular anomalies (most people use battleships, and even BS with webs and tracking bonuses and light drones can have a hard time)
Decreasing the number of frigs and adding more battlecrusiers to sanctums is nice, but any frigs in forskaen hubs will just kill Teir3 anom farming (nagas already have only just enough slots for tank, how do you add a web to that?).
The devblog doesn't actually say frigs it says pirates, so if it's not frigs being added to forsaken hubs, no harm no foul. But if it is frigs , that's a huge nerf to grunt player income which could have bad effects on null sec pvp. It's goingt o be iteresting to see what happens to null pvp with these changes in general.
devblog wrote:We are also making some small tweaks to the NPC composition of Hubs and Sanctums. Switching a few of the NPCs in Hubs to the tougher Elite Frigates and Cruisers, and switching a few of the Elites in Sanctums out for battlecruisers. The changes are still being tweaked and tuned, but the intended result is a better balance between the different anomalies, giving Sanctums the advantage in isk per hour over the easier to find Hubs.
So hubs will add some elite frigates and cruisers, sanctums will take some out and switch them for battlecruisers. IMO that's a good change. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13838
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:52:00 -
[72] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Some suchGǪ and then you have to sacrifice one of those slots for an improved refinery, and another one to get a few more corp offices in there so all slots can be put to full use. So realistically, it's 150ish, when it should be three or four times that.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:53:00 -
[73] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. Please quote where it was said that frigates (specifically) were going to be added. All that was mentioned was that warp disruption will be added to anoms that lack it.
They also didn't say they were going to make new npc non-frig (and non-sleeper/incursion) ships that scram.
I'm really really hoping they don't take the lazy way and add frigs to forsaken hubs, forsaken hubs have been unique in having n frigs since they added them.
|
Junko Sideswipe
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
151
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:55:00 -
[74] - Quote
But are you making caldari outposts not the worst kickouts in the game? Confederation of xXPIZZAXx CEO Watch PIZZA Videos http://www.youtube.com/user/LunchSquad |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:55:00 -
[75] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. Sanctums are apparently being rebalanced though for higher isk/hr. We'll just have to wait and see what that means. Hopefully it's a good rebalance and you can make more decent isk than you can now. Sanctum isk/hr is fine, frigs have a serious unexpected effect on isk hour, it's why forsaken hubs are by far the most popular anomalies (most people use battleships, and even BS with webs and tracking bonuses and light drones can have a hard time) Decreasing the number of frigs and adding more battlecrusiers to sanctums is nice, but any frigs in forskaen hubs will just kill Teir3 anom farming (nagas already have only just enough slots for tank, how do you add a web to that?). The devblog doesn't actually say frigs it says pirates, so if it's not frigs being added to forsaken hubs, no harm no foul. But if it is frigs , that's a huge nerf to grunt player income which could have bad effects on null sec pvp. It's goingt o be iteresting to see what happens to null pvp with these changes in general.
LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you. |
Kadean
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:55:00 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys, just checking in to say I'm gonna go party hard at the pub crawl tonight, so I'll be doing most of my responding to feedback early next week instead of right away. Don't worry, I will read every single post in this thread while nursing my hangover.
I hope you guys enjoy the spoils of the huge amount of work Team Five O has put into these changes, and have fun on the markets.
Hey, thanks for reading my post, i hope there wasn't too many to read before you got to mine.......so....sup? |
Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
325
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:56:00 -
[77] - Quote
Exscuse my ignorance of the POS sytems, but why does the Amarr have quite a bit more manufacturing capabilities than the other races? "Entitlement" is a euphemism for "I hate the way you play and it makes me cry like a baby". If you fantasize about being immoral it means you enjoy being immoral deep down. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4731
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:58:00 -
[78] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you. Ice mining getting moved to anomalies is a "body slam"? Seriously? Check your privilege. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:59:00 -
[79] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Sanctum isk/hr is fine, frigs have a serious unexpected effect on isk hour, it's why forsaken hubs are by far the most popular anomalies (most people use battleships, and even BS with webs and tracking bonuses and light drones can have a hard time)
Decreasing the number of frigs and adding more battlecrusiers to sanctums is nice, but any frigs in forskaen hubs will just kill Teir3 anom farming (nagas already have only just enough slots for tank, how do you add a web to that?).
The devblog doesn't actually say frigs it says pirates, so if it's not frigs being added to forsaken hubs, no harm no foul. But if it is frigs , that's a huge nerf to grunt player income which could have bad effects on null sec pvp. It's goingt o be iteresting to see what happens to null pvp with these changes in general.
devblog wrote:We are also making some small tweaks to the NPC composition of Hubs and Sanctums. Switching a few of the NPCs in Hubs to the tougher Elite Frigates and Cruisers, and switching a few of the Elites in Sanctums out for battlecruisers. The changes are still being tweaked and tuned, but the intended result is a better balance between the different anomalies, giving Sanctums the advantage in isk per hour over the easier to find Hubs. So hubs will add some elite frigates and cruisers, sanctums will take some out and switch them for battlecruisers. IMO that's a good change.
You must not rat for your isk.
Forsaken hubs are the only reasons right now to not completely abbandon null sec for empire incursions and high sec 4/10 farming. The things you have to do to kill ANY frigs in a battleship in an anom means you can do other things , and you can do them at all in an Attack BC except for the Talos which sucks outside of Serp/Angel space.
This is a bad idea man, PVE is my main thing and I've been an Anom and exploration guy for years. The adaptations people are going to have to make (using long range ships like the Oracle as it is in Blood Raider space or adding webs that will be useless against anything BUT frigs etc etc) is totally going to cut isk per hour for grunt players beyond any amount of tweaking ccp is going to do to sanctums.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13838
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:00:00 -
[80] - Quote
Captain Tardbar wrote:Exscuse my ignorance of the POS sytems, but why does the Ammar have quite a bit more manufacturing capabilities than the other races? Because theirs is the Gǣfactory outpostGǥ. The Gallente get an administrative outpost (mainly tons of offices), the Caldari get research outosts (science slots), and Minmatar can refine oreGǪ
They all need to be removed and redone. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8850
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:02:00 -
[81] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Overall, I think the solution is to do what high sec players are told to do: team up with people, learn to adapt, etc.
quotin' this Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:02:00 -
[82] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:
LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you.
And here comes the high sec ignorance. Who said anything about it affecting one ship class, LOTS of different ships do anoms.
As it is, the game is already grossly unblanced for grunt null sec pilots (null mining sucks compared to high, incursions and DED farming offers the same or more isk per hour, high sec missions offer less isk but are harder to interupt etc etc).
Its not jsut about individual pilots, the changes can be adapted to, but it's going in the wrong direction. Grunt pilots in null are the ones losing ships, thats a bad bad bad group to nerf income on if you want you high sec LP and isk to mean anyhting. We're your market. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:03:00 -
[83] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Some suchGǪ and then you have to sacrifice one of those slots for an improved refinery, and another one to get a few more corp offices in there so all slots can be put to full use. So realistically, it's 150ish, when it should be three or four times that. Of course you're right, but this is still a significant improvement from the current situation. Also, increasing the base office slots from 4 to 12 will help significantly.
However, putting a refinery upgrade in will remain somewhat pointless while it remains impossible to get a perfect refine rate (pre-tax) with the tier 3 upgrade. IMO they need to buff the refine rates on the non-minmatar upgrades to where it's possible to get perfect refine with the top-tier upgrades. 40% base requires perfect skills plus the 1% implant IIRC, so that would be my personal ideal rate, or slightly lower to require a more expensive implant. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8850
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:05:00 -
[84] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Lord Haur wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. This. I haven't done the analysis myself but I know that Tippia understands these things a lot better than I do. I get 410 on an Amarr Factory Outpost (50 + 6*60). I get 230 max manufacturing slots. 50 (base) + 2*20 (basics) + 2*40 (standard) + 1*60 (improved). Some suchGǪ and then you have to sacrifice one of those slots for an improved refinery, and another one to get a few more corp offices in there so all slots can be put to full use. So realistically, it's 150ish, when it should be three or four times that. GǪoh, and the refinery and office upgrades need similar buffs to make them actually make sense.
It's a good start, though.
Of course it's moot until hi-sec stations start charging vaguely realistic slot fees. About a 50,000% increase should do it... Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4731
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:06:00 -
[85] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:You must not rat for your isk. I do, and I hate every minute of it.
Jenn aSide wrote:Forsaken hubs are the only reasons right now to not completely abbandon null sec for empire incursions and high sec 4/10 farming. The things you have to do to kill ANY frigs in a battleship in an anom means you can do other things , and you can do them at all in an Attack BC except for the Talos which sucks outside of Serp/Angel space. But you missed the point. Sanctums will have LESS frigates and elite cruisers and MORE battlecruisers, so LESS of the stuff that's disproportionally tough to kill compared to their bounties. Not only that but sanctums will still lead to The Maze (or whatever the equivalent is for non-Guristas stuff) which is much better than FSP. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:07:00 -
[86] - Quote
Anyways, enough forum whoring from me, I need to dump my laptop before the pub crawl. |
Dalilus
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:10:00 -
[87] - Quote
another dev blog explaining how the "idependent" csm and ccp are taking care of their favorite pets; the lowsec, null and w bears while continuing to nerf highsec. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
266
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:10:00 -
[88] - Quote
Tippia wrote: Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there.
I would presume that if they have an eventual goal of making nullsec industry a conflict driver for midscale engagements, they don't want the residents overly attached to station-based production. Might be too late for that, though. -- I'm not entirely clear on how the proposed changes are going to make mining in lowsec more desirable. It's still going to be less secure than high sec for a minor increase in profit and less profitable and less secure than mining in 0.0. Grav sites will be easier to find, I suppose, but I don't think that's going to be enough to sustain lowsec mining.
Also: how will the new mining anomalies interact with Faction Warfare space? At present, non-FW anoms do not spawn in FW systems. Will the new mining anoms be suppressed as well, or will they spawn as normal?
Finally, as a frigate enthusiast, I have to ask: are there any additional plans for the Venture (such as making cherry-picking/ninja mining a more profitable endeavor?) |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:15:00 -
[89] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:You must not rat for your isk. I do, and I hate every minute of it. Jenn aSide wrote:Forsaken hubs are the only reasons right now to not completely abbandon null sec for empire incursions and high sec 4/10 farming. The things you have to do to kill ANY frigs in a battleship in an anom means you can do other things , and you can do them at all in an Attack BC except for the Talos which sucks outside of Serp/Angel space. But you missed the point. Sanctums will have LESS frigates and elite cruisers and MORE battlecruisers, so LESS of the stuff that's disproportionally tough to kill compared to their bounties. Not only that but sanctums will still lead to The Maze (or whatever the equivalent is for non-Guristas stuff) which is much better than FSP.
no I dind't "miss" it, I mentioned it, it doesn't matter. A SINGLE frig in an anom makes a large gun only ship obsolete unless you are at range and can pop it as it approaches.
You dislike doing anoms and so probably don't understand what's happening. I like anoms (because I hated belt ratting) and have created litterly dozens of 1 and 2 ship doctrines to tackle them. This will end up a very serious nerf across multple ships, in case like the Naga it might prove fatal, and the naga is a great ship for poor player to jump in and make some isk.
Not the end of the world, but it is going the wrong way (ccp should be helping grunt players and making null income bottom up rather than top down). And yea, even if they remove all but one frig from sanctums. .
|
Xessej
Darqsyde Exploration Limited Mass - Effect
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:17:00 -
[90] - Quote
Why leave the ice anoms in the systems that have ice now? Miners have chased the better grav sites around so why not ice? Also it would really put the hurt on the botters. |
|
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Unclaimed.
73
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:25:00 -
[91] - Quote
Hoarr wrote:Altrue wrote:What about wormhole ice anomalies ? Do you currently have them? No? then probably not. WHs should not be self sustaining for everything, that's been a pretty basic design direction from CCP since they were implemented.
design? or over sight? |
Logix42
Sloooooow Motion
125
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:25:00 -
[92] - Quote
I approve of these mineral changes, will now have a reason for miners venture to low/null. Obviously the markets will change with the change in supply, but as of right now the ore ranking, if you were to refine with perfect skills would be: (All prices in ISK/m3)
Before the changes: Arkonor 350.37 Hedbergite 290.24 Hemorphite 281.68 Bistot 277.83 Crokite 274.15 Jaspet 255.68 Dark Ochre 228.38 Scordite 199.74 Pyroxeres 197.25 Kernite 184.29 Plagioclase 165.61 Veldspar 157.96 Omber 151.42 Gneiss 132.86 Spodumain 97.61
After the changes: Arkonor 366.31 Bistot 327.55 Crokite 323.68 Hedbergite 290.24 Hemorphite 281.68 Dark Ochre 269.88 Jaspet 255.68 Gneiss 242.95 Spodumain 219.84 Scordite 199.74 Pyroxeres 197.25 Kernite 184.29 Plagioclase 165.61 Veldspar 157.96 Omber 151.42
Operation Write Down All the Things!! G-Doc list at http://bit.ly/wdatt or the Eve-áforum post at http://bit.ly/I56ebm |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
928
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:27:00 -
[93] - Quote
i support the harlem shake... in any form! Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
115
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:32:00 -
[94] - Quote
It's exciting, how they, AGAIN, escaped the problem of lowsec. "There's an associated issue with lowsec risk-vs-reward", and a complete silence of how, or if, it'll be addressed... |
Ager Agemo
Imperial Collective
272
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:32:00 -
[95] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined.
i just can't help but lol and rejoice XD if currently 4 belts could supply all empire, that means now ALL the belts in game on hs will BARELY keep 80% if mined fully... they must be ******* tiny XD i love it! |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
427
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:36:00 -
[96] - Quote
We Still need the POS revamp!!!! Hope to see them in the next expansion!!!!
The main reason for the outpost to exists it to keep assets SAFE. The construction should happen in POSes!!! Buff POSES!!! Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
936
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:37:00 -
[97] - Quote
Posting in a nerf HI SEC thread An' then [email protected], he come scramblin outta theTerminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system'scrashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children' |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
575
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:38:00 -
[98] - Quote
dunno if the outpost upgrades are quite good enough (as it stands amarr factories will basically be the most useless of outposts and regrettably in the way of something useful) but they are a big improvement |
Daedalus II
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
158
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:40:00 -
[99] - Quote
So question:
If Gneiss and Spodumain has such a low value, how will increasing the amount of minerals they produce help? The end result as I see it is those minerals getting even lower in price, eventually resulting in Gneiss and Spodumain going back to their original low value. The reason for those minerals to be so low in value must after all be due to oversupply, right? Producing even more of those minerals then, to me, doesn't sound like a good solution.
Wouldn't it be better to maybe remove half of the Gneiss and Spodumain asteroids from each belt? That way they neither become an anchor nor do they result in oversupply of those minerals, making them increase in value. |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:42:00 -
[100] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you. Ice mining getting moved to anomalies is a "body slam"? Seriously? Check your privilege.
That is not the body slam.
But how about you examine the fact that mining in high sec just took a hammering as demand for high sec mins, primarily trit and pyerite, will be replaced by null sec supplies..
Trit and pyerite have been slowly dropping in price for weeks as people in the know have been dumping stock. Once this was announced, trit and pyerite started really sliding in Jita.
Call it what you will, but the introduction of the superores in null and wh's probably lowers high sec mining revenue by 25% when this all shakes out by July / August. |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
936
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:42:00 -
[101] - Quote
Dalilus wrote:another dev blog explaining how the "idependent" csm and ccp are taking care of their favorite pets; the lowsec, null and w bears while continuing to nerf highsec.
CCP explained by creating a voting system that probably suppressed HI SEC votes even further! CSM9 is the time for cumpulsory sufferage in the CSM elections!
EDIT:Posting in a nerf HI SEC thread An' then [email protected], he come scramblin outta theTerminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system'scrashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children' |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
115
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:43:00 -
[102] - Quote
Quote:There are no plans to change ... the refining rates of outposts in Odyssey. Ahhahahahaha... Great blog, CCP. Could have put that line at the top... and really don't write anything below it. The whole blog wasn't worth reading at this point. |
cheese monkey
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
133
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
Only 80%?? if ALL the ice is mined?!!!
Ouch! Good thing i don't care about capitals or pos's otherwise i would be ever so slightly miffed. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
364
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:48:00 -
[104] - Quote
I like these changes - the only thing I am asking is to make sure lowsec gets much better quality ore than hi-sec. Currently it's only marginal better where an interest in lowsec would occur if the ore would be equal to medium quality 0.0.
Lowsec needs it and hi-sec people don't really :-) |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
54
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:52:00 -
[105] - Quote
I fully approve of all of these changes. Brilliant work making moons be what they were initially supposed to be. And I hope your valiant effort brings more indy to 0.0. I however do with we had more production slots in each station than this buff will give us. Is 1000 slots too much to dream of?
2 points I am curious about: Will these changes actually make indy in 0.0 worth it? Or are we continuing/going to go back to the import/export markets of the drone poo days?
Secondly: I am very disappointed that there was no mention of any changes to salvaging. I would love to see some sort of T2 salvage alchemy. With capital rigs it would be nice to see at least a slight uptick in T2 salvage/price limit through alchemy. Also, how will these exploration sites effect the prices of salvage? In the demo it looked like there was an incredible amount of items shooting out of that wreck. Will these site spawn more frequently compared to now? |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
903
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:56:00 -
[106] - Quote
Here are the the new ore numbers for a max miner with rorq support.
I think they are much better. Poor omber though, never gets any love
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/6756/neworenumbers426prices.jpg Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
903
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:00:00 -
[107] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:So question:
If Gneiss and Spodumain has such a low value, how will increasing the amount of minerals they produce help? The end result as I see it is those minerals getting even lower in price, eventually resulting in Gneiss and Spodumain going back to their original low value. The reason for those minerals to be so low in value must after all be due to oversupply, right? Producing even more of those minerals then, to me, doesn't sound like a good solution.
Wouldn't it be better to maybe remove half of the Gneiss and Spodumain asteroids from each belt? That way they neither become an anchor nor do they result in oversupply of those minerals, making them increase in value. They basically added minerals from high sec. I don't see the issue. One of the issues with null industry is the availability of low end minerals. That's why people compress with 425 railguns or whatnot and then ship them to null to refine them for the trit they need. That's not a good system. Now when you mine out the spod, you get those low end minerals that you need.
Also, the reason spod is so low in value is it's huge m3 vs others. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
TheButcherPete
The James Gang R O G U E
241
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:05:00 -
[108] - Quote
Goood gooooood, "nerf" the highbears, so they'll come to null and I can suck their bloo- I mean recruit them!
pfft. Highsec isn't getting nerfed. Get over yourselves.
ccp doesn't care about highbears anyway :D Bzzt.
GÖÑ Punkturis GÖÑ |
Nomad I
University of Caille Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:07:00 -
[109] - Quote
the Rorqual is able to compress 500ice blocks per hour. Thats not really much, with the new harvesters.Please adapt the Rorqual too |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1777
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:09:00 -
[110] - Quote
Here is the only issue I see with the ice belts. Right now I can say "I got an hour to kill, Ill just mine some ice". But these new belts are small enough that they will deplete in an hour or so (That's assuming CCP's "5 spawns a day" mentioned in the blog). Then it takes 4 hours for a new one to pop up. So there is an 80% chance that my one hour of time will be when there is no belt.
Sure I could fly elsewhere. But when I get to a new system there is an 80% chance its belt will be in the re-spawn timer as well. And the travel time cuts into the hour I have available.
Im not worried about the price. The economy will adjust.
But I cannot tell my employer to adjust my work hours around an ice belt re-spawn timer.
But Im not sure how to do Ice differently to alleviate this issue while keeping CCP goals. The best I can see is a player driven solution: A mailing list where whenever a belt pops you send a message to everyone on the list as to what system and the time. Then when a list member logs in they look at the messages and see what system to fly to (Its the one that was mined out almost four hours ago). A chat channel could be used too, although a player just logging in will have to ask "which system now?"
The result would be a cloud of miners flying system to system draining each belt in minutes before flying to the next. I can even see set circuits being developed, where you go from system A to B to C and so on, then returning to A in 4 hours.
I can see it now: All the ice miners that are normally scattered over dozens of systems now all are in one big blog, flying system to system draining each new belt in a few minutes, then flying to the next. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
Kanzlerin Mintaki
The Gamespotters
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:10:00 -
[111] - Quote
Hey there,
please don't forget to adjust the compression rate of the Rorqual / the blueprints for ice compression accordingly, to bring them up to par with the reduced cycle time of the harvesters.
|
Regolis
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
53
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:15:00 -
[112] - Quote
Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation. |
Zakarumit CZ
Zakarum Industries Exiliar Syndicate
47
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:15:00 -
[113] - Quote
I really hope CCP can review the Ice changes. I think making ice and anomally you dont basically need to scan is a bad idea. Letting them spawn precisely every 4 hours in only selected systems is even worse idea. Please, male Ice sites just another cosmis signature which people can find anywhere and that people need actually to scan. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1777
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:19:00 -
[114] - Quote
Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation.
There are sufficient people in Null who do like mining as well to keep the supply in good shape. Especially with the faster mining and the possible price rise.
Zakarumit CZ wrote:I really hope CCP can review the Ice changes. I think making ice and anomally you dont basically need to scan is a bad idea. Letting them spawn precisely every 4 hours in only selected systems is even worse idea. Please, make Ice sites just another cosmis signature which people can find anywhere and that people need actually to scan. That would make sense only if barges and exhumers had a utility high for a probe launcher. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3287
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:20:00 -
[115] - Quote
The income from mining Arkonor could have been easily boosted by simply rebalancing spodumain to be in line with ABC in terms of high end minerals, thus increasing the total ISK/hr of mining out the asteroids in these nullsec grav sites.
These changes will not encourage more miners to head out to null sec. These changes are effectively ensuring that the miners already mining in nullsec will provide more resources, reducing the requirement for sourcing those resources from anywhere else such as shuttling them down from hisec, or employing more miners in null.
To encourage more miners in nullsec, CCP should remove mineral compression. This will put pressure on nullsec industrialist to source their materials locally. In addition, make life easier for miners by reworking refineries. With the coming Surface Infrastructure boosts, industry in low/null will be significantly boosted, allowing nullsec to get closer to the holy grail of being able to supply all their ammo requirements "locally" (and more to the point, being required to do so).
There needs to be pain involved in sourcing materials for war. Making it easier for nullsec by simply adding super-veldspar into the mix is very much a step in the wrong direction. This reduces any incentives to interact with people outside the alliance. I believe that small, surgical changes are all that is required to significantly change the rules of the game, not these sledge-hammer approaches of adding more tritanium to ABC than exist in Veldspar. This is a mess. An unmitigated disaster.
I'll just sit back and try to calm down for a while, before presenting my main question to the round table tomorrow which will be: what proportion of nocxium in EVE was refined from Pyroxeres over the last few months? If CCP cannot answer that question, I will take it as evidence that they didn't pay much attention to the entirety of the material economy, and spent entirely too much time listening to the whinging of null sec "industrialists" whose only purpose in life is to contribute to the proliferation of supercapital ships in Supercapitals Online.
PS: yes, I mad. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8853
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:24:00 -
[116] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: These changes will not encourage more miners to head out to null sec.
Maybe not, but they're certainly encouraging the people already in nullsec to look at whether they should be mining.
Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:26:00 -
[117] - Quote
Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation.
Not only was high sec ice-mining nerfed in many ways for the casual player, but high sec mining was just hit hard, and by extension, mission loot as the refined value of that loot just took a hammering.
But is all good, since null sec now has more moons to fight over.
Bottom line, this was another large net transfer of wealth from high sec to null sec. And who knows what more things are planned for tomorrow.
And more food for thought. Can you imagine what high sec will look like when the new null sec cartel CSM is done with it over the winter 2013 and summer 2014 iterations?
It will be an utter wasteland.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8853
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:26:00 -
[118] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: sledge-hammer approaches of adding more tritanium to ABC than exist in Veldspar.
How much Trit per cubic metre is there in Veldspar compared to NewSpod?
Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8853
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:26:00 -
[119] - Quote
Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation.
People mined in hi-sec when trit was 0.8 ISk per unit. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:27:00 -
[120] - Quote
CCP: "So, our players want to 'Burn Jita'? THIS is how you set Jita on fire... "
Let the speculations begin :) CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1778
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:28:00 -
[121] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:The income from mining Arkonor could have been easily boosted by simply rebalancing spodumain to be in line with ABC in terms of high end minerals, thus increasing the total ISK/hr of mining out the asteroids in these nullsec grav sites.
..........
To encourage more miners in nullsec, CCP should remove mineral compression.
Actually i think what they did was good. Awhile ago I proposed that Spod should be Scordite with some added Megacyte. That would insure that it is always more valuable than Scordite no matter what the market did. Other minerals could be changed in a similar way. The result would be all Null ores would forever be better than high sec ore. And that is about what CCP did.
About the compression: I got to agree. It also makes no physical sense. Its like I take my car to the scrapyard, they crush it, shred it, send it to the smelter and a cube of iron 5 meters on a side comes out. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4732
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:34:00 -
[122] - Quote
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:CCP: "So, our players want to 'Burn Jita'? THIS is how you set Jita on fire... " Let the speculations begin :) what Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1778
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:37:00 -
[123] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:CCP: "So, our players want to 'Burn Jita'? THIS is how you set Jita on fire... " Let the speculations begin :) what Because High sec will still mine far more ice that it needs. Some will be shipped out, depending on the price. So just what will the price do?
And if null can mine more of what it needs without importing, what happens to Trit prices? Ship prices? Guess right and make a bundle! http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:43:00 -
[124] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:CCP: "So, our players want to 'Burn Jita'? THIS is how you set Jita on fire... " Let the speculations begin :) what Because High sec will still mine far more ice that it needs. Some will be shipped out, depending on the price. So just what will the price do? And if null can mine more of what it needs without importing, what happens to Trit prices? Ship prices? Guess right and make a bundle! There's another big factor for low-end mineral prices that is going to hit EVE in the next expansion - racial battlecruisers. Traditionally battlecruisers are the most used ships in the game and by looking at the ways to get them, it would always be more profitable to build one than to get it from the LP store.
After those news I thought that low-ends will skyrocket, but now, I'm not so sure. CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic |
Zakarumit CZ
Zakarum Industries Exiliar Syndicate
47
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:44:00 -
[125] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation. There are sufficient people in Null who do like mining as well to keep the supply in good shape. Especially with the faster mining and the possible price rise. Zakarumit CZ wrote:I really hope CCP can review the Ice changes. I think making ice and anomally you dont basically need to scan is a bad idea. Letting them spawn precisely every 4 hours in only selected systems is even worse idea. Please, make Ice sites just another cosmis signature which people can find anywhere and that people need actually to scan. That would make sense only if barges and exhumers had a utility high for a probe launcher.
If ice was spread across whole new eden randomly, you could just stay in one system or its surroundings and look for ice there. This just force people to move to a specific system. Well, and when you are in your favourite system, its no big deal to have a scanning ship there. Also most miners have an Orca around which can easily squeeze a scanning ship inside. Hell, if ice was spawned as anomalies, you could scan it down with barge/exhumer board scanner. So why the hell still only some particular systems?
|
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:48:00 -
[126] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation. People mined in hi-sec when trit was 0.8 ISk per unit.
But what were the prices of other goods in comparison? Just can't say people mined when trit was 0.8 ISK per unit because it could of been that prices of other goods were relatively low in comparison. It's all about purchasing power there bud. |
Felix Crusher
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:53:00 -
[127] - Quote
I can't help but suspect that while this is a step in the right direction, 0.0 industry will now have to deal with nearly as bad mexallon and isogen shortages instead of tritanium and pyerite shortages. |
Marsan
Emergency and I
98
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:00:00 -
[128] - Quote
I guess I was right to sell off my stocks of T1 ships, and start hoarding fuel blocks. On the plus side cheaper minerals mean cheaper T1 ships and modules. POS fuel may start to really hurt if the Goons and Co start hoarding Ice and hunting ice miners. Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a hopeful small portion of the community. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1778
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:02:00 -
[129] - Quote
Felix Crusher wrote:I can't help but suspect that while this is a step in the right direction, 0.0 industry will go from dealing with horrible tritanium and pyerite shortages to dealing with nearly as bad mexallon and isogen shortages. Maybe but, from the blog
"Gneiss: 3700 Tritanium (+3529), 3700 Mexallon (+3529), 700 Isogen (+357), 171 Zydrine"
So Gneiss is being buffed with those. Nocx seems to be the only one left out...... http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8854
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:07:00 -
[130] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:Malcanis wrote:Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation. People mined in hi-sec when trit was 0.8 ISk per unit. But what were the prices of other goods in comparison? Just can't say people mined when trit was 0.8 ISK per unit because it could of been that prices of other goods were relatively low in comparison. It's all about purchasing power there bud.
Prices were set by the insurance floor. While Trit was ~1 ISK/pu, Zydrine was 3k+ and Mega was about twice that.
When I started playing, Ravens were ~138M Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:09:00 -
[131] - Quote
My preferred place to Eve is null-sec, but it requires me to have a lot of free time to meet the obligations of being in a corp. I haven't had that free time in a long while.
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
So now when work/business/social-life have me very busy I might as well just let my subscription lapse until I have time to be in null-sec again.
I'm a firm believer in adapt or die, but when I and others make the above described adaptation, I worry it will be Eve that dies.
Have I missed the improvement that is going to make it worthwhile to login if hi-sec is all you have time for?
Null sec needs love, I'll be the first to admit it. But you aren't going to coerce people into null or low-sec. Either they lack the time to be part of corps, or they lack the balls/fangs/bloodthirstiness to want to be there.
I have about 45 minutes a night I could spend in high-sec. I spend that 45 minutes in SWTOR.
You don't need to make high-sec the best place, but you do have to make it interesting and worthwhile to log into.
Or God has to create more PvPers. ;-) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8855
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:17:00 -
[132] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese.
Maybe consider adapting?
Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
859
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:18:00 -
[133] - Quote
What if I told you there are renter corps out there who don't expect you to show up for CTAs every other day?
There are actually quite a lot of people who start building a nullsec industrial empire, only to fail miserable because of a multitude of current game mechanics only to either unsubscribe or to live a boring life in boring highsec where talking about the last my little pony episode is the most exciting thing that happens during the day We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:25:00 -
[134] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting?
The only adaptation I can currently make when they move my cheese to null-sec is to quit a job or girlfriend so I have the time to join a corp, get comms situated, figure out the lay of the land, and emergency evac when something I have little control over causes leadership to decide we're now in a new region in a new bloc, and oh by the way, you'll need to get situated on all new comms and forums and auths.
But it is not just moving my cheese, it's also the lack of entertainment value in high-sec. Thus I have adapted by moving to SWTOR and haven't seen a reason to renew my sub which expires in June unless I lose a job/contract. Eve won't miss me, but if I'm any indicator of players' satisfaction with high-sec then God needs to create more PVPers, and fast. Hopefully I'm an anomaly and there will still be an Eve to come back to when I develop the time to be a null-sec resident again. But if I'm typical, that spells bad news until high-sec becomes more entertaining OR worthwhile. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:33:00 -
[135] - Quote
and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec?
Have you played SWTOR yet?
I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
326
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:33:00 -
[136] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Amarr Lab Upgrade: 3(+5), 5(+13), 7(+21) Copying, ME, PE slots
is this correct? cause it looks like a typo to me. |
Onslaughtor
True Slave Foundations Shaktipat Revelators
52
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:35:00 -
[137] - Quote
The think I'm most worried about is that the numbers blog does not include much in the way of common low sec ore, please have a look at them as well. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:41:00 -
[138] - Quote
I like that a number of changes are being made simultaneously, rather than a single change. A single change allows for rather easy market speculation; multiple dependent changes help to keep everyone guessing.
I note, however, that T1 module market & manufacturing, which has been in a moribund state for quite a while, has been neglected yet again. No one uses T1 modules, and so, no one builds them (except to use in T2 module manufacturing). Removing them from NPC drops did absolutely nothing to fix this problem.
Given that most noob industrialists are much more likely to start off by building ammo or T1 modules, rather than jump immediately into building ships and T2 stuff, it seems to me to be a rather significant oversight, in the new player experience.
So, how about including something to encourage the entry-level industrialists? |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
327
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:45:00 -
[139] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:The only adaptation I can currently make when they move my cheese to null-sec is to quit a job or girlfriend so I have the time to join a corp, get comms situated, figure out the lay of the land, and emergency evac when something I have little control over causes leadership to decide we're now in a new region in a new bloc, and oh by the way, you'll need to get situated on all new comms and forums and auths.
First, I would consider joining a corp that wasn't total crud, like you seem to have done in the past. One that is stable and has been around in the same location for a while.
For a slight security deposit of 500M ISK, I could process an aplication for such a corp. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:49:00 -
[140] - Quote
Quote:
For a slight security deposit of 500M ISK, I could process an aplication for such a corp.
classic. Thanks for the chuckle.
loves me mah Goonz! |
|
Echo Mande
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:54:00 -
[141] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Felix Crusher wrote:I can't help but suspect that while this is a step in the right direction, 0.0 industry will go from dealing with horrible tritanium and pyerite shortages to dealing with nearly as bad mexallon and isogen shortages. Maybe but, from the blog "Gneiss: 3700 Tritanium (+3529), 3700 Mexallon (+3529), 700 Isogen (+357), 171 Zydrine" So Gneiss is being buffed with those. Nocx seems to be the only one left out...... Yup, no improved nocx sources. But I think that either Mexallon or maybe Isogen could become the bottleneck for nullsec shipbuilding because as I remember nocx was common enough.
Trit will become a lot more common in nullsec, with Spod containing (by volume) a bit more than Scordite and Crokite and dark Ochre containing as much as Pyroxeres. Bistot will have as much Pyerite as Plagioclase. Gneiss will have almost as much Mexallon as Plagioclase, which should help with that though maybe not enough.
I don't have the numbers but I'm wondering how much a small nullsec grav site will yield in terms of lowends. There's an awfully big Spod in there.
|
herpderp Ostus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:54:00 -
[142] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs.
spoke like a true nulsec carebear |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
327
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:57:00 -
[143] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Quote:
For a slight security deposit of 500M ISK, I could process an aplication for such a corp.
classic. Thanks for the chuckle. loves me mah Goonz! Still the two previous sentances, before what you quoted, is good advice. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons. |
Petrified
Old Men Online TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:58:00 -
[144] - Quote
Overall, the changes sound good. There are a couple of things I would not mind clarification on: With regards to asteroids I assume you are removing static belts as well as static ice belts? If you are removing static belts, leave the grav sites at least for higher grade ores. Are you going to allow moon mining in Worm Holes anytime soon? (I hear that people can't moon mine there)
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:00:00 -
[145] - Quote
Marsan wrote:POS fuel may start to really hurt if the Goons and Co start hoarding Ice and hunting ice miners. Maybe you were asleep during the Ice Interdiction, but the "Goons and Co" have already tried this.
The interdiction itself was implemented well, lots of Macks died, and blue ice and blue ice product prices indeed spiked for a couple of months. But, most of the industrialists maintain large POS fuel stockpiles - ranging from a few months to several years. Keeping the interdiction going long enough to bleed out those stockpiles proved somewhat impractical. Ice miners were also still able to sneak through the interdiction, just enough to keep topping off those stockpiles.
Today, it would be even more impractical, since, post-interdiction, any industrialist who did not have a large stockpile before certainly has one now.
|
Danny Centauri
Huzzah Industries
77
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:03:00 -
[146] - Quote
I think I just e(ve)jactulated this is a industry players wet dream, change means profit! EVE Manufacturing Guide - Simple guides to manufacturing in EVE for both beginners and more experienced players. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:06:00 -
[147] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Quote:
For a slight security deposit of 500M ISK, I could process an aplication for such a corp.
classic. Thanks for the chuckle. loves me mah Goonz! Still the two previous sentances, before what you quoted, is good advice.
Indeed, I just replied to the fun part.
But I haven't met the null-sec alliance a 45 minute a night player would keep satisfied.
So it comes back to what Eve has to entertain me with in brief play, and frankly, SWTOR is winning that battle.
They need to either make high-sec worthwhile OR entertaining. Null-sec can be the best place. Hell, I WANT null-sec to be the best place for when I have free time to be in a corp. But high-sec needs to be worth logging into. If it isn't for resources, then it needs to be for some kind of entertainment. Now If I had a couple of hours a night I could get drunk and do incursions. But 45 minutes is like a mission or 2. Frankly SWTOR missions are more entertaining. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:09:00 -
[148] - Quote
Hmm... I remember long ago when getting enough Trit was one of the bottlenecks in building ships in null. It was easier to get it from high sec, but transporting it still put a limit on how fast we could crank ships out.
So, will the changes to ore composition increase super cap proliferation even further? Or is the current limitation on production due to manufacturing lines & times. Just wondering.... |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:14:00 -
[149] - Quote
I am not convinced that grav sites should be changed into anomalies, and that ice should be placed in anomalies as well. Scanning (using probes) for grav sites and ice seems like a better solution. It provides a means to slow down bots, and provides a little warning/protection for miners who are not afk. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:28:00 -
[150] - Quote
Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Please reconsider this change, as this basically kills mining in wormholes.
Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies. |
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:34:00 -
[151] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1782
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:37:00 -
[152] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Please reconsider this change, as this basically kills mining in wormholes. Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late. With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time. The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies. Here is what you do: Use a team of two miners. Have each double web the other. Align to your POS. When someone shows on grid the fleet commander hits warp. The double webs means you are at warp speed so you warp right away while still traveling sufficiently slow that you stay in range of the roid.
Also many times we keep scouts on the statics and have the scouts keep a probe out. The probe is to see new signatures (possible new WH's) while the scouts see if anyone comes in via the existing statics. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Mithril Ryder
Genstar Inc Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:40:00 -
[153] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined.
I hope you realize how terribly terribly and inexcusably short sighted that is.
Problem 1: Assuming that all of a resource can or will be acquired on a consistent basis over the entire day. Problem 2: Setting a static supply limit on something with an elastic demand. Problem 3: Pointlessly static respawn timers (unless it is 4 hours since the "belt" gets depleted which only aggravates problem 2)
I hope there is an order of magnitude more ice spawns in low and null to compensate for these issues, and tempt more ice miners into low/null. (And no, the existing numbers of belts in low and null are not enough, you need low/null to be a huge temptation, for miners, and the sparse belts/sites currently there still won't be enough, not until ice spikes and people shut down towers in droves.)
I'm surprised that CCP still thinks "static supply, plus dynamic and growing playerbase and thus demand = good". At some point people simply stop buying things when the cost skyrockets. |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:48:00 -
[154] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting?
Spoken like a true null sec zealot, or should I say, CSM rep.
Adapt or die. Sounds like this is what Liz Laser is saying. He plans on dying, which in this case means unsubbing. But I keep forgetting that is what the null sec zealots want.
All those bleating sheep in high sec to just go away, and the game will be a better place, right? |
SamuelK
The Concilium Enterprises Extinction Level Event.
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:49:00 -
[155] - Quote
I am nothing but impressed. I love everything on that list.
Are the insta scan grav belts going to apply to wormhole space as well? Are the zyrdrine amounts on gneiss going to be increased?
also, I see whiners in this thread already.. get in a covetor or a retriever and mine ice in low sec after these changes. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
587
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:51:00 -
[156] - Quote
It was long overdue, but anyway, good changes. |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:51:00 -
[157] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec? Have you played SWTOR yet? I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play.
SWTOR? Seriously? I think that game was the fastest and biggest budget AAA MMO to go from P2P F2P and not to mention Subs dropped like a rock. That game is fairly decent until you complete you character(s) storyline. But honestly, I don't play themepark MMOs anymore I just can't do it anymore. I guess it's because my first MMO was Ultima Online.
But as for ore redistribution I am a little surprised myself. I figured they would add in more minerals to the high end ores but didn't expect them to be filled with Tritanium and Pyerite. It's still sad to see that Omber is still worthless, wonder why they didn't fix that one at least make it more lucrative than Veldspar. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
587
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:53:00 -
[158] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? Spoken like a true null sec zealot, or should I say, CSM rep. Adapt or die. Sounds like this is what Liz Laser is saying. He plans on dying, which in this case means unsubbing. But I keep forgetting that is what the null sec zealots want. All those bleating sheep in high sec to just go away, and the game will be a better place, right?
If they can't understand something as simple as risk vs reward, then good riddance. |
Xessej
Darqsyde Exploration Limited Mass - Effect
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:59:00 -
[159] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) The rest of Eve has this perfect intel tool called local. Wspace doesn't. |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Tribal Band
630
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:00:00 -
[160] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Rivers of tears are going to flow.
tears of joy .... right ??
|
|
Verran Skarne
Shadowfire Enterprises
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:01:00 -
[161] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Please reconsider this change, as this basically kills mining in wormholes. Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late. With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time. The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
+1 to this.
Lower-class wormholes do not have the available content to support more than a handful of pilots unless you factor in mining. This is why a lot of corps that move into the C1s, C2s, and so on will mine the grav sites to make extra money and have something to do. It's not so much of an issue in C5s and C6s where the sleeper sites and capital escalations generate so much more ISK, but it's a very significant chunk of the available income in the lower-class holes.
Unfortunately with this change, that small C1 or C2 corp is going to have to have a dedicated combat/deep space scanner online and at the keyboard whenever they go out mining, or they'll lose their entire mining fleet to the first hostile roam that comes through. That's one less person to run mining lasers, which reduces the amount of ore they can bring in, and the amount of ISK they generate from it.
Unless anomaly (including grav site) spawn rate is significantly increased in lower-end wormholes, it's likely that most of the smaller corps in wormhole space will just give up, and it will become just like nullsec is now - a place where only huge corps and alliances/coalitions, that can have dozens of members online and at any given time, can really afford to play. I'm not sure that's really a good thing for w-space or for the game.
|
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:03:00 -
[162] - Quote
herpderp Ostus wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. spoke like a true nulsec unwilling high sec carebear
Fixed
|
Hardwick Johnson
Particle Men Industries Beyond-Repair
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:07:00 -
[163] - Quote
Fozzie:
I have three main questions.
1) Has any thought been given to seeding all the common ore types to all racial highsec space? Currently, Caldai highsec has no access to isogen, which puts a crimp on manufacturing. All other regions of New Eden contain the 5 common elements needed for basic manufacturing
2) Also, want to make sure I read the part about ice mining correctly: All highsec systems which currently contain ice belts will spawn the ice anom's under Odyssey?
3) Phasing out of grav sites: Does this mean that grav sites that are currently scanned for with probes, will now appear in system scanner like the other anoms? |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:12:00 -
[164] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) In low- and null-sec, you have local to give you perfect intel about who's in the system. So, you see someone who's not blue show up in local, you head back to the station or POS.
Mining in WHs is already more dangerous than mining elsewhere due to the lack of local.
Vincent Athena wrote:Here is what you do: Use a team of two miners. Have each double web the other. Align to your POS. When someone shows on grid the fleet commander hits warp. The double webs means you are at warp speed so you warp right away while still traveling sufficiently slow that you stay in range of the roid. Good idea, but: - Retrievers only have one midslot, no dual web for them. Mackinaws are just a more expensive loss when they inevitably blow up, so not a good option. Procurer would be an option, although you end up taking more than 2x as many trips back to the POS for the dubious added safety. - FC would need very good reflexes to pull it off. I'd wager an SB could have one of them locked and pointed before the FC could finish getting through the context menu to the POS BM. Even if he's got the mouse hovering over it, take your hand off the mouse to eat a sandwich and you're risking a loss. - Requires more than one person or more than one account, options that aren't available to everyone and won't really happen in lower level WHs where you won't have more than one or two people anyway.
Quote:Also many times we keep scouts on the statics and have the scouts keep a probe out. The probe is to see new signatures (possible new WH's) while the scouts see if anyone comes in via the existing statics. Also requires more than one person or more than one account, so possibly not an option in lower class WHs, but good for higher class WHs.
Neither of these points change the fact that moving gravs from sigs to anoms significantly increases the risk of mining in WHs. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
931
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:14:00 -
[165] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs.
You dont understand less isk per tick is good for deflation... And scram frigs mean more dead nullbears Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:14:00 -
[166] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:Liz Laser wrote:and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec? Have you played SWTOR yet? I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play. SWTOR? Seriously? I think that game was the fastest and biggest budget AAA MMO to go from P2P F2P and not to mention Subs dropped like a rock. That game is fairly decent until you complete you character(s) storyline. But honestly, I don't play themepark MMOs anymore I just can't do it anymore. I guess it's because my first MMO was Ultima Online. But as for ore redistribution I am a little surprised myself. I figured they would add in more minerals to the high end ores but didn't expect them to be filled with Tritanium and Pyerite. It's still sad to see that Omber is still worthless, wonder why they didn't fix that one at least make it more lucrative than Veldspar.
At 45 minutes a night I don't devour SWTOR "content" like most players. I still prefer Eve as a game, but not in such small bites.
As far as the ore, they want null to be self sufficient. Heck, when I have the time to be a null-sec dweller *I* want to be self sufficient. But the realities are that high-sec needs a reason to exist until God creates more PvPers. Luckily, most players have more time than me, and incursions may be both the only remaining cheese and the entertainment in high-sec. Just doesn't work for an ultra-casual like me. |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
149
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:15:00 -
[167] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Tippia wrote: Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there.
I'm not entirely clear on how the proposed changes are going to make mining in lowsec more desirable. It's still going to be less secure than high sec for a minor increase in profit and less profitable and less secure than mining in 0.0. Grav sites will be easier to find, I suppose, but I don't think that's going to be enough to sustain lowsec mining. Also: how will the new mining anomalies interact with Faction Warfare space? At present, non-FW anoms do not spawn in FW systems. Will the new mining anoms be suppressed as well, or will they spawn as normal? ...
They won't make mining in lowsec desirable at all. From what I got watching the presentation was that the current grav sites which do spawn in FW space (but have to be found using scan probes) are going to be able to be seen using the on-board scanner instead. That means that while miners will be able to find the sites easily without a scanning ship, so will everyone else. I'd give a mining barge about a 2-3 min life span in lowsec with that system. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:19:00 -
[168] - Quote
Verran Skarne wrote:+1 to this.
Lower-class wormholes do not have the available content to support more than a handful of pilots unless you factor in mining. This is why a lot of corps that move into the C1s, C2s, and so on will mine the grav sites to make extra money and have something to do. It's not so much of an issue in C5s and C6s where the sleeper sites and capital escalations generate so much more ISK, but it's a very significant chunk of the available income in the lower-class holes.
Unfortunately with this change, that small C1 or C2 corp is going to have to have a dedicated combat/deep space scanner online and at the keyboard whenever they go out mining, or they'll lose their entire mining fleet to the first hostile roam that comes through. That's one less person to run mining lasers, which reduces the amount of ore they can bring in, and the amount of ISK they generate from it.
Unless anomaly (including grav site) spawn rate is significantly increased in lower-end wormholes, it's likely that most of the smaller corps in wormhole space will just give up, and it will become just like nullsec is now - a place where only huge corps and alliances/coalitions, that can have dozens of members online and at any given time, can really afford to play. I'm not sure that's really a good thing for w-space or for the game. Excellent point. C1s/C3s can't reasonably support more than one or two people (C2s are less of an issue since they have the WH static to farm). |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:33:00 -
[169] - Quote
I respect that CCP is finally taking a rebalance of industry more seriously and actually doing something to enhance a system which is, by many accounts, terribly broken and imbalanced. In the spirit of full disclosure: I'm a highsec industrialist.
I'd go into nullsec in a heartbeat and mine the ever loving hell out of the minerals down there except it's completely unsafe for an industrialist to get resources in space which is inherently insecure. This is why people used to the drone regions and get the refinable drone materials. They were, at the very least, in PvE ships and had half a chance at defending themselves against PvP attackers.
The only true solution to making industry actually worth doing in nullsec is to make it so that non-combatants have a chance at surving down there. This would, of course, dramatically change the nature of nullsec in the most undesirable of ways for the Church of the Almighty Pew ... but it would instantly shift industry from highsec to nullsec since nullsec is the only place where you can get the best minerals in good abundance (w-space notwithstanding). I mean ... ffs ... you can already find Veldspar rocks down there which don't run out after some guy solo mines that same rock for what would seem like an eternity to any highsec miner.
So, solution time. I see two possibilities.
First, have a whole bunch of highsec pockets all over the place down there but leave the resources alone. That would be kind of ... completely counterintuitive and probably would limit the number of null empires even more than the current sov system does.
Second, NPC cops which respond to standings of whoever holds sovereignty over a system in the same way highsec cops respond to standings of players flying through their space. The NPC cops would need some serious balancing and tweaking, but the idea would make borders relatively secure and would keep goofball small gangs from just wandering through hostile territory unless they get a couple other goofball gangs to go with them so they can fend off the cops as they go. Also, if you're trying to take sovereignty over a system and always have a set number of cops firing on your fleet (and they're focusing fire on your logi's, etc), then one could justify reducing the insane amount of time it takes to grind sov since the difficulty has been shifted away from raw time and toward surviving the cheap &/or elite NPC defense fleets which the sov holder has bought and paid for with an amount of isk as appropriate to the strength of the cops they want. Defender pays for better cops, and you have a harder time taking their space. Because, let's face it, camping a gate three hours a day as a requirement for being part of nullsec is garbage and we all know it. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force Tribal Band
134
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:47:00 -
[170] - Quote
Regarding Outpost upgrades, let me say one word: Super Capitals. Almost no one uses CSMAs because the risk of them being inaccessible and loosing your 25+ billions ISK ship without at least a fighting chance is completely unappealing. What I propose is why not get rid of the CSMA altogether and replace it with a very expensive Outpost upgrade that allows for at least Super Carriers, to be docked? I'm pretty sure this would top most Super Cap pilot's wish list of Outpost upgrades. |
|
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 00:53:00 -
[171] - Quote
removing grav sites in hi-sec removes the incentive for miners to expend their skills into Exploration. Also removes the compromise that gankers need either a scan ship in their gang or fitted probe launcher. (and necessary skills)
I would note that grav sites are highly competed for in hi-sec as they are. These are easily located following downtime. Will there be a corresponding change here? A common practice for many hi-sec mining crews is to remove the high end ores and leave remaining roids. The site does not de-spawn to generate anew elsewhere. Would it not be possible to have the site timeout when there no activity within after an hour or so?
And since it will be asked anyway. removing grav sites, lead the option for skill re-allocation from astrometic investment? |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
616
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:01:00 -
[172] - Quote
Seriously great work guys, these are AMAZING changes that everyone has been waiting for and I cannot wait to see them implemented. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
859
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:05:00 -
[173] - Quote
Quote:As far as the ore, they want null to be self sufficient. Heck, when I have the time to be a null-sec dweller *I* want to be self sufficient. But the realities are that high-sec needs a reason to exist until God creates more PvPers. Luckily, most players have more time than me, and incursions may be both the only remaining cheese and the entertainment in high-sec. Just doesn't work for an ultra-casual like me.
nobody ever wanted nullsec to be self sufficient, we wanted nullsec to be a great place to start an industrial venture
with the current mechanics, only production from T2 BPOs and Production of (Super)Capitals were viable, with the changes, almost everything makes sense to produce in 00
JFs will no longer travel empty on their way to Jita, thats a great change
We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Titan Chain
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:08:00 -
[174] - Quote
It seems your taking the long way around.
You have the power to simply shutdown HS, so rather than just transfer all the wealth to Null, it would be easier to just shut it down leaving Null and its denizens free reign. Has the added benefit, that you wouldnt have to spend time concocting fantasies such as that justification you used..
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
859
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:08:00 -
[175] - Quote
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:Words.
lolnope, thats one of the worst ideas ever
a nullsec full of miners is not a nullsec full of sheep to prey on, its a nullsec full of sheep, well aware of wolves out there and well connected with each other
We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1657
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:13:00 -
[176] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. You dont understand less isk per tick is good for deflation... And scram frigs mean more dead nullbears
Sure, those are upsides for the game.....but they won't happen because high sec has much safer isk making. Forsaken hubs are litterally on of the few really good null pve isk makers, it they change, (regardless of what happenes to sanctums and havens), fewer people will do them. That = less people to kill in null.
The effect will be like the original anomalie nerf (when null sec isk makers FLOODED FW, wormholes and high sec incursions) ie less people taking the risk. People said the same thing back then "yay it will be great for inflation). Wrong, the isk makers will just shift to places they can't be as easily killed.
Null sec needs a grunt level isk making buff, not a nerf.
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
859
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:18:00 -
[177] - Quote
Quote:Null sec needs a grunt level isk making buff, not a nerf.
i heard they were changing hacking sites in a rather interesting way
justsayin We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:20:00 -
[178] - Quote
More R64 and less demand on technetium.
+1 on less demand on technetium.
-1 on more R64.
We will head back to 2008 when the R64's created a monopoly for big alliances and even MORE stagnation.
|
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:28:00 -
[179] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:Words. lolnope, thats one of the worst ideas ever a nullsec full of miners is not a nullsec full of sheep to prey on, its a nullsec full of sheep, well aware of wolves out there and well connected with each other
Reread what I wrote. I didn't say it should make the whole place secure - just less insecure. If you want industry to be worth a damn, then you need defenseless ships in space to get the things to make it happen. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
859
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:34:00 -
[180] - Quote
Quote:Reread what I wrote. I didn't say it should make the whole place secure - just less insecure. If you want industry to be worth a damn, then you need defenseless ships in space to get the things to make it happen.
barges are not defenseless
there are intel channels
there are bubbles at the gate
there are cyno jammers
there is instant intel from local chat
there are drag bubbles set up from all gates
there are home defence fleets of cheap and easy to skill T1 cruisers
there are carefully planed traps
We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
|
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:37:00 -
[181] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote: barges are not defenseless there are intel channels there are bubbles at the gate there are cyno jammers there is instant intel from local chat there are drag bubbles set up from all gates there are home defence fleets of cheap and easy to skill T1 cruisers there are carefully planed traps there is so much more you can do to defend yourself
Barges are defenseless - five drones can't fend off a single PvP ship of any kind. All those other things require tons of people camping gates to defend their own borders instead of doing things which are actually fun. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
575
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:41:00 -
[182] - Quote
i must say i am really really really unhappy about having to rescan the 60k+ moons we have scanned
UUGH |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
575
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:42:00 -
[183] - Quote
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote: I'd go into nullsec in a heartbeat and mine the ever loving hell out of the minerals down there except it's completely unsafe for an industrialist to get resources in space which is inherently insecure.
somehow we'll manage without the bedwetting contingent
nullsec isn't supposed to be automatically safe |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
575
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:43:00 -
[184] - Quote
a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:46:00 -
[185] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive
I can't argue with you about the predator/prey thing, but if you want industry in nullsec ... this's what you need. Shift a few guys from the defenders of the miners into the miners themselves with the extra defense. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
576
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:49:00 -
[186] - Quote
i disagree; once properly balanced the smarter miners can realize that the riches of a/b/c outweigh the occasional barge loss
risk is a cost and the people in nullsec will be the ones who can properly value it not run from it screaming in terror |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
860
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:55:00 -
[187] - Quote
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:Gilbaron wrote: barges are not defenseless there are intel channels there are bubbles at the gate there are cyno jammers there is instant intel from local chat there are drag bubbles set up from all gates there are home defence fleets of cheap and easy to skill T1 cruisers there are carefully planed traps there is so much more you can do to defend yourself
Barges are defenseless - five drones can't fend off a single PvP ship of any kind. All those other things require tons of people camping gates to defend their own borders instead of doing things which are actually fun.
intel channels - just watch them and report anyone you see in your system who does not belong there - extra effort: .2% attention
bubbles at the gate - yeah, you are correct, setting up a bubble takes like two minutes, TWO !!!! - extra effort: less than .1% of the time required to mine
cyno jammers - yeah, you are correct, these don't come for free. setting up one requires some work, like 60 minutes for each, and another 20 per month after that, also some ISK. extra effort: 600m / month, 275m initial cost and some 20 minutes of work per month - BUT: what if i told you you don't need to jam every system ? especially not in the deepest regions of space, those that are usually rented ?
intel from local - see above, another .2% attention !
drag bubbles from all gates - yeah, another 5 minutes per grav site, horrible !
home defence fleets - yeah, effort, you are right, how horrible ! (what if i told you it's actually fun ?)
carefully planned traps - yeah, think of all those dieing enemys, horrible, think of their children. and the moment your trap snaps, think of it ! (doesn't it sound like fun ?) We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
7898
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 01:59:00 -
[188] - Quote
Wheee
|
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4733
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:01:00 -
[189] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i disagree; once properly balanced the smarter miners can realize that the riches of a/b/c outweigh the occasional barge loss
risk is a cost and the people in nullsec will be the ones who can properly value it not run from it screaming in terror You're not making any sense. Maybe you're just trolling, since, well, goons do that, but I seriously doubt any intelligent miner is going to go "welp, if that neut that just entered local warps in and cynos a fleet on my ass to blow me up, that's just the cost of operation."
He's going to warp to a safe pos because not getting your ship blown up is a lot more cost effective.
EDIT: Or maybe I misunderstood what you said. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:01:00 -
[190] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? Spoken like a true null sec zealot, or should I say, CSM rep. Adapt or die. Sounds like this is what Liz Laser is saying. He plans on dying, which in this case means unsubbing. But I keep forgetting that is what the null sec zealots want. All those bleating sheep in high sec to just go away, and the game will be a better place, right? If they can't understand something as simple as risk vs reward, then good riddance.
Totally ok with risk vs reward. Would settle for Hi-sec being ENTERTAINING, especially for those of us with small chunks of playtime.
Like I said in another post... I WANT null-sec to be the best place for when I have time for it. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4733
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:03:00 -
[191] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Totally ok with risk vs reward. Would settle for Hi-sec being ENTERTAINING, especially for those of us with small chunks of playtime.
Like I said in another post... I WANT null-sec to be the best place for when I have time for it. You're perfectly capable of making it entertaining now. Your imagination is more of a limiting factor here, really. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:27:00 -
[192] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Totally ok with risk vs reward. Would settle for Hi-sec being ENTERTAINING, especially for those of us with small chunks of playtime.
Like I said in another post... I WANT null-sec to be the best place for when I have time for it. You're perfectly capable of making it entertaining now. Your imagination is more of a limiting factor here, really.
Perhaps you're right. If you read my bio I never claimed to be a genius. Let's just hope the rest of high-sec has imagination, or big enough chunks of time for fun like incursions.
I'm totally ok with the idea that I can unsub until I have the free time null-sec requires, (even if it is through my own lack of imagination and I spend that 45 minutes a night watching episodes of Firefly again).
What would really suck is if lots of other high-sec people also see high-sec becoming unrewarding. That would mean no Eve for me to come back to when i develop leisure time again.
No one has ever succeeded at converting large numbers of carebears into PvPers (at least no one with death penalties as high as Eve's). They'll just go elsewhere once they see their playspace becoming unworthwhile.
And pages later I guess no one *can* point me to ANY Odyssey improvements that benefit or entertain high sec players? Or did that question get lost in the shuffle?
|
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
330
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:42:00 -
[193] - Quote
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:Gilbaron wrote: barges are not defenseless there are intel channels there are bubbles at the gate there are cyno jammers there is instant intel from local chat there are drag bubbles set up from all gates there are home defence fleets of cheap and easy to skill T1 cruisers there are carefully planed traps there is so much more you can do to defend yourself
Barges are defenseless - five drones can't fend off a single PvP ship of any kind. All those other things require tons of people camping gates to defend their own borders instead of doing things which are actually fun. A single barge has only 5 drones, now multiply that by 5 to 10 barges for a really good mining op and what do you have? Also have to mention the two or three battlecrusiers to blow up the battleship rats that sometimes spawn in. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons. |
Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
131
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 02:58:00 -
[194] - Quote
So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield. X |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:06:00 -
[195] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:A single barge has only 5 drones, now multiply that by 5 to 10 barges for a really good mining op and what do you have? Also have to mention the two or three battlecrusiers to blow up the battleship rats that sometimes spawn in.
In theory, sure, but the attackers wouldn't come with just a couple guys. Goons should know this as well as anyone. Giving the miners a bit of extra defense seems like carebearism, sure, but it'd really keep the miners working (even though they'd still be on their toes).
Bear in mind I'm in highsec and I'm not saying, "omg nerf null and boost high because i'm a derp," like a lot of people I've heard. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:12:00 -
[196] - Quote
Galphii wrote:So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield.
You can't drag people out of high-sec.
However, your suggestion is an excellent one if you're a null-sec miner who simply wants less market competition.
But you'll just make some other hi-sec activity their plan B if you chase them out of hi-sec mining.
The number of miners who will venture out of high-sec and stay in low and null is insignificant.
The number that will remain MINERS in low and null is even more insignificant. It makes much more sense to PvE (ratting,plexing,etc.) and earn your iskies in a ship that can *somewhat* fight back. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:15:00 -
[197] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Galphii wrote:So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield. You can't drag people out of high-sec. Why do people keep saying this? Do you seriously think that people won't go where the isk is? Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
131
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:27:00 -
[198] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:You can't drag people out of high-sec. No, but you can entice them with more profit. Highsec is the training ground - let real profit be made elsewhere.
Liz Laser wrote:However, your suggestion is an excellent one if you're a null-sec miner who simply wants less market competition. Exactly - if people want more money from mining, they go to nullsec and do it. Also, I don't mine.
Liz Laser wrote:The number of miners who will venture out of high-sec and stay in low and null is insignificant. Wow, you're amazing. Can you give me the lottery numbers while you're at it? X |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:28:00 -
[199] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Galphii wrote:So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield. You can't drag people out of high-sec. Why do people keep saying this? Do you seriously think that people won't go where the isk is?
No they won't. What do you think would happen if they removed all belts in high sec? Think they would go down into lowsec? No. Many would quit, and those who don't would stop the mining profession and do something else. Highsec mining exists for a reason don't you think? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:32:00 -
[200] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Galphii wrote:So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield. You can't drag people out of high-sec. Why do people keep saying this? Do you seriously think that people won't go where the isk is? No they won't. What do you think would happen if they removed all belts in high sec? Think they would go down into lowsec? No. Many would quit, and those who don't would stop the mining profession and do something else. Highsec mining exists for a reason don't you think? That has exactly nothing to do with what I said. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
|
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:35:00 -
[201] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Aria Ning wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Galphii wrote:So, no changes to the regular belts in lowsec. People will have to use anoms and hope for spod of gneiss to show up I suppose.
I suggest removing the +5% & +10% rocks from highsec to provide further incentive for miners to go elsewhere for better yield. You can't drag people out of high-sec. Why do people keep saying this? Do you seriously think that people won't go where the isk is? No they won't. What do you think would happen if they removed all belts in high sec? Think they would go down into lowsec? No. Many would quit, and those who don't would stop the mining profession and do something else. Highsec mining exists for a reason don't you think? That has exactly nothing to do with what I said.
It does, but 100% not exactly. However, you're implying that players will go where the isk is where if there is isk in low/nullsec mining then they will venture there to mine. What I am saying is many won't. |
Lolmer
Yahoo Inc Caffeine Nicotine and Hate
98
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:35:00 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance.
Why make ex-Gravimetric-now-Ore-Sites so easy to scan down? Finding valuable ore to mine should take some effort and should not be effortless (one extra-button press to basically make it a warp-able point like an asteroid belt). |
Lolmer
Yahoo Inc Caffeine Nicotine and Hate
98
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:40:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:When Odyssey is released, the current static (and massive) ice belts spread throughout space will be removed from the game, and replaced by a series of Ore Anomalies that will spawn and respawn only in systems that previously contained the aforementioned static ice belts.
+wormholes, please. It's silly that the solar systems found via wormholes have no ice, ever. No frozen water+ in any of them? Ever? Not even floating in from other systems as a comet (old topic)? You now have them an anomaly (cosmic signature would be better so that it needs to be scanned down and isn't a free 100% hit ;)), so having them randomly appear in wormholes is easy. :)
Might as well make the ice randomly show up everywhere, though maybe still limiting the ice type by region, and not in specific systems so that you must go hunting for it. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:41:00 -
[204] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:It does, but 100% not exactly. However, you're implying that players will go where the isk is where if there is isk in low/nullsec mining then they will venture there to mine. What I am saying is many won't. Well of course many won't. I guess I should have said "do you seriously think nobody will go where the isk is?" The question is if many will. And I'm reasonably sure that yes, many people will. Even if not, nullsec and lowsec mining does need to be made more valuable than highsec. The casual player shouldn't be concerned about isk/hr, and those who want maximum isk/hr in the safety of highsec are the lowest common denominator and CCP shouldn't cater to them. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
926
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:42:00 -
[205] - Quote
There is an astonishing about of tears in this thread. Tears from nullsec ratters, tears from highsec miners and industrialists, the whole nine yards.
Probably means Fozzie did something right.
ANYWAY
Lord Haur wrote:Also eagerly awaiting the Akita T thread detailing where CCP has ****** up the new T2 moon mineral requirements to move the bottleneck to (say) Mercury.
It's funny you should say that, because awhile back I duplicated Akita T's work in a manner that would let me predict the results of any changes like the ones CCP just did. Incidentally, R64s ARE the new bottleneck. BUT, feedback for Fozzie: Check Hafnium again, maybe Mercury too. Hafnium especially is dangerous, and could create a "New tech", where we have the four R64s plus Hafnium capturing the value. Given the point of the change was to shift value away from the regional Technetium, I doubt the intent was to turn Hafnium into the new Technetium. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:42:00 -
[206] - Quote
Lolmer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Why make ex-Gravimetric-now-Ore-Sites so easy to scan down? Finding valuable ore to mine should take some effort and should not be effortless (one extra-button press to basically make it a warp-able point like an asteroid belt).
I agree.
Although I didn't like the scan process itself too much (thought it took too much time just to only fine 1 gravsite out of 5-6 systems). I was hoping that they would instead have probes scan for certain anomalies. At least this would have cut the time down of scanning sites and somewhat allow someone who was mining in null/lowsec to be informed of an intruder scanning down in the system for kills. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
926
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:50:00 -
[207] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:Lolmer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Why make ex-Gravimetric-now-Ore-Sites so easy to scan down? Finding valuable ore to mine should take some effort and should not be effortless (one extra-button press to basically make it a warp-able point like an asteroid belt). I agree. Although I didn't like the scan process itself too much (thought it took too much time just to only fine 1 gravsite out of 5-6 systems). I was hoping that they would instead have probes scan for certain anomalies. At least this would have cut the time down of scanning sites and somewhat allow someone who was mining in null/lowsec to be informed of an intruder scanning down in the system for kills.
The fact that you had to probe them out cut both ways, since it made you quite a lot safer by raising the bar for gankers to get at you. Mining may be more valuable now, but it will be more dangerous as well. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:51:00 -
[208] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Aria Ning wrote:It does, but 100% not exactly. However, you're implying that players will go where the isk is where if there is isk in low/nullsec mining then they will venture there to mine. What I am saying is many won't. Well of course many won't. I guess I should have said "do you seriously think nobody will go where the isk is?" The question is if many will. And I'm reasonably sure that yes, many people will. Even if not, nullsec and lowsec mining does need to be made more valuable than highsec. The casual player shouldn't be concerned about isk/hr, and those who want maximum isk/hr in the safety of highsec are the lowest common denominator and CCP shouldn't cater to them.
I agree that low/nullsec needs to be more valuable than highsec no doubt. But we're talking about mining here. Most people who do mine, mine while they're preoccupied with something else. I mean mining isn't exactly fun science. However, you can't semi-afk in low/nullsec mining, especially not alone (well maybe nullsec you might be able to semi--afk). Which is why i think many will not make or do the transition from high-sec mining to low/nullsec and with nullsec. And I am not even sure the rewards are even enough to incite such a transition. |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:53:00 -
[209] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Liz Laser wrote:and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec? Have you played SWTOR yet? I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play. SWTOR? Seriously? I think that game was the fastest and biggest budget AAA MMO to go from P2P F2P and not to mention Subs dropped like a rock. That game is fairly decent until you complete you character(s) storyline. But honestly, I don't play themepark MMOs anymore I just can't do it anymore. I guess it's because my first MMO was Ultima Online. But as for ore redistribution I am a little surprised myself. I figured they would add in more minerals to the high end ores but didn't expect them to be filled with Tritanium and Pyerite. It's still sad to see that Omber is still worthless, wonder why they didn't fix that one at least make it more lucrative than Veldspar. At 45 minutes a night I don't devour SWTOR "content" like most players. I still prefer Eve as a game, but not in such small bites. As far as the ore, they want null to be self sufficient. Heck, when I have the time to be a null-sec dweller *I* want to be self sufficient. But the realities are that high-sec needs a reason to exist until God creates more PvPers. Luckily, most players have more time than me, and incursions may be both the only remaining cheese and the entertainment in high-sec. Just doesn't work for an ultra-casual like me.
Liz, you have to remember, you are trying to converse with a zealot. Facts and logic can never defeat ideology.
In their view of the Eve world, you have no place in it, and the game is better off if you and your kind unsub, and leave the game for the "real" players. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:53:00 -
[210] - Quote
People go to null sec to see what the heck all the fuss is. At least i did.
People STAY in null-sec because they like adventure and teamwork.
That's just my opinion, but as another poster said, take the belts out of high-sec and you'll see I'm right.
EVERYONE has had a chance to do null-sec.
EVERYONE knows there are corps and alliances that will replace your lost PvP ships.
If they haven't come out to null yet, they just aren't going to. Heck, fly the right ships and corps/alliances will pay you more than your ship is worth.
If they didn't stay it wasn't nearly as much about profit as many of you seem to think. They weren't weighing risk/profit. Almost assuredly they were measuring obligations/fun or for the more wallet-minded obligations/profit.
The obligations of teamwork are what cause so many to return to high-sec.
You can nerf hi-sec all you want. But God is going to have to create more PvPers for CCP to stay in business, because hi-sec miners are not going to be your mineral slaves AND do CTAs, and do home defense, and fuel bridges, and relocate to new war fronts, and everything else that's involved in being null-sec. The people who come and STAY in null-sec are people who like to see stuff explode.
|
|
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:54:00 -
[211] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Lolmer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Why make ex-Gravimetric-now-Ore-Sites so easy to scan down? Finding valuable ore to mine should take some effort and should not be effortless (one extra-button press to basically make it a warp-able point like an asteroid belt). I agree. Although I didn't like the scan process itself too much (thought it took too much time just to only fine 1 gravsite out of 5-6 systems). I was hoping that they would instead have probes scan for certain anomalies. At least this would have cut the time down of scanning sites and somewhat allow someone who was mining in null/lowsec to be informed of an intruder scanning down in the system for kills. The fact that you had to probe them out cut both ways, since it made you quite a lot safer by raising the bar for gankers to get at you. Mining may be more valuable now, but it will be more dangerous as well.
Right. The probing bought you additional time to get out of dodge if you saw someone out with combat probes on your D-scan. But this systems just makes it even riskier to mine. In fact I think the scanning system itself may defeat the ore redistribution's purpose, meaning you're getting more reward but a lot more risk, the risk might even outweigh the reward. |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:55:00 -
[212] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:The casual player shouldn't be concerned about isk/hr, and those who want maximum isk/hr in the safety of highsec are the lowest common denominator and CCP shouldn't cater to them.
You'll note that CCP is specifically catering to low/null miners already with the mineral changes to the ores in those areas. Not a bad thing, but I feel it doesn't go far enough to make lowsec industry worth really pursuing at all levels. The individual hangars in a POS also go a long way to helping corp members trust each other a bit (since they can trust that their things won't be taken quite so readily), so I expect corps will get relatively larger after that gets implemented.
Besides, my original argument as a whole isn't just centered on mining and industry. Some people like to camp gates and set up border traps ... but to have it almost be a requirement that lots of people be on every border gate at all times seems, for lack of a better word, asinine to me. I can accept that CCP wants things to be player-driven, but it's also a game and some concessions have to be made for null to truly be fun to people who can't afford to spend all their free time playing EVE.
NPC security of a power level high enough to keep random small bands out of your claimed space should be done - and it should cost significantly to keep the power level of those NPC's lower in all but your highly-valued systems. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 03:59:00 -
[213] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Liz Laser wrote:and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec? Have you played SWTOR yet? I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play. SWTOR? Seriously? I think that game was the fastest and biggest budget AAA MMO to go from P2P F2P and not to mention Subs dropped like a rock. That game is fairly decent until you complete you character(s) storyline. But honestly, I don't play themepark MMOs anymore I just can't do it anymore. I guess it's because my first MMO was Ultima Online. But as for ore redistribution I am a little surprised myself. I figured they would add in more minerals to the high end ores but didn't expect them to be filled with Tritanium and Pyerite. It's still sad to see that Omber is still worthless, wonder why they didn't fix that one at least make it more lucrative than Veldspar. At 45 minutes a night I don't devour SWTOR "content" like most players. I still prefer Eve as a game, but not in such small bites. As far as the ore, they want null to be self sufficient. Heck, when I have the time to be a null-sec dweller *I* want to be self sufficient. But the realities are that high-sec needs a reason to exist until God creates more PvPers. Luckily, most players have more time than me, and incursions may be both the only remaining cheese and the entertainment in high-sec. Just doesn't work for an ultra-casual like me. Liz, you have to remember, you are trying to converse with a zealot. Facts and logic can never defeat ideology. In their view of the Eve world, you have no place in it, and the game is better off if you and your kind unsub, and leave the game for the "real" players.
The funny thing is the moment I lose a job/contract/girlfriend I'll be back in null-sec with such zealots. Null is where I want to be when i have the time to be a good corp member. But I recognize that CCP needs carebear subscribers, unless Dust 514 becomes such a hit they can decide to make the whole game null-sec. Maybe that's their plan, who knows? |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:03:00 -
[214] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i must say i am really really really unhappy about having to rescan the 60k+ moons we have scanned
UUGH Wow, you Goons scanned 60k+ moons? What a carebearish thing to do.... lol. ;) |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:04:00 -
[215] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Lolmer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Why make ex-Gravimetric-now-Ore-Sites so easy to scan down? Finding valuable ore to mine should take some effort and should not be effortless (one extra-button press to basically make it a warp-able point like an asteroid belt). I agree. Although I didn't like the scan process itself too much (thought it took too much time just to only fine 1 gravsite out of 5-6 systems). I was hoping that they would instead have probes scan for certain anomalies. At least this would have cut the time down of scanning sites and somewhat allow someone who was mining in null/lowsec to be informed of an intruder scanning down in the system for kills. The fact that you had to probe them out cut both ways, since it made you quite a lot safer by raising the bar for gankers to get at you. Mining may be more valuable now, but it will be more dangerous as well.
Gankers...in the deep null sec alliance enclaves...giggle.
BTW, on a different note, that quarter trillion you invested in ice products, on the strength of just the screen shot of the Pax presentation, guess that turned out pretty well for you. Most people would suggest that a 250 billion investment in something like that would be called a crazy gamble, unworthy of a great economic mind. Unless of course, you had some way of knowing that it was a pretty safe bet.
In completely unrelated news, a dev was fired this past summer for giving away key info to null sec alliance members. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
927
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:09:00 -
[216] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:Right. The probing bought you additional time to get out of dodge if you saw someone out with combat probes on your D-scan. But this systems just makes it even riskier to mine. In fact I think the scanning system itself may defeat the ore redistribution's purpose, meaning you're getting more reward but a lot more risk, the risk might even outweigh the reward.
It takes ~30 seconds for me to get to an anomaly from the time I jump in to the time that I drop out of warp in the anomaly, even if the anomaly is particularly close to my in-gate (less than 1AU). That's the time necessary to run the system scanner (10 seconds), during which I d-scan to determine the range they're at, the time to choose the anomaly (2-3 seconds), and then the time to enter and exit warp. If they're further away, they're safer. On top of that, gravimetric anomalies are a hell of a lot larger than ratting anomalies and the warp-in point for an intruder may not actually be anywhere near the points you'd sit miners at to mine from, adding extra safety.
Basically, this is not a tremendous increase in risk. It's the difference between "a gang can't threaten you at all unless they have probes" and "a gang can maybe threaten you, if they're fast on the scanner and you're paying an exceptionally low amount of attention."
Dilbert HighSeed wrote: Gankers...in the deep null sec alliance enclaves...giggle.
BTW, on a different note, that quarter trillion you invested in ice products, on the strength of just the screen shot of the Pax presentation, guess that turned out pretty well for you. Most people would suggest that a 250 billion investment in something like that would be called a crazy gamble, unworthy of a great economic mind. Unless of course, you had some way of knowing that it was a pretty safe bet.
In completely unrelated news, a dev was fired this past summer for giving away key info to null sec alliance members.
The PAX East presentation featured a picture of a barge mining ice in context of resource rebalancing. Given that ice was at all time lows it was an extremely safe buy.
Would you like to make any more bull**** unfounded accusations? Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
121
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:09:00 -
[217] - Quote
Still going with the passive income model for moon goo aye?
Why on Earth don't you implement the moon ring mining system? The redistribution of moons and demands will do absolutely nothing to stop one entity controlling one section (jump drives negate any kind of distance) and it's still passive income.
The mining changes do nothing to actually make mining interesting. It needs a far more interactive approach, how about having to do a deep scan of the asteroid, having a 3 dimensional render of the composition of the roid show up and you direct your lasers to the spot you want to mine, so the people who are the quickest at it can get the highest yield ore. I'd make the actual yield on miners a lot more as well.
People who live in low sec don't mine, nor will they ever bloody mine, they'll just spend more isk on ships, become more risk averse, continue flying nothing but frigates because a BC costs 100mill isk fully fit.
Same thing goes for Ice mining as well, it won't encourage people to do anything because it's fun, it'll only make people do it because it's profitable, so they grind and grind, get bored, leave the game.
I'd be much happier if ice was all mined by bots, freeing up people to do pvp. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
927
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:12:00 -
[218] - Quote
Akturous wrote:Still going with the passive income model for moon goo aye?
Why on Earth don't you implement the moon ring mining system? The redistribution of moons and demands will do absolutely nothing to stop one entity controlling one section (jump drives negate any kind of distance) and it's still passive income.
Quote:
Phase Two is not the end of our plans for Tech Two industry and mineral collection. We are not entirely satisfied with the mechanics of moon mining itself and would like to make changes in the future to provide more opportunities for active gameplay that can be disrupted by small groups of pilots. However we are confident that Phase Two will both improve the health of the game as a whole and lay a stronger foundation for the future iterations.
If I could make this twenty point font and bright red, I would. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:12:00 -
[219] - Quote
If you think risk/reward is the only thing keeping miners out of null, you still have to figure the costs/frustrations they face as they learn null sec and lose hulks in the process.
You'll need to jack up the reward a LOT to get them to stay even though they lost 3 hulks in a week.
And if the reward is THAT high, the main beneficiaries will be the people who already dwell in null-sec with multiple accounts and know how to get things done in null.
*I* think people do null for the adventure and teamwork.
I think making null more rewarding is going to lead to 98% of those additinal rewards being seen by the people who already are null-sec players.
That's fine with me as long as high-sec bears keeps paying their subscriptions. |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
121
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:16:00 -
[220] - Quote
mynnna wrote: If I could make this twenty point font and bright red, I would.
So does this mean they'll remove moon mining from pos's competely? No they won't and until they do it will be failed. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:17:00 -
[221] - Quote
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:The casual player shouldn't be concerned about isk/hr, and those who want maximum isk/hr in the safety of highsec are the lowest common denominator and CCP shouldn't cater to them. You'll note that CCP is specifically catering to low/null miners already with the mineral changes to the ores in those areas. No, I realize that. I'm addressing those who are complaining about it.
Decarthado Aurgnet wrote:Some people like to camp gates and set up border traps ... but to have it almost be a requirement that lots of people be on every border gate at all times seems, for lack of a better word, asinine to me. It's not a requirement at all. It's pretty unnecessary. Many players will camp gates, but it's not to protect miners and ratters, it's mainly just to get kills. The miners and ratters really should be looking out for themselves.
Frankly the "semi-AFK" argument is the one worth addressing, and I definitely can understand easily why someone would choose to do so.
The thing is, if you're semi-AFK mining, you've already chosen to forgo maximum isk/hr in exchange for convenience. So again, why should CCP cater to you when you don't even cater to yourself? Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
927
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:18:00 -
[222] - Quote
Akturous wrote:mynnna wrote:Akturous wrote:Still going with the passive income model for moon goo aye?
Why on Earth don't you implement the moon ring mining system? The redistribution of moons and demands will do absolutely nothing to stop one entity controlling one section (jump drives negate any kind of distance) and it's still passive income.
Quote:
Phase Two is not the end of our plans for Tech Two industry and mineral collection. We are not entirely satisfied with the mechanics of moon mining itself and would like to make changes in the future to provide more opportunities for active gameplay that can be disrupted by small groups of pilots. However we are confident that Phase Two will both improve the health of the game as a whole and lay a stronger foundation for the future iterations.
If I could make this twenty point font and bright red, I would. So does this mean they'll remove moon mining from pos's competely? No they won't and until they do it will be failed.
Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Calathorn Virpio
Golden Construction Inc. Legacy Rising
237
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:19:00 -
[223] - Quote
you guys have once again confirmed how insane you really are
(never change) CCP are the French gate camping=/=PVP everything else is fair game |
Decarthado Aurgnet
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:20:00 -
[224] - Quote
Akturous wrote:So does this mean they'll remove moon mining from pos's competely? No they won't and until they do it will be failed.
CCP has been quoted as saying they don't like the idea of passive income in general. Moon mining mechanics, datacores, etc ... they're working on ways to make it all be active sources of income. |
Ronan Teisdari
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:23:00 -
[225] - Quote
The names for the new Composites and Intermediates are terrible. They don't fit in with the rest of the names, nor do they conform to existing materials.
Thulihaf? ProMerc?
Really? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:24:00 -
[226] - Quote
I dare you to come up with a definition of "passive income" that actually sounds passive and includes moon mining. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4734
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:25:00 -
[227] - Quote
Ronan Teisdari wrote:The names for the new Composites and Intermediates are terrible. They don't fit in with the rest of the names, nor do they conform to existing materials.
Thulihaf? ProMerc?
Really?
devblog wrote:Please note that all names for the new materials and composites are placeholders. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
580
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:28:00 -
[228] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote: Gankers...in the deep null sec alliance enclaves...giggle.
BTW, on a different note, that quarter trillion you invested in ice products, on the strength of just the screen shot of the Pax presentation, guess that turned out pretty well for you. Most people would suggest that a 250 billion investment in something like that would be called a crazy gamble, unworthy of a great economic mind. Unless of course, you had some way of knowing that it was a pretty safe bet.
In completely unrelated news, a dev was fired this past summer for giving away key info to null sec alliance members.
constable, that consulting detective claims to have solved this case through analysis of tobacco ash
we all know such a gamble would be unworthy of a great detective mind
inspector Lestrade, arrest that goon |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
580
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:31:00 -
[229] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:i disagree; once properly balanced the smarter miners can realize that the riches of a/b/c outweigh the occasional barge loss
risk is a cost and the people in nullsec will be the ones who can properly value it not run from it screaming in terror You're not making any sense. Maybe you're just trolling, since, well, goons do that, but I seriously doubt any intelligent miner is going to go "welp, if that neut that just entered local warps in and cynos a fleet on my ass to blow me up, that's just the cost of operation." He's going to warp to a safe pos because not getting your ship blown up is a lot more cost effective. EDIT: Or maybe I misunderstood what you said. its the misunderstanding bit it is that nullsec miners will not cower at the risk they **** up and don't safe up, our bedwetting friend believed that miners cannot tolerate the least bit of risk, even just risk they themselves **** up
the only option a miner has and should have in the presence of predators is to flee |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
580
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:33:00 -
[230] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:i must say i am really really really unhappy about having to rescan the 60k+ moons we have scanned
UUGH Wow, you Goons scanned 60k+ moons? What a carebearish thing to do.... lol. ;) turns out when you're the best alliance of the last decade and conquer a new region all the goddamn time you accumulate a lot of scans |
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
928
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:42:00 -
[231] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:i must say i am really really really unhappy about having to rescan the 60k+ moons we have scanned
UUGH Wow, you Goons scanned 60k+ moons? What a carebearish thing to do.... lol. ;) turns out when you're the best alliance of the last decade and conquer a new region all the goddamn time you accumulate a lot of scans
Yeah our "conquer and live in every region" bucket list is missing like, the drone regions.
And that's it. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
131
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 04:52:00 -
[232] - Quote
With ice providing 80% of the pos fuel needs, there's going to be a major price increase in ice 'cause mining in lowsec is imminently hazardous. The problem is that mining is still incredibly dull, and promotes afk-ism, and people generally don't like doing that outside of HS. X |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 05:00:00 -
[233] - Quote
Galphii wrote:With ice providing 80% of the pos fuel needs, there's going to be a major price increase in ice 'cause mining in lowsec is imminently hazardous. The problem is that mining is still incredibly dull, and promotes afk-ism, and people generally don't like doing that outside of HS.
Eventually, they're going to have to make it so that mining (including ice mining) is all about moving around to find asteroids and then rushing to the asteroid to zap it first and it instantly goes into cargo and then you and your bros take off looking for more asteroids.
Make it frenetic and competitive, even in high-sec.
As long as we can afk stuff, we will. But there's no particular benefit to the game of afk players EXCEPT for those ever important subscription fees. |
Nick Bete
The Scope Gallente Federation
205
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 05:17:00 -
[234] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Totally ok with risk vs reward. Would settle for Hi-sec being ENTERTAINING, especially for those of us with small chunks of playtime.
Like I said in another post... I WANT null-sec to be the best place for when I have time for it.
Perhaps you're right. If you read my bio I never claimed to be a genius. Let's just hope the rest of high-sec has imagination, or big enough chunks of time for fun like incursions.
I'm totally ok with the idea that I can unsub until I have the free time null-sec requires, (even if it is through my own lack of imagination and I spend that 45 minutes a night watching episodes of Firefly again).
What would really suck is if lots of other high-sec people also see high-sec becoming unrewarding. That would mean no Eve for me to come back to when i develop leisure time again.
No one has ever succeeded at converting large numbers of carebears into PvPers (at least no one with death penalties as high as Eve's). They'll just go elsewhere once they see their playspace becoming unworthwhile.
And pages later I guess no one *can* point me to ANY Odyssey improvements that benefit or entertain high sec players? Or did that question get lost in the shuffle?
You won't find any because this expansion is, and looks like those for the foreseeable future, are all about the null sec crowd. CCP's listening to the null sec zealots who scream the loudest on the forums as well as the null dominated CSM. This isn't about balance or simply buffing null, it's about buffing null at the expense of high sec. This is what the zealots have been striving for for years. They want high sec to be a starter area for newbies with only very limited resources so that targets are driven out to low sec and potential worker drones to null.
Hey, high sec is the perfect isk generating, no risk, no skill required paradise. The non-valued suckers, err I mean...subscribers there, don't deserve anything better, right?
Yeah, there are things that are broken with null especially but, why correct those issues on the backs of one particular group of players? |
pussnheels
The Fiction Factory
1151
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 05:23:00 -
[235] - Quote
Dear CCP do any of your developers actually play this game i seriously doubt they do
you basicly told that 70% of your players are not welcome any more
and i will not be the only one who will not play a game wheredespite the advertisment of open ended oportunities CCP only caters to a small minority of what are basicly assholes and the rest are only there to pay your development costs I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1162
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 05:41:00 -
[236] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: These changes will not encourage more miners to head out to null sec.
Maybe not, but they're certainly encouraging the people already in nullsec to look at whether they should be mining.
Just a thought.
If folk in hi-sec mine, they are deemed by many null-sec folk to be bots, bot aspirant, not playing Eve properly etc.
Will the same rules apply to null-sec folk who now take up mining? This is not a signature. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 05:58:00 -
[237] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Right. The probing bought you additional time to get out of dodge if you saw someone out with combat probes on your D-scan. But this systems just makes it even riskier to mine. In fact I think the scanning system itself may defeat the ore redistribution's purpose, meaning you're getting more reward but a lot more risk, the risk might even outweigh the reward. It takes ~30 seconds for me to get to an anomaly from the time I jump in to the time that I drop out of warp in the anomaly, even if the anomaly is particularly close to my in-gate (less than 1AU). That's the time necessary to run the system scanner (10 seconds), during which I d-scan to determine the range they're at, the time to choose the anomaly (2-3 seconds), and then the time to enter and exit warp. If they're further away, they're safer. On top of that, gravimetric anomalies are a hell of a lot larger than ratting anomalies and the warp-in point for an intruder may not actually be anywhere near the points you'd sit miners at to mine from, adding extra safety. Basically, this is not a tremendous increase in risk. It's the difference between "a gang can't threaten you at all unless they have probes" and "a gang can maybe threaten you, if they're fast on the scanner and you're paying an exceptionally low amount of attention." Except in wormholes, where we don't have the local channel. This is a huge increase in risk in WHs. |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1162
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:04:00 -
[238] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive
Ooh, you do sound so tough.
You need to tone down the role-play a notch or two.
50% of players play solo, (quoted at fan-fest) so it is rather difficult for any solo miming ship to defend itself against a pvp ship. This is not a signature. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
1171
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:19:00 -
[239] - Quote
On moons in particular, moving the "Tech" and previously "Dyspro" bottlenecks to a general "R64 bottleneck" with T2 racial flavor providing a shifting market-based way to influence which mineral is most valuable is awesome. I supported it during my campaign and I'm pleased as peach it's the general principle CCP Fozzie adopted to solve the problem of One Moon to Rule Them All without killing off moons as a conflict driver.
But most importantly I'm encouraged to see CCP deliver on a critical promise within a year. Late 2012 after much poking and prodding by players and CSM for years CCP finally took a look at Technetium with the Cobalt alchemy process. It didn't solve the problem, but at least undercut price-fixing by regional cartels to some degree and provided a new low-level conflict driver by moving some of the value of Tech into Cobalt and Platinum moons.
But again, didn't solve the problem. CSM7 pushed hard for them to REALLY look at the underlying issues of the tech bottleneck, implement R32 alchemy as a first step to rebalancing T2 production, and include that language in the dev blog releasing Tech alchemy. Most people and bloggers thought CCP would never follow through which tbh they had good historical reason to believe. I'm sure Fozzie got sick of me poking about it but I really wanted them all to be wrong and for us to finally get the fixes this mechanic has needed for years. And sure enough, here we are! With a moon mineral production approach that at least has a chance of standing the test of time (by all means Mynnna, Akita T, etc rip these numbers apart before June to make sure of it).
A lot of that credit goes to CCP Fozzie in particular, who really took this spreadsheet on and delivered. Throughout all of it like he has with ship balancing he's really collaborated with your representatives and loves getting + using direct feedback from players.
So thank you CCP and thank you Fozzie
Now with that said, about those Apoc nerfs... ;p "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."-á -Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
Dawn Harbinger
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:24:00 -
[240] - Quote
Well done Fozzie and Co! |
|
Max Therion
Jita Ikami Bank
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:35:00 -
[241] - Quote
Having built and deployed Outposts in EVE I applaud the iterations on this extremely extensive use of virtual investment in Internet spaceships game resources. Moving toward making them basically "work better" for those who expand and extend their capabilities is a no-brainer and has needed some much needed CCP Dev love for a long time. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
347
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:56:00 -
[242] - Quote
How about introducing Outposts into high-sec, and begin removing most, if not all, NPC stations completely from the game? |
Vilgan Mazran
Aperture Harmonics K162
14
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:56:00 -
[243] - Quote
Ore changes are friggin awesome. A+++, makes TONS of sense. |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
256
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 07:03:00 -
[244] - Quote
Are the new reactions and T2 component blueprints going to be seeded in advance of the expansion? |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
121
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 07:50:00 -
[245] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I dare you to come up with a definition of "passive income" that actually sounds passive and includes moon mining.
Are you joking? I have 5 moon mining pos's. I JF two months worth of fuel for all towers into the system and take the goo out. In the mean time I log on a 2 day alt in a bestower in system once a month to refuel and empty silos. It's pretty well passive. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
Frying Doom
2410
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 07:58:00 -
[246] - Quote
Akturous wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:I dare you to come up with a definition of "passive income" that actually sounds passive and includes moon mining. Are you joking? I have 5 moon mining pos's. I JF two months worth of fuel for all towers into the system and take the goo out. In the mean time I log on a 2 day alt in a bestower in system once a month to refuel and empty silos. It's pretty well passive. Sorry you are not telling the current Null sec narrative that Moon Mining is not passive income. Therefore you must be lying. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 08:04:00 -
[247] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? The only adaptation I can currently make when they move my cheese to null-sec is to quit a job or girlfriend so I have the time to join a corp, get comms situated, figure out the lay of the land, and emergency evac when something I have little control over causes leadership to decide we're now in a new region in a new bloc, and oh by the way, you'll need to get situated on all new comms and forums and auths. But it is not just moving my cheese, it's also the lack of entertainment value in high-sec. Thus I have adapted by moving to SWTOR and haven't seen a reason to renew my sub which expires in June unless I lose a job/contract. Eve won't miss me, but if I'm any indicator of players' satisfaction with high-sec then God needs to create more PVPers, and fast. Hopefully I'm an anomaly and there will still be an Eve to come back to when I develop the time to be a null-sec resident again. But if I'm typical, that spells bad news until high-sec becomes more entertaining OR worthwhile.
I'll tell you for a fact you don't need to move to nullsec to make good ISK.
In fact if you only have 45-60 mins at a time for EVE, why on earth are you spending it mining? Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 08:05:00 -
[248] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Akturous wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:I dare you to come up with a definition of "passive income" that actually sounds passive and includes moon mining. Are you joking? I have 5 moon mining pos's. I JF two months worth of fuel for all towers into the system and take the goo out. In the mean time I log on a 2 day alt in a bestower in system once a month to refuel and empty silos. It's pretty well passive. Sorry you are not telling the current Null sec narrative that Moon Mining is not passive income. Therefore you must be lying.
No one ever has to make any effort to get hold of a moon and they're in unlimited supply. So very passive. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Doukyou
Deafening Silence Syndiate In Umbra Mortis
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 08:34:00 -
[249] - Quote
I like the mineral changes and the outpost changes. I don't do much t2 production but I have the skills so I am relatively unimpressed with the T2 moon minning changes.
The Ice belt thing.....Whoever made this decision needs to be taken out to the fishing dock, Wrapped in very heavy chains and pushed off the end.
ARE YOU GUYS F@#%ING RETARD3D!!!!
Skip the whole belt/anomaly thing. Put in frigging non renewable ort clouds. No beacons, just a simple scan down with probes to the edge of the system, as area's get mined out people have to move to new locations. Simple as that. The amount of ice available should never be a reflection of player usage. I think mining belts should be moved to the same method. but lets try it with ice first. Every system should have some sort of ort cloud and there should be multiple types of ice in each. The amount of ice available in each system should be relative to the sec status of each, so 1.0 or .9 systems will have very thin ort clouds and .0 or less will have lots of untapped large ort clouds. The Idea should be how much do the players want to look, NOT how much you think we need. This will also make it harder for anyone to control the flow of ice. Eventually you will force players out in to low and null as the ice belts get thinner. Hell if your going to put anomalies in for ice make them comets so we have to keep pace with the ice chunk.
I know from a technical side adding in a 100k plus object per system could be a pain in the butt, so make it something that gets seeded as players warp to grid or scan down a specific grid and warp to it. If a grid isn't accessed in 30 or 60 days it gets archived till it is scanned down and warped too again. Thus you don't load down your servers too much. I have found that miners are creatures of habit and they will happily work an area dry if they can.
|
Felsusguy
Archimedes RD Company
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:04:00 -
[250] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. How droll. |
|
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:05:00 -
[251] - Quote
Doukyou wrote:I like the mineral changes and the outpost changes. I don't do much t2 production but I have the skills so I am relatively unimpressed with the T2 moon minning changes.
The Ice belt thing.....Whoever made this decision needs to be taken out to the fishing dock, Wrapped in very heavy chains and pushed off the end.
ARE YOU GUYS F@#%ING RETARD3D!!!!
Skip the whole belt/anomaly thing. Put in frigging non renewable ort clouds. No beacons, just a simple scan down with probes to the edge of the system, as area's get mined out people have to move to new locations. Simple as that. The amount of ice available should never be a reflection of player usage. I think mining belts should be moved to the same method. but lets try it with ice first. Every system should have some sort of ort cloud and there should be multiple types of ice in each. The amount of ice available in each system should be relative to the sec status of each, so 1.0 or .9 systems will have very thin ort clouds and .0 or less will have lots of untapped large ort clouds. The Idea should be how much do the players want to look, NOT how much you think we need. This will also make it harder for anyone to control the flow of ice. Eventually you will force players out in to low and null as the ice belts get thinner. Hell if your going to put anomalies in for ice make them comets so we have to keep pace with the ice chunk.
I know from a technical side adding in a 100k plus object per system could be a pain in the butt, so make it something that gets seeded as players warp to grid or scan down a specific grid and warp to it. If a grid isn't accessed in 30 or 60 days it gets archived till it is scanned down and warped too again. Thus you don't load down your servers too much. I have found that miners are creatures of habit and they will happily work an area dry if they can.
And once these are all used up, there's no cap ships or POSes left because the fuel is so expensive that no one can afford it anymore?
brilliant plan. |
Frying Doom
2411
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:11:00 -
[252] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote: And once these are all used up, there's no cap ships or POSes left because the fuel is so expensive that no one can afford it anymore?
brilliant plan.
No fuel prices will stay about the same as people will flee C1-C4 Wormholes as you would have to be insane to mine in them and there is not enough amons to support more than a few people. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
KatanTharkay
V I R I I Ineluctable.
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:24:00 -
[253] - Quote
As long as 0.0 is not filled with carebears and hi-sec with mostly nooob characters you're doing it wrong. |
Loney
CyberDyne R-D
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:39:00 -
[254] - Quote
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in this blog... However I have a suggestion related to ICE mining.
If you are reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and trying to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Crease a POS module for ICE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT |
Loney
CyberDyne R-D
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:40:00 -
[255] - Quote
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in this blog... However I have a suggestion related to ICE mining.
If you are reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and trying to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Crease a POS module for ICE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT |
mechtech
Ice Liberation Army
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:43:00 -
[256] - Quote
Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Eh, I like the idea of logistics, even if it's boring hauling. You can always contract it out, some people apparently like doing this stuff. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
459
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:49:00 -
[257] - Quote
I like the ore yield changes, it'll definitely make nullsec mining profitable and make nullsec production much easier. But lowsec mining will still be pretty worthless, and it's all because Pyroxeres yields too much Nocxium. As long as you're fixing mineral yields, you might as well fix Pyroxeres. It currently yields around half as much Nocxium as Jaspet, Hemorphite, or Hedbergite (Nocxium is pretty much their entire value), but Pyroxeres is available in highsec. It should yield much less Nocxium. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4735
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 10:16:00 -
[258] - Quote
Nick Bete wrote:You won't find any because this expansion is, and looks like those for the foreseeable future, are all about the null sec crowd. CCP's listening to the null sec zealots who scream the loudest on the forums as well as the null dominated CSM. This isn't about balance or simply buffing null, it's about buffing null at the expense of high sec. This is what the zealots have been striving for for years. They want high sec to be a starter area for newbies with only very limited resources so that targets are driven out to low sec and potential worker drones to null. Hey, high sec is the perfect isk generating, no risk, no skill required paradise. The non-valued suckers, err I mean...subscribers there, don't deserve anything better, right? Yeah, there are things that are broken with null especially but, why correct those issues on the backs of one particular group of players? I realize you and others like you have no concept of game balance, but that's no reason to accuse CCP of favoritism. Module activation timers are buggy. CCP please fix. |
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 10:31:00 -
[259] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I like the ore yield changes, it'll definitely make nullsec mining profitable and make nullsec production much easier. But lowsec mining will still be pretty worthless, and it's all because Pyroxeres yields too much Nocxium. As long as you're fixing mineral yields, you might as well fix Pyroxeres. It currently yields around half as much Nocxium as Jaspet, Hemorphite, or Hedbergite (Nocxium is pretty much their entire value), but Pyroxeres is available in highsec. It should yield much less Nocxium.
Well, lowsec mining was pretty much worthless before and its getting worse with these patches which is a major let-down of low-sec community from CCP in my eyes. Lowsec is, due to lack of any mechanism allowing for area control (station lockouts in sov null and bubbles in general) and combined with a decent amount of active population living in it (in terms of people per system) absolutely the riskiest place to try and do any mining. Fact that there are no changes to lowsec ores and that finding grav belts is getting easier will mean only that even those who thought of trying to mine in lower security space will be going straight out to nullsec. This really is a shame. Also - moon goo is passive, however people try to spin it.
I'd say - return grav sites into probing domain and sprinkle low with some better ores, ccp please. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8867
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 10:37:00 -
[260] - Quote
Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value.
There are already tens of thousands of unused slots in hi-sec. That ship has already sailed. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13842
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:13:00 -
[261] - Quote
Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. Enough for a single nullsec system to be comparable with a single highsec system. It's an excellent idea. Alternatively, we can slash the number of highsec indy slots byGǪ ohGǪ 80% or so. Would that be a better solution? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Mc Cormeg
Friends Of Harassment
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:20:00 -
[262] - Quote
Whats the point of having systemscanable ore anomalies at all? I mean yea with combat anomalies this scan mechanics makes absolute sense because you don't have any combat sites from scratch. But with mining sites? I mean you got the standard belts to satisfy your mining passion. Why putting in some "new" type of ore belt which offer no more gameplay beyond doing some extra cklicks for some fancy complexes known as "hidden" ore sites? Right, you can gain some extra profit if you bother with using your system scan but in my opinion the old system with more reward for the rather complex scanning effort was much more balanced.
To clarify that. Getting more risk involved with mining operations is absolutly a good idea. But i don't get the point, why you can't approach this goal with the normal standard belts. |
Frying Doom
2412
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:20:00 -
[263] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. Enough for a single nullsec system to be comparable with a single highsec system. It's an excellent idea. Alternatively, we can slash the number of highsec indy slots byGǪ ohGǪ 80% or so. Would that be a better solution? How many Hi-sec systems have 500-700 manufacturing slots?
A lot of Hi-sec stations and systems have no manufacturing capability. 500-700 slots per station would give just Goonswarm more manufacturing slots than all of Hi-sec and then you have everyone elses outpost on top of that. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
181
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:27:00 -
[264] - Quote
I suggested ore rebalance earlier myself but I donGÇÖt exactly agree with way it is being done here. Gnessis and Spod changes are good, but what is the point of buffing ABC, especially Arkonour? Ark is 2nd best ore to mine anywhere as it is, it needs no boost. And why is noting being done about omber? Is omber to remain **** ore as before, and why? Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:34:00 -
[265] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive Ooh, you do sound so tough. You need to tone down the role-play a notch or two. 50% of players play solo, (quoted at fan-fest) so it is rather difficult for any solo miming ship to defend itself against a pvp ship.
EvilweaselSA wrote:a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive
TEST alt - don't trust. |
Adrian Dixon
Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction The Devil's Warrior Alliance
133
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:39:00 -
[266] - Quote
So happy that changes are being made and thigs are being done. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
903
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:50:00 -
[267] - Quote
I'm good with all changes except the ability to scan down a grav belt with the onboard scanner. I don't have a problem being vigilant while mining. I have a problem with people camping systems 23/7 while they are at work or whatever then they end up hotdropping you with a fleet of blackops. Till now, you had some ability to counter that because a lot of times the didn't scan down the belts. I don't have issues with roaming fleets or people who even stay waiting at their computer for a few hours for you to screw up. But giving people who can camp all day the ability to scan a system down that fast really calls for a counter of some sort.
Also, how does this affect wormholes? Isn't the whole point of wormhole space that everything is undiscovered? This basically kills wormhole mining.
Perhaps this is the intent, make it harder for people to mine in 0.0 as a balance to nerfing high-sec but it's already a bit of a challenge. Maximze your Industry Potential! - Get EVE Isk per Hour! |
ngaly
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:50:00 -
[268] - Quote
It is very unfair that some players made huge profits by knowing about the changes before you announced them. The CSM and especially CCP Devs did surely talk about this to friends in some cases. It is impossible for you to find out who talked. However, what you can do is punish those players who took advantage of the insider information. Like in real life you can discover insider trading by simply identifying the players who made unusual successful investments. What you should do is simple remove a part of their investments respective to the amount the specific item increased in price directly after you announced the changes.
In the future you should announce resource related changes even before you decide to implement them. You should clearly announce what you are thinking about changing as soon as you start thinking about it and you should announce what you intend to implement as soon as you decide to implement it.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13842
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:56:00 -
[269] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:How many Hi-sec systems have 500-700 manufacturing slots? Far more than there would be nullsec systems that had the same.
Quote:500-700 slots per station would give just Goonswarm more manufacturing slots than all of Hi-sec and then you have everyone elses outpost on top of that. No, it wouldn't, because it would be an economic and logistical clusterfuck to put a fully upgraded industry-only station in every system. Also, so what? If any alliance really wanted to build 140 outposts, fully upgrade them for this one task (and nothing else), then they bloody well should get all that capacity, so what's the problem with that?
Of course, in reality, there's no reason for them to since not even all the highsec slots are occupied at the moment, so it makes no sense to do that GÇö they'd be a complete waste of ISK. What they could do is offer capacity that lets their industrialists work at home rather than in highsec, and for that they need highsec-like capacity. There's still the issue of highsec being free and easy, and that problem can't be fixed by altering nullGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
75
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:57:00 -
[270] - Quote
Fozzie, have you noticed that you get asked to write about major changes more often than not.
Though your disclaimers are better than average so I can see why.
Someone should give that man a raise.
((More PG for one of the Amarr BS please)) |
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
62
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 11:58:00 -
[271] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Tippia wrote:Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. Enough for a single nullsec system to be comparable with a single highsec system. It's an excellent idea. Alternatively, we can slash the number of highsec indy slots byGǪ ohGǪ 80% or so. Would that be a better solution? How many Hi-sec systems have 500-700 manufacturing slots? A lot of Hi-sec stations and systems have no manufacturing capability. 500-700 slots per station would give just Goonswarm more manufacturing slots than all of Hi-sec and then you have everyone elses outpost on top of that. Itamo has a total of 550 manufacturing slots 2 jumps from Jita, all with 50% base refineries. However, I do agree that that amount of slots is limited to relatively few systems, and giving that many slots with the prevalence of Amarr outposts is slightly excessive, especially when considering the capacity-increasing time reductions on ship production in amarr outposts.
Just for reference, when producing ships in Amarr outposts, you get a 30% base time reduction on ships, up to 60% for either T1 or T2 ships with the top-tier upgrade. That works out as a 42% capacity increase at stock, up to doubling capacity with the tier 2 upgrade and 2.5x capacity maxed.
Yes, it doesn't affect modules/drones etc., but they would require a fairly significant nerf to highsec manufacturing to be worth building, even with the time reductions availiable at other outpost types. |
Gelatine
EverBroke Geeks
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:39:00 -
[272] - Quote
I'm cool with these changes (I think,) but I'd like to ask for "something" to be done about d-scan. If all the miners (who aren't bots) go to null-sec, they're all going to end up with RSI from hitting the d-scan buttan every second. Maybe a module scanning every cycle automatically with a fixed scan range, or a drone or something along those lines - something. Cheers. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
63
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:41:00 -
[273] - Quote
Gelatine wrote:I'm cool with these changes (I think,) but I'd like to ask for "something" to be done about d-scan. If all the miners (who aren't bots) go to null-sec, they're all going to end up with RSI from hitting the d-scan buttan every second. Maybe a module scanning every cycle automatically with a fixed scan range, or a drone or something along those lines - something. Cheers. dscan isn't needed that much while Local remains in it's current state.
But yea a dscan improvement would be nice. |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
248
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:47:00 -
[274] - Quote
Not an expert on moon mining on reactions so no comment there....but.... everything else? FANTASTICLUCIOUS!!!! Thanks for the good job and being brave enough to do it. |
Lambert Simnel
PWLS Enterprises
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:48:00 -
[275] - Quote
Putting aside the hysteria in some of these posts, I actually don't think these changes will achieve what CCP wants.
Firstly, I doubt high sec miners/industrialists will be lured to low and null sec by the proposed changes simply because CCP cannot change the behavior of players seeking 'security' or the ability to mine afk. Lets face it mining is something you do while looking at something far more interesting on your second screen.
Secondly I found this quote from Fozzie a little disingenuous:
'The lack of profitable sources of certain common minerals such as Tritanium and Pyerite conspires with the lack of reasonable manufacturing facilities to cripple the prospects of Nullsec industry, robbing miners of a local market for their minerals, and manufacturers of a place to ply their trade in player-owned space.'
While I agree with the statement, we all know that anything manufactured or mined in low or null sec is likely to be jumped back into high sec where the major trade hubs and markets are. With few exceptions (and I'm happy for someone to tell me what they are), I can't see major market hubs, where large volumes of items are moved consistently, springing up in low or null sec.
If CCP are serious about making low or null sec 'self sufficient' then they should make jump freighters unable to enter high-sec. Only that would encourage local markets to flourish as then there would be no easy to route to and from high sec.
|
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
18
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:50:00 -
[276] - Quote
Grav site becoming anomalies makes WH mining mostly non-viable. Perhaps Skiff only fleets might work under heavy protection.
No longer can mining fleets detect your presence by probes and have time to warp to POS. Any unopened WH an attacker finds is almost an automatic mining ship kill even without cov ops cloak.
There is NO fleet protection from surprise attack alpha volleys. That is the whole principle of most RL snipers. Most those mining ships are going to pop in the first few seconds of any organized attack -- with the possible exception of skiffs. Most the time so-called defense fleets will be left with merely revenge.
Yes you can quickly start defending from later attacks. But the first attacks are free even if you see them on directional 3-4 second from arrival. No mining ship larger than Venture is going to warp out in time if they were actually mining. If they are orbiting its likely even slower. And only Skiff orbits fast enough to generate much angular velocity.
The opening of new WH's provides an perfect WH system breaching opportunity -- totally stealth ambush on any mining fleet that they should not be able see coming in time no matter how god they are. Just stack your fleet up at 10K+ distance from WH like SWAT and military does when they blow new "door" in back wall for breaching ops. Rush that wh to open it. Then scan once for grav site anomalies on the other. Next thing you are landing in ambush range of their mining fleet in 20 seconds.
Simple Covet Ops ship attacks through existing WH also benefit. This change frees high slot normally used for probes and cuts time to attack dramatically. If they aren't warping as soon as they hear you enter, those mining ships are toast. Every WH is like you had BMed the grav sites earlier.
-- Some insist that NO ONE would go for a mining ship kill first if there are combat ship around. BS I have seen different many times.
Why? Often it just comes down to mining ships are faster ISK killed/second - plus combat ship tend to stick around longer than is wise. But sometimes mining ships are all a small hit and run attack fleet is strong enough to put on his killboard and get away alive. They destroy miners and run before you r huge protect fleet turns them to space dust. Sometimes its killboard greed. They are pretty sure they can take your protection fleet easily if it sticks around but take the first 20 seconds to add your mining ships to that expected total before miners can warp away. All based on the idea miners run immediately if slowly; but combat ships normally can't start leaving until last miner warps out. --
Solutions other than go all skiff?
Well CCP could provide lesser sovereignty structures in WH to automatically detect new wh openings & send out audio/chat alarm. Not pinpointing new Wh location necessarily.
New anchorable mobile structures could provide mining sites limited protection like
(1) warning shield: huge (100km radius) but very weak (1000hp?) POS-like force shield to stop ambush approach at viable warning distance. Only useful versus single intruders. And since its anchored the attacker still gets a structure kill in many cases.
(2) Advanced Mobile Warp Disruptor -- keyed like POS shields so that friendlies can warp in and out freely but others are stopped at 25km (small), 40km (medium), 100km (large) or 250km (huge).
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8870
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:51:00 -
[277] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Tippia wrote:Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. Enough for a single nullsec system to be comparable with a single highsec system. It's an excellent idea. Alternatively, we can slash the number of highsec indy slots byGǪ ohGǪ 80% or so. Would that be a better solution? How many Hi-sec systems have 500-700 manufacturing slots? A lot of Hi-sec stations and systems have no manufacturing capability. 500-700 slots per station would give just Goonswarm more manufacturing slots than all of Hi-sec and then you have everyone elses outpost on top of that.
Itamo550 Nonni750 Baviasi450 Hilaban450 Inghenges550 Haatomo450 Suroken450 Penirgman700 Ghesis450
Now answer me this: How many Amarr Outposts have the required 5 upgrades? Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Stragak
Mangi Consilii
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 12:57:00 -
[278] - Quote
Any way you flip the pancake it is still a pancake.
Yes I agree there should be a boost to Outpost but I feel it should be along side of the POS system that allot more people use. Including the Outpost uses... Just saying.
Secondly 550-1M whats the difference... More indy alts that's what to use of those slots. Needs more dynamics in this solution til I personally approve it. Nobody cares about your plans to be dirty hippies. goon (n)-áthefreedictionary A thug hired to intimidate or harm opponents A stupid or oafish person.
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:04:00 -
[279] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Now answer me this: How many Amarr Outposts have the required 5 upgrades?
I only know of one, it's one of the old RKK factories in Delve.
In other news, CCP posts in the devblog that the resource roundtable was to be moved to singularity. It wasn't. It's packed completely full. |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:15:00 -
[280] - Quote
Fozzie have you considered how many of your customers do ice mining at the moment and enjoy the current system and style of play. Perhaps you have some stats or have taken a randomised opinion poll?
Have you also considered what proportion of those will quit and what proportion will make a move and mine in null or low sec? |
|
Frying Doom
2412
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:22:00 -
[281] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tippia wrote:Felsusguy wrote:Tippia wrote:Secondly, those outpost slot increases are off by about one order of magnitude. The design goal should be that if you really max out an indy station, you should have 500GÇô700 manufacturing slotsGǪ even these new numbers aren't nearly enough to get there. Enough for 45-63 industrialists with perfect skills to perform all available manufacturing jobs 24/7? No, I don't think that's a good idea. Inflate the volume and you deflate the value. Enough for a single nullsec system to be comparable with a single highsec system. It's an excellent idea. Alternatively, we can slash the number of highsec indy slots byGǪ ohGǪ 80% or so. Would that be a better solution? How many Hi-sec systems have 500-700 manufacturing slots? A lot of Hi-sec stations and systems have no manufacturing capability. 500-700 slots per station would give just Goonswarm more manufacturing slots than all of Hi-sec and then you have everyone elses outpost on top of that. Itamo550 Nonni750 Baviasi450 Hilaban450 Inghenges550 Haatomo450 Suroken450 Penirgman700 Ghesis450 Now answer me this: How many Amarr Outposts have the required 5 upgrades? Also: why is it wrong for Goonswarm to have more slots than hi-sec? first 450 is not between 500 and 700
Why do you believe Goonswarm should have more manufacturing capability than all of high sec? Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Traidir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
59
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:29:00 -
[282] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:At the same time as we seed these new minerals into moons, we will also be somewhat reducing the time required to complete a moon scan, to ensure that players can find the new minerals in a reasonable time period.
This is a missed opportunity: scanning moons could have been made into a game of its own... rather than: "Launch probes... wait... see if you won." *snore*... There should be a graphical interface, showing all the systems moons and the distribution layout (that you've scanned out so far). There should be active player input for detecting minerals; sloppy players should have a chance of missing resource caches that skilled players might catch. There should be an wide opportunity for PVP during the scanning: i.e. ships cant be cloaked while scans are underway... or perhaps a giant flag that says "someone is here" (as with planetary districts for example). There is even the possibility for scaning-result interference as players try to sabotage each other. Dust players could even be involved in the process. Serious, serious opportunity missed.... Is there still time to change things? |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
231
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:30:00 -
[283] - Quote
I love the changes to ice. Now more more wealth will be concentrated in fewer hand and new players can GTFO. I look forward to larger corps and high sec alliances forcing out smaller players via freighter mining.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:33:00 -
[284] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Malcanis wrote:Mara Rinn wrote: These changes will not encourage more miners to head out to null sec.
Maybe not, but they're certainly encouraging the people already in nullsec to look at whether they should be mining. Just a thought. If folk in hi-sec mine, they are deemed by many null-sec - lo-sec folk to be bots, bot aspirant, not playing Eve properly etc. Will the same rules apply to null-sec - lo-sec folk who now take up mining?
Miners don't get respect in null. They get treated like renters... renters wearing dresses.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13843
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:37:00 -
[285] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Why do you believe Goonswarm should have more manufacturing capability than all of high sec? They won't. Even if they did, so what?
They should have it because they choose to and because they can. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Irya Boone
TIPIAKS
223
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:41:00 -
[286] - Quote
Need ice anomalies in WH !! RENAME null sec systems With the name of REAL Universe Stellar Name like KOI-730 etc etc It will be awesome. Need Black Ops be able to FIT cover ops cloaking device !!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8871
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:44:00 -
[287] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: first 450 is not between 500 and 700
Why do you believe Goonswarm should have more manufacturing capability than all of high sec?
1) Agreed but there weren't any with exactly 500, and 450 is a pretty massive number of slots anyway.
2) How about, because they earned them? Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Rujin Bellagraff
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:44:00 -
[288] - Quote
Regarding Ore/Ice mining. Many high-sec bears will be just that. No amount of convincing will move them over to low/null sec. Some options they are probably considering: - If one is a high-sec Ore miner, become an Ice miner. Join the throngs of pilots that will do the same, and learn to ninja the Ice belts that spawn, creating a monopoly for themselves. - Join the high-sec incursion bear community. - Unsub their high-sec bear accounts.
I would suspect that the percentage of miners that will actually move is less than 10%. Which means CCP is counting on the null-bears (bots) to pick up the slack. I am not a gambling person; so not sure of the outcome.
So CCP must have considered these 'risks vs. rewards', as they like to put it, and decided to move forward with these changes. Only time will tell if the change was good on their behalf (if their overall subscription goes up or down). |
Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries Orion Consortium
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:55:00 -
[289] - Quote
Rujin Bellagraff wrote:Regarding Ore/Ice mining. Many high-sec bears will be just that. No amount of convincing will move them over to low/null sec. Some options they are probably considering: - If one is a high-sec Ore miner, become an Ice miner. Join the throngs of pilots that will do the same, and learn to ninja the Ice belts that spawn, creating a monopoly for themselves. - Join the high-sec incursion bear community. - Unsub their high-sec bear accounts.
I would suspect that the percentage of miners that will actually move is less than 10%. Which means CCP is counting on the null-bears (bots) to pick up the slack. I am not a gambling person; so not sure of the outcome.
So CCP must have considered these 'risks vs. rewards', as they like to put it, and decided to move forward with these changes. Only time will tell if the change was good on their behalf (if their overall subscription goes up or down).
With these changes, ice prices will rise until mining ice is as profitable as mining the ABCs. When mining ice makes just as much as ore mining in 0.0, miners will switch. That means, those lucky enough to get to mine Ice in high sec will make as much ISK per hour as 0.0 miners. |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 13:58:00 -
[290] - Quote
Keep the grav sites as scan-able via probes. Make the ice sites so that they are also scan-able via probes.
1) From the Dev Blog it seems like you want people to leave high sec to mine ice. In particular you are hoping people will go to low sec. This is best served by giving someone an opportunity (not certainty) of protecting themselves while mining there. Advanced warning is functional as warning. EHP will only slow down the inevitable when you are being warp scrambled by a pirate.
2) Verrane Skarne mentioned the problems of enough content in C1 and C2 Wormholes. Mining becomes a possible source of activity there. A vigilant miner can work to be safer in that location currently. Making grav sites into anomalies just removes that content.
3) Probe scanning provides interaction opportunities. Lets look at three "user stories." Anomaly: Go to space -> Warp to anomaly. Probed sites: Go to space -> Use probes -> Warp to site. Probed site: Go to space -> talk to other miners -> warp to site. By putting ice in the probed sites you encourage interaction in game, which can lead to more fun.
4) Anomalies do not provide more use. As noted in 1 and 2 they actually remove uses. The concerns that someone would be frustrated trying to scan down sites can be significantly mitigated by making the ice and ore sites easier to probe down. This will reduce safety, but not eliminate it.
5) Some safety in null/low/wormholes will not translate to high sec. If you are constantly preparing to warp at the first sign of probes in high sec, then perhaps you can just go to a different space and make more money! |
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:04:00 -
[291] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? The only adaptation I can currently make when they move my cheese to null-sec is to quit a job or girlfriend so I have the time to join a corp, get comms situated, figure out the lay of the land, and emergency evac when something I have little control over causes leadership to decide we're now in a new region in a new bloc, and oh by the way, you'll need to get situated on all new comms and forums and auths. But it is not just moving my cheese, it's also the lack of entertainment value in high-sec. Thus I have adapted by moving to SWTOR and haven't seen a reason to renew my sub which expires in June unless I lose a job/contract. Eve won't miss me, but if I'm any indicator of players' satisfaction with high-sec then God needs to create more PVPers, and fast. Hopefully I'm an anomaly and there will still be an Eve to come back to when I develop the time to be a null-sec resident again. But if I'm typical, that spells bad news until high-sec becomes more entertaining OR worthwhile. I'll tell you for a fact you don't need to move to nullsec to make good ISK. In fact if you only have 45-60 mins at a time for EVE, why on earth are you spending it mining?
I'm not spending it mining. I'm spending it in SWTOR. The limited possibilities available for small 45 minute chunks of time in hi-sec already lost my playing time (and were already going to lose my subscription when it runs out in June). It's not just the cheese, it's also the entertainment value. L4 missions or market games could still be worthwhile activity in that small chunk of time, but I'd rather do a SWTOR mission than an Eve mission. It isn't solely about cheese, they need to make high-sec more ENTERTAINING. I'm not unsubscribing because of Odyssey. I'm just not finding anything in Odyssey to change that decision, and I'm worried that the attempts to flog hi-sec players into null-sec are going to leave me no Eve to come back to when I finally regain the leisure to rejoin you and my other friends in null.
I hope I'm wrong. I hope that high-sec can be continually stepped on and still pay their subscription fees. What I'm SURE of though is they aren't heading to null the way the CSM and CCP think they will.
It would be very easy for CCP to prove me wrong or right and be able to inform the CSM of the changes in player behavior (or lack thereof).....
THIS week, do a census where you note which players are in hi-sec Measure 10 times including over the weekend. If on any of those censii they are in null or low-sec throw them out of that hi-sec count. Then 90 days after Odyssey do another 10 censii over a week and see how many of those same players get spotted in null. My prediction is it will be a very very very small number and will be due to other factors (like me regaining the leisure time for null-sec).
While I *hope* high-sec will endure and pay their subs, I'm *convinced* that you won't turn them into null-sec players by making high-sec less rewarding, less fun, or less afk-able.
Prove me wrong. You already have the flogging high-sec into null policies soon to be instituted, so just get them to make the measurements and be scientists about it rather than religious zealots about it. Measure your results and throw them in my face if you're right. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
932
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:04:00 -
[292] - Quote
I allways thought moon mining should be like PI... Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Kor'el Izia
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:10:00 -
[293] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. Interesting, how much was previously mined in highsec? |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
181
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:14:00 -
[294] - Quote
It is good idea not to go overboard with manufacturing slots per station because eventual we should be able to build multiple outpost per system.
Hawing multiple stations would be bad idea right now because outpost are HP buffer in system conquest mechanics. But if sov mechanics a are changed in a way number of stations in system would not affect amount of HP to be grinned during conquest there is no reason limit of one outpost per system should remain.
So rather then giving current outposts ridiculous numbers of slots I would rather CCP make necessary changes to sov mechanics to allow for multiple outposts, and then passably even destructible outposts.
Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:17:00 -
[295] - Quote
With all these changes providing more 'balance' to null, and less reasons to rely on highsec, I'd say give wh's ice anomalies too. Can't see a reason why not v0v |
Frying Doom
2413
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:18:00 -
[296] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
2) How about, because they actually earned them?
You are proposing a massive shift in game balance and your reasoning is "because they actually earned them"
Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots?
Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots? Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13849
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:26:00 -
[297] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote: 2) How about, because they actually earned them?
You are proposing a massive shift in game balance Not particularly, no. We're proposing a shift in where nullsec industrialists do their industry. The slots already exist. They're just not placed where they should be.
Quote:Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots? By conquering and developing the 140 systems required to "out-slot" highsec. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Drunk 'n' Disorderly
684
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:28:00 -
[298] - Quote
fozzie for CEO! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4744
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:34:00 -
[299] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Miners don't get respect in null. They get treated like renters... renters wearing dresses.
That's generally because mining in null is currently a rather pointless thing to do. If it's made worthwhile then nobody's going to be laughing. It will be treated with the same respect as ratting (which frankly doesn't get treated with much respect either). |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:45:00 -
[300] - Quote
Rujin Bellagraff wrote:Regarding Ore/Ice mining. Many high-sec bears will be just that. No amount of convincing will move them over to low/null sec. Some options they are probably considering: - If one is a high-sec Ore miner, become an Ice miner. Join the throngs of pilots that will do the same, and learn to ninja the Ice belts that spawn, creating a monopoly for themselves. - Join the high-sec incursion bear community. - Unsub their high-sec bear accounts.
I would suspect that the percentage of miners that will actually move is less than 10%. Which means CCP is counting on the null-bears (bots) to pick up the slack. I am not a gambling person; so not sure of the outcome.
So CCP must have considered these 'risks vs. rewards', as they like to put it, and decided to move forward with these changes. Only time will tell if the change was good on their behalf (if their overall subscription goes up or down).
You can bet that ice interdiction parties by the null sec cartels will be a common thing. They have the resources, pilots, and organization to mine out ice belts FAST, and at the same time bump/ destroy any other non-allied mining ships from the belts.
It will become a situation that they will have ongoing threads on their private forums stating the precise time that a new belt will spawn, allowing the next wave of their pilots 4 TZ's over to grab the entire belt's worth of ice.
Welcome to the new resource chokepoint / oligopoly commodity. But hey, the goon lead game designer said he wanted ice to become the oil of Eve.
Well, expect goons, test, and others to continue to act like u.s., China, Russia, and the other major powers do in the real world with oil, and do their best to have their industrial corps control the supply, backed by whatever military might is required. |
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:48:00 -
[301] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Miners don't get respect in null. They get treated like renters... renters wearing dresses.
That's generally because mining in null is currently a rather pointless thing to do. If it's made worthwhile then nobody's going to be laughing. It will be treated with the same respect as ratting (which frankly doesn't get treated with much respect either).
I'll believe it when I see it.
And I agree on the ratting comment. As long as alliances had moongoo incomes to replace everyone's PvP losses, ANY form of grinding looked like wallet fattening greed when we should, instead, be engaged in PvP. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4744
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:50:00 -
[302] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:You can bet that ice interdiction parties by the null sec cartels will be a common thing. They have the resources, pilots, and organization to mine out ice belts FAST, and at the same time bump/ destroy any other non-allied mining ships from the belts.
It will become a situation that they will have ongoing threads on their private forums stating the precise time that a new belt will spawn, allowing the next wave of their pilots 4 TZ's over to grab the entire belt's worth of ice. I think you seriously overestimate their ability to do this to more than a handful of ice belts. They might be able to do more if they commit a significant portion of their pilots to the task, but they're not going to care that much to do it. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
861
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:53:00 -
[303] - Quote
Yeah, because having a 24/7 icemining division in highsec has always been mittens favorite wet dream We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8875
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:53:00 -
[304] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:
2) How about, because they actually earned them?
You are proposing a massive shift in game balance and your reasoning is "because they actually earned them" Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots? Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots?
Maybe you could explain how the 68,050 manufacturing slots in hisec were "earned"? Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8875
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 14:59:00 -
[305] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Miners don't get respect in null. They get treated like renters... renters wearing dresses.
That's generally because mining in null is currently a rather pointless thing to do. If it's made worthwhile then nobody's going to be laughing. It will be treated with the same respect as ratting (which frankly doesn't get treated with much respect either). I'll believe it when I see it. And I agree on the ratting comment. As long as alliances had moongoo incomes to replace everyone's PvP losses, ANY form of grinding looked like wallet fattening greed when we should, instead, be engaged in PvP.
This is precisely what needs to change. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:00:00 -
[306] - Quote
Molic Blackbird wrote:Rujin Bellagraff wrote:Regarding Ore/Ice mining. Many high-sec bears will be just that. No amount of convincing will move them over to low/null sec. Some options they are probably considering: - If one is a high-sec Ore miner, become an Ice miner. Join the throngs of pilots that will do the same, and learn to ninja the Ice belts that spawn, creating a monopoly for themselves. - Join the high-sec incursion bear community. - Unsub their high-sec bear accounts.
I would suspect that the percentage of miners that will actually move is less than 10%. Which means CCP is counting on the null-bears (bots) to pick up the slack. I am not a gambling person; so not sure of the outcome.
So CCP must have considered these 'risks vs. rewards', as they like to put it, and decided to move forward with these changes. Only time will tell if the change was good on their behalf (if their overall subscription goes up or down). With these changes, ice prices will rise until mining ice is as profitable as mining the ABCs. When mining ice makes just as much as ore mining in 0.0, miners will switch. That means, those lucky enough to get to mine Ice in high sec will make as much ISK per hour as 0.0 miners.
though the difficulty of searching for and competing for it in high-sec might challenge the isk/hour calculation. It might be interesting, though. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
348
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:06:00 -
[307] - Quote
The only thing that making the null less dependent on HiSec for minerals is hardening of the blue donut. CCP just put frosting on it.
Remember: CCP's goal is cash. The harder it is on HiSec, the more cash they make. CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8877
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:06:00 -
[308] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:
2) How about, because they actually earned them?
You are proposing a massive shift in game balance
That's literally true, I suppose, although I'd phrase it as "correcting a massive imbalance"
Unless you think that the trillions of ISK that EVE players have spent should actually only entitle them to 3% of the production capacity of hi-sec?
Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
348
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:09:00 -
[309] - Quote
Traidir wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:At the same time as we seed these new minerals into moons, we will also be somewhat reducing the time required to complete a moon scan, to ensure that players can find the new minerals in a reasonable time period. This is a missed opportunity: scanning moons could have been made into a game of its own... rather than: "Launch probes... wait... see if you won." *snore*... There should be a graphical interface, showing all the systems moons and the distribution layout (that you've scanned out so far). There should be active player input for detecting minerals; sloppy players should have a chance of missing resource caches that skilled players might catch. There should be an wide opportunity for PVP during the scanning: i.e. ships cant be cloaked while scans are underway... or perhaps a giant flag that says "someone is here" (as with planetary districts for example). There is even the possibility for scaning-result interference as players try to sabotage each other. Dust players could even be involved in the process. Serious, serious opportunity missed.... Is there still time to change things?
Once the scans are done and end up in Dotlan - end of game and a lot of wasted CCP dev work.
CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:13:00 -
[310] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Yeah, because having a 24/7 icemining division in highsec has always been mittens favorite wet dream
I get the humor, but as someone who was in Goon friendly alliances during part of The Great Gallente Ice Swindle I can assure you that if you were blue to Goons you were able to ice mine Gallente ice with much less chance of being ganked.
So your main was out in null mindlessly shooting at structures or camping a gate and all your alts were mindlessly ice mining.
My guess is that making ice mining more about chasing it and competing for it would only make it MORE appealing to those who'd seek to monopolize such an essential commodity.
Just guessing though. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4745
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:14:00 -
[311] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Yeah, because having a 24/7 icemining division in highsec has always been mittens favorite wet dream LOL. Seriously... I don't get some of these complaints. Do people seriously believe that GSF is going to devote a significant number of pilots to ice mining in highsec? How deluded could you possibly get? |
Frying Doom
2413
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:15:00 -
[312] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:
2) How about, because they actually earned them?
You are proposing a massive shift in game balance That's literally true, I suppose, although I'd phrase it as "correcting a massive imbalance" Unless you think that the trillions of ISK that EVE players have spent should actually only entitle them to 3% of the production capacity of hi-sec? No as I said they do deserve more than what they have been given but 500-700 is just way too much. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Dilbert HighSeed
Pirannha Corp
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:17:00 -
[313] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:You can bet that ice interdiction parties by the null sec cartels will be a common thing. They have the resources, pilots, and organization to mine out ice belts FAST, and at the same time bump/ destroy any other non-allied mining ships from the belts.
It will become a situation that they will have ongoing threads on their private forums stating the precise time that a new belt will spawn, allowing the next wave of their pilots 4 TZ's over to grab the entire belt's worth of ice. I think you seriously overestimate their ability to do this to more than a handful of ice belts. They might be able to do more if they commit a significant portion of their pilots to the task, but they're not going to care that much to do it.
If there is an opportunity to control a resource, and make vast sums of ISK, the null sec cartels will allocate whatever human resources are required for a solution. It is a matter of cost / benefit.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:20:00 -
[314] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:The only thing that making the null less dependent on HiSec for minerals is hardening of the blue donut. CCP just put frosting on it.
Remember: CCP's goal is cash. The harder it is on HiSec, the more cash they make.
I guess it's opposite day where you are
Unhappy opposite day to you, good sir! Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:21:00 -
[315] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:You can bet that ice interdiction parties by the null sec cartels will be a common thing. They have the resources, pilots, and organization to mine out ice belts FAST, and at the same time bump/ destroy any other non-allied mining ships from the belts.
It will become a situation that they will have ongoing threads on their private forums stating the precise time that a new belt will spawn, allowing the next wave of their pilots 4 TZ's over to grab the entire belt's worth of ice. I think you seriously overestimate their ability to do this to more than a handful of ice belts. They might be able to do more if they commit a significant portion of their pilots to the task, but they're not going to care that much to do it. If there is an opportunity to control a resource, and make vast sums of ISK, the null sec cartels will allocate whatever human resources are required for a solution. It is a matter of cost / benefit.
I wish I shared your faith in the competence and dedication of the "null sec cartel" members. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13855
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:21:00 -
[316] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:No as I said they do deserve more than what they have been given but 500-700 is just way too much. How so? Why should they not be allowed to have it if they're willing to pay for it (and suffer the consequnces) when others get it for free and without consequence?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:22:00 -
[317] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Gilbaron wrote:Yeah, because having a 24/7 icemining division in highsec has always been mittens favorite wet dream LOL. Seriously... I don't get some of these complaints. Do people seriously believe that GSF is going to devote a significant number of pilots to ice mining in highsec? How deluded could you possibly get?
I'd love to see what happened if mittens gave that order Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4745
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:23:00 -
[318] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:If there is an opportunity to control a resource, and make vast sums of ISK, the null sec cartels will allocate whatever human resources are required for a solution. It is a matter of cost / benefit.
At the cost of doing something they actually enjoy doing, right? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:24:00 -
[319] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:No as I said they do deserve more than what they have been given but 500-700 is just way too much. How so? Why should they not be allowed to have it if they're willing to pay for it (and suffer the consequnces) when others get it for free and without consequence?
No you see 700 slots is a perfectly fair and balanced number of slots for hi-sec players to get for free in invulnerable stations they can't be locked out of, but as a slot capacity for extremely expensive 0.0 outposts which can be taken away from you, it's grossly overpowered. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Caneb
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:26:00 -
[320] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots?
Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots?
Not sure where you're getting those numbers from.
We currently have 28 Amarr outposts and 44 other outposts.
If we fully upgrade all our Amarr outposts (unlikely, but let's run with it) we'd have 250*28 = 7000 manufacturing slots, plus say 500 more from non-amarr outposts depending on upgrade level and direction.
We have 121 sovereign systems. 72 of them already have outposts and are accounted for above. If we fill the remaining 49 systems with fully upgraded Amarr factories we'd have another 12250 manufacturing slots, or roughly 19000 in total, a pretty far cry from the 36-50 thousand you pulled out of your ass.
edit: Derp, you get three T1 upgrades, not two. Math corrected. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8878
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:28:00 -
[321] - Quote
Caneb wrote:Frying Doom wrote: Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots?
Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots?
Not sure where you're getting those numbers from. We currently have 28 Amarr outposts and 44 other outposts. If we fully upgrade all our Amarr outposts (unlikely, but let's run with it) we'd have 230*28 = 6440 manufacturing slots, plus say 500 more from non-amarr outposts depending on upgrade level and direction. We have 121 sovereign systems. 72 of them already have outposts and are accounted for above. If we fill the remaining 49 systems with fully upgraded Amarr factories we'd have another 11270 manufacturing slots, or roughly 18000 in total, a pretty far cry from the 36-50 thousand you pulled out of your ass.
I believe he was replying to Tippia's assertion that 0.0 stations should be upgradeable to match the best hi-sec systems @ 700 slots or so. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Frying Doom
2413
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:29:00 -
[322] - Quote
Caneb wrote:Frying Doom wrote: Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots?
Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots?
Not sure where you're getting those numbers from. We currently have 28 Amarr outposts and 44 other outposts. If we fully upgrade all our Amarr outposts (unlikely, but let's run with it) we'd have 230*28 = 6440 manufacturing slots, plus say 500 more from non-amarr outposts depending on upgrade level and direction. We have 121 sovereign systems. 72 of them already have outposts and are accounted for above. If we fill the remaining 49 systems with fully upgraded Amarr factories we'd have another 11270 manufacturing slots, or roughly 18000 in total, a pretty far cry from the 36-50 thousand you pulled out of your ass. Reading before commenting is a good skill.
Learn it. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Von Keigai
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:34:00 -
[323] - Quote
I am concerned about the proposed mechanics of icebelt respawn. Respawn happens a fixed and exact four hours after depletion of the last icebelt. This is a bad idea. It creates a "gold rush". It rewards solo play. It rewards semi-AFK players, who will be able to log in on a known schedule for their setup keyclicks. And it creates a quite unrealistic ability to know when something will be discovered in the future. "We know ice will be discovered in Otela at exactly 17:32. Just not where." A miner could be in one system, tap out the ice, then move to a nearby system for the four hours with absolute certainty that he is not missing any ice. A mining team could theoretically establish a schedule among a set of nearby ice belts, by carefully not-mining the last little bit of ice until it accords with a schedule.
The obvious tweak is make the respawn variable in time, averaging four hours but perhaps ranging anywhere from 1 hour to 7. This gives the same expected ice production, while making it impossible for players to trivially predict just by coming back in exactly four hours. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8879
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:36:00 -
[324] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Caneb wrote:Frying Doom wrote: Maybe you could elaborate on how you believed they earned the right to between 36,000 and 50,400 manufacturing slots?
Yes I do believe they need more slots and even more than what has been proposed but 36,000 + slots?
Not sure where you're getting those numbers from. We currently have 28 Amarr outposts and 44 other outposts. If we fully upgrade all our Amarr outposts (unlikely, but let's run with it) we'd have 230*28 = 6440 manufacturing slots, plus say 500 more from non-amarr outposts depending on upgrade level and direction. We have 121 sovereign systems. 72 of them already have outposts and are accounted for above. If we fill the remaining 49 systems with fully upgraded Amarr factories we'd have another 11270 manufacturing slots, or roughly 18000 in total, a pretty far cry from the 36-50 thousand you pulled out of your ass. Reading before commenting is a good skill. Learn it.
So is understanding. Try it. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
Caneb
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:38:00 -
[325] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: I believe he was replying to Tippia's assertion that 0.0 stations should be upgradeable to match the best hi-sec systems @ 700 slots or so.
My bad then.
Another solution to the lack of slots would be to add an assembly array with a bonus to material efficiency to offset the cost of running the POS (Assuming the array slots are used efficiently), so that POS based manufacturing could be competitive with station manufacturing. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8879
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:43:00 -
[326] - Quote
Caneb wrote:Malcanis wrote: I believe he was replying to Tippia's assertion that 0.0 stations should be upgradeable to match the best hi-sec systems @ 700 slots or so.
My bad then. Another solution to the lack of slots would be to add an assembly array with a bonus to material efficiency to offset the cost of running the POS (Assuming the array slots are used efficiently), so that POS based manufacturing could be competitive with station manufacturing.
The interesting aspect to all this is that hi-sec is grossly oversupplied with build slots. I'd be surprised if 50% of then are in use at any time. It's probably less then that.
Given that, why would anyone care how many build slots 0.0 has? What does it even matter if a 0.0 bloc has more than hi-sec? Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4745
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:49:00 -
[327] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Given that, why would anyone care how many build slots 0.0 has? What does it even matter if a 0.0 bloc has more than hi-sec? Because build slots = shiny toys and HIGHSEC WANT ALL AND NULLSEC CAN'T HAVE. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:56:00 -
[328] - Quote
Caneb wrote:edit: Derp, you get three T1 upgrades, not two. Math corrected. You were right the first time. While you do get 3 basic upgrade slots, you can only install one of a particular upgrade. The third basic slot will need to be filled with something other than additional manufacturing slots, most likely the office upgrade. |
Caneb
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:15:00 -
[329] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:Caneb wrote:edit: Derp, you get three T1 upgrades, not two. Math corrected. You were right the first time. While you do get 3 basic upgrade slots, you can only install one of a particular upgrade. The third basic slot will need to be filled with something other than additional manufacturing slots, most likely the office upgrade. Look at me getting schooled all over the place.
Ok so the ideal setup would be
Amarr Outpost - 50 slots T1 Factory upgrade - 20 slots T1 Plant upgrade - 20 slots T1 Whatever upgrade - 0 slots T2 Factory upgrade - 40 slots T2 Plant upgrade - 40 slots T3 Factory upgrade - 60 slots
Total 230 slots. Correct? |
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
85
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:18:00 -
[330] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Bottom line, another massive transfer of wealth from high sec to null sec and wh's. Demand for high sec mins was just wiped out as null sec now is overflowing with low end mins in high sec ores.
And wh's no longer have a trit / pyerite scarcity issue.
So heres the rub and "bottom line" high sec space is a great place, its "relatively" safe and you can mine quite a bit, you can mission, run incursions...suffice it to say high sec is NOT short of any forms of income. With that being said, null sec is. Why the hell would you go out to null sec to mine Ark when you can mine veld and make more doing it? In wormhole space its opposite of course because you at least have some level of control and protection. Its not like a fleet of carriers and dreads are going to hot drop you. Also, traffic isn't as bad so you tend to mine ark first.
The "bottom line" as you put it is that although I lived in and mined high sec and dont even touch null, I still think this change was needed. Its way too easy to make more money mining in high over null. At least this way players dont have to go to high sec to mine or import it from there. They can get back out in the belts in null and use the ore instead of letting the space just sit there and rot.
High sec miners shouldn't be complaining, they should be glad...it means less people are stealing your ore :) The changes aren't severely overbalanced. You can still make quite a bit of money mining high sec, you just arent going to get filthy rich from it. I suggest finding an incursion fleet.
As for null space, yes they have benefited from the insanity of moon goo, but that has been changing in steps and phases. Now even it is a bit more balanced and doesnt put profits in the hands of just one or two alliances.
The point is, stop complaining. If you think you can make more money in null sec then high...move there. It is now correctly balanced. You are paying for slightly less valued ore by mining in a slightly more protected system. I really dont see anything wrong with this trade off. |
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:21:00 -
[331] - Quote
T3 can be either Factory or Plant, the only difference is the time bonus is on T1 or T2 ships respectively. But yes that's right, if your only concern is maxing the slots out. |
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
1161
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:26:00 -
[332] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. Will this be adjusted down so as to eat into stockpiles, cause else the 20% deficiency is going to take years before non-high-sec ice mining will be needed. Nyan |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4745
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:27:00 -
[333] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. Will this be adjusted down so as to eat into stockpiles, cause else the 20% deficiency is going to take years before non-high-sec ice mining will be needed. lol, can you imagine the outcry if this were to be adjusted down? |
Traidir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
59
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:30:00 -
[334] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Once the scans are done and end up in Dotlan - end of game and a lot of wasted CCP dev work. Not if the resources deplete.
|
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
85
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:32:00 -
[335] - Quote
Von Keigai wrote:I am concerned about the proposed mechanics of icebelt respawn. Respawn happens a fixed and exact four hours after depletion of the last icebelt. This is a bad idea. It creates a "gold rush". It rewards solo play. It rewards semi-AFK players, who will be able to log in on a known schedule for their setup keyclicks. And it creates a quite unrealistic ability to know when something will be discovered in the future. "We know ice will be discovered in Otela at exactly 17:32. Just not where." A miner could be in one system, tap out the ice, then move to a nearby system for the four hours with absolute certainty that he is not missing any ice. A mining team could theoretically establish a schedule among a set of nearby ice belts, by carefully not-mining the last little bit of ice until it accords with a schedule.
The obvious tweak is make the respawn variable in time, averaging four hours but perhaps ranging anywhere from 1 hour to 7. This gives the same expected ice production, while making it impossible for players to trivially predict just by coming back in exactly four hours.
There are a couple issues I have with your assessment of this situation.
A. Solo play should always be rewarded, it is a slowly disapperaing aspect of this game and im glad it is being supported a bit more now. Players who use macks are still going to solo no matter where they go...respawn rates are irrelevant to that fact. Another thing to think of is that most miners who solo play will have 3-4 accounts that they engage in mining with. So in a technical term its not eexactly solo play...from a social stand point it is but not from a 3rd person point of view.
B. I fail to see how this rewards semi-afk play. Yes, ice harvesters are being penalized with longer cycle times; however, having lowers amounts of ice depleting over more areas is much better. We all know that depleting an ice roid the way they are set now is a *****. Even with a good sized fleet it would take you all day to do just one roid. Having them pop every hour or so helps.
C. As for the ability to know where it will be discovered in the future that one is easy. The new discovery scanner can be set to auto-scan and pick up new ice belts, the belts are not moving from the current systems they are in...just away from static belts.
D. The 4 hour spawn rate being an issue is irrelevant. I mean technically the way it is now with standard ore belts is respawning at DT. So as a miner you know that exactly 11:30 every day that belt will get new ore. Thus you can set a time table there as well.
E. Finally yes, a miner could get a fleet together and tap out a belt so to speak, but another fleet could be tapping out a belt in a different system, and the first fleet may move to the system the second fleet was in and find it devoid of ice. This isnt an issue. Having the respawn set in stone at exactly 4 hours helps players who play in varoius time zones to be able to take advantage of it and organize a fleet within their time zone to take advantage of it.
To be honest, I love the 4 hour exact timing of it. It allows miners to plan when they want to deplete a belt; AND...yes there is an and, it allows gankers to know exactly when ice will be available too. Thus if you mine you have the edge and if you gank you have equal footing PLUS every time zone can gain an equal edge. To be honest your concerns are misplaced to me. |
Sissy Fuzz
Sissy Fuzz Communications
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:36:00 -
[336] - Quote
10 years of dumbing down EVE! And still going strong!
"We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance."
Love this one: Changing the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players.
I'd say - they won't be hidden anymore, will they. Way to take away one small thing that is actually fun i high sec. Why not add an AutoMine and AutoGank function too? Or even better: Also add a NavigateToAndMine and NavigateToAndGank option to the autopilot!! Then you won't even have to be in the actual system when you get the urge to mine or gank something.
Then it will be really noob friendly for all types of players.
/SF
|
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
85
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:39:00 -
[337] - Quote
Sissy Fuzz wrote:10 years of dumbing down EVE! And still going strong!
"We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance."
Love this one: Changing the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players.
I'd say - they won't be hidden anymore, will they. Way to take away one small thing that is actually fun i high sec. Why not add an AutoMine and AutoGank function too? Or even better: Also add a NavigateToAndMine and NavigateToAndGank option to the autopilot!! Then you won't even have to be in the actual system when you get the urge to mine or gank something.
Then it will be really noob friendly for all types of players.
/SF
I sense someone is pissed that they cant mine hidden from gankers anymore...This isnt dumbing eve down its making it less work and more play. Im a miner and I support these changes. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:48:00 -
[338] - Quote
Traidir wrote:KIller Wabbit wrote:Once the scans are done and end up in Dotlan - end of game and a lot of wasted CCP dev work. Not if the resources deplete.
depleting moongoo is a really bad idea We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 17:21:00 -
[339] - Quote
Quote:A. Solo play should always be rewarded, it is a slowly disapperaing aspect of this game and im glad it is being supported a bit more now. Players who use macks are still going to solo no matter where they go...respawn rates are irrelevant to that fact. Another thing to think of is that most miners who solo play will have 3-4 accounts that they engage in mining with. So in a technical term its not eexactly solo play...from a social stand point it is but not from a 3rd person point of view.
nope, it should be possible, but this is a MULTIPLAYER game, teaming up should be rewarded
Quote:B. I fail to see how this rewards semi-afk play. Yes, ice harvesters are being penalized with longer cycle times; however, having lowers amounts of ice depleting over more areas is much better. We all know that depleting an ice roid the way they are set now is a *****. Even with a good sized fleet it would take you all day to do just one roid. Having them pop every hour or so helps.
semi-afk play should not be rewarded
We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Unclaimed.
222
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 17:43:00 -
[340] - Quote
On the whole, I like these changes, but some I think are a mistake:
Please do not add more slots to outposts, except perhaps for additional corporate office slots. Industry in null should take place in POSes, not in outposts. POS industry is better from a game design perspective than outpost industry. First, POSes require fuel, so increased POS use stimulates PI and ice mining; more POSes means more PvE, which means a more active economy, more ISK in player pockets, AND more targets in space to shoot at. Second, POSes are objectives to fight over. Third, a POS is a stake in the ground, and creates a sense of ownership. Fourth, POS industry encourages cooperation between corp members, and creates openings for corp thieves.
I've written extensively on why outpost slot availability is not a bottleneck in null industrial production. In brief -- the drone regions produced all of their T1 ship and ammo needs up until the removal of drone alloys, using POS industry slots. There's no reason to expand outpost slots, and doing so does not promote player interaction.
Please leave the random hidden belts as grav sites that must be probed down. These are the belts that spawn randomly, and are not tied to the industry index of a system. They should be better than regular belts, given the effort it takes to scan them down and then make use of them, especially in lowsec; better for a low/null miner means safer.
If I understand correctly, the new 'discovery' scanner will produce instant results. This is a mistake. Miners need the ten second window in order to (1) see the hostile pilot in local and (2) get into warp. Mining barges are very, very slow; this change risks turning mining in null, lowsec, and wh space into a turkey shoot. The stupid miners will go back to high-sec, and the smart miners will start mining while permanently aligned to a safe tower; both will result in reduced targets. If i-hub-spawned belts are moved to the new discovery/system scanner, then either they should not appear immediately on the scan results or, alternatively, the i-hub should spawn duplicate belts -- that is, it should spawn an additional belt or two at each level, instead of one belt, so that it is more difficult to drop in on the mining operation.
I have little experience with wormholes, but considering how easy mining barges are to kill, and how difficult it is to detect hostiles in wormholes even under the current probing/scan mechanic, grav sites in wormholes should remain part of the exploration system and should require probes to locate. Unless the discovery scanner also shows all ships within scan range, which renders this issue moot.
The addition of low-end minerals to high-end ore is awesome, and should make null industry possible, and should also increase the rewards of mining in null by a substantial degree. I am somewhat concerned about the risk of low-end minerals from null flooding into high-sec. Maybe it might make sense to increase the volume of high-end ore (and increase yield per unit proportionately in compensation), in order to make exporting raw high-end ore to high-sec less profitable. No sane person will normally move low-end minerals via jump freighter, so that should not be a substantial issue except in shallow null.
The ice mining changes are great. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13866
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 18:02:00 -
[341] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote: Please do not add more slots to outposts, except perhaps for additional corporate office slots. Industry in null should take place in POSes, not in outposts. POS industry is better from a game design perspective than outpost industry. First, POSes require fuel, so increased POS use stimulates PI and ice mining; more POSes means more PvE, which means a more active economy, more ISK in player pockets, AND more targets in space to shoot at. Second, POSes are objectives to fight over. Third, a POS is a stake in the ground, and creates a sense of ownership. Fourth, POS industry encourages cooperation between corp members, and creates openings for corp thieves. That would make sense if POSes were actually in any way useful for large-scale industry, which would require a complete revamp of everything POS related. Moreover, POSes don't solve the problem of highsec since a) the same POSes are available there and b) since we still have the highsec stations, which are the real problem to be solved.
So no, add craptons of slots to outposts, and then GÇö should POSes ever be reimplemented GÇö maybe it would be time to scale back station and outpost slots. But certainly not before then. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 18:09:00 -
[342] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:
semi-afk play should not be rewarded
Kiss 100,000 accounts goodbye, then. |
Fergus Runkle
Truth and Reconciliation Council
21
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 18:16:00 -
[343] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:
You can bet that ice interdiction parties by the null sec cartels will be a common thing. They have the resources, pilots, and organization to mine out ice belts FAST, and at the same time bump/ destroy any other non-allied mining ships from the belts.
It will become a situation that they will have ongoing threads on their private forums stating the precise time that a new belt will spawn, allowing the next wave of their pilots 4 TZ's over to grab the entire belt's worth of ice.
Welcome to the new resource chokepoint / oligopoly commodity. But hey, the goon lead game designer said he wanted ice to become the oil of Eve.
Well, expect goons, test, and others to continue to act like u.s., China, Russia, and the other major powers do in the real world with oil, and do their best to have their industrial corps control the supply, backed by whatever military might is required.
Pretty much this.
1) why can't the ice belts spawn anywhere rather than in fixed systems, thats not making it harder for bots
2) why the move from signatures to anomalies for the ore belts and new ice belts, leave them in the exploration system. Gives the explorers a sense of the gold rush pioneers. theres ice in this 'ere system
(unless the move to anomalies is in preparation for ALL ore to be moved to them, no static belts of any kind anymore)
|
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
85
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 19:36:00 -
[344] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Quote:A. Solo play should always be rewarded, it is a slowly disapperaing aspect of this game and im glad it is being supported a bit more now. Players who use macks are still going to solo no matter where they go...respawn rates are irrelevant to that fact. Another thing to think of is that most miners who solo play will have 3-4 accounts that they engage in mining with. So in a technical term its not eexactly solo play...from a social stand point it is but not from a 3rd person point of view.
nope, it should be possible, but this is a MULTIPLAYER game, teaming up should be rewarded Quote:B. I fail to see how this rewards semi-afk play. Yes, ice harvesters are being penalized with longer cycle times; however, having lowers amounts of ice depleting over more areas is much better. We all know that depleting an ice roid the way they are set now is a *****. Even with a good sized fleet it would take you all day to do just one roid. Having them pop every hour or so helps.
semi-afk play should not be rewarded
It is a multi-player game; however, it is also a sandbox and yes while people should be able to interact with other players, there should not be a restriction of allowing others to do solo stuff. In truth it should be pretty balanced on both sides. More and more changes have been geared toward only fleet ops and multi-player opportunities and while these are nice to have, we must not stomp out the new content and ability for players to take a break now and again and just do something on their own without someone barking orders. |
Althanaslas Imhari
All Your Machariel Belong to Ham
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 20:14:00 -
[345] - Quote
I'm not a miner myself, but something that I haven't really seen taken into account yet is that ORE ships use oxygen isotopes as well, along with one of the more popular JFs (Anshar). Now that ice (likely blue ice especially) is becoming scarce, will there be more efforts to discourage the use of bots/macros?
Just from a game mechanic standpoint, seems like you're setting up a perfect situation for that sort of thing to run rampant and basically dominate the market. |
Lunaleil Fournier
StarFleet Enterprises Red Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 20:34:00 -
[346] - Quote
Really happy with most of this, but you're missing a huge opportunity with anomalies.
Nullsec Anomalies should be re-done into 3 different sites: one for 2 month old noobs in t1 BS's (dens), one for vets in marauders (hubs), and one for groups of people (sanctums). Each one increases the isk per hour per pilot which means groups would make the highest isk per hour per person. It would be much more scalable and allow more people per system. It also would give noobs a viable income in 00 that the current low level anoms don't provide - if you balance the payout to be worthwhile.
Also - a lot of current anoms are just a pain to run because of the rediculous numbers of frigs and cruisers. Balancing that to be less tedious but still difficult by removing numbers but buffing the rats that remain would be greatly appreciated. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 20:58:00 -
[347] - Quote
I never said solo play or semi afk playshould be impossible, I said that grouping up and being active should pay off
Right now, it often does not. That's really bad game design.
Making (highsec) ice a scarse Ressource is a step in the right direction, organised gameplay will be rewarding, competition is (for the first time in ice history) a possibility, competition is where stories are told. High-Sec needs those. We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Conjaq
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 20:59:00 -
[348] - Quote
Quote:From the dev blog; Most systems that currently have ice belts will contain these new ice anomalies, with the notable exception of many systems in Amarrian, Khanid, and Ammatar high security space. Below I will list all the systems in high security space that will contain spawns of Clear Icicle.
....List of systems
These will be the only high security systems that will contain Clear Icicle. All low-security and null-security systems that currently contain static ice belts, as well as all high security systems in Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar space that contain static ice belts, will contain the new ice anomalies.
How come the amarr ice belts are not changed, like the rest of all the the factions? It seems wierd only amarr keep their static ice belts, |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:22:00 -
[349] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:a miner is prey and its only defense, like prey, should be fleeing to safety when the predators arrive Ya know, if this is really true, then all mining ships should have a built-in +4 WCS, as well as a much higher agility for faster warp outs and to help avoid bumping.... |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:29:00 -
[350] - Quote
Althanaslas Imhari wrote:I'm not a miner myself, but something that I haven't really seen taken into account yet is that ORE ships use oxygen isotopes as well, along with one of the more popular JFs (Anshar). The only mining ship which uses oxytopes is the Rorqual. The mining barges, exhumers, the Venture, and the Orca do not use oxytopes. |
|
Althanaslas Imhari
All Your Machariel Belong to Ham
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:38:00 -
[351] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Althanaslas Imhari wrote:I'm not a miner myself, but something that I haven't really seen taken into account yet is that ORE ships use oxygen isotopes as well, along with one of the more popular JFs (Anshar). The only mining ship which uses oxytopes is the Rorqual. The mining barges, exhumers, the Venture, and the Orca do not use oxytopes.
Sorry, I suppose I should have specified that in my original post (ship, as opposed to ships). My point was that there are more ships out there using the isotopes refined from Blue Ice than any of the other ice products, leading to an already inflated market for Blue Ice and Oxygen Isotopes. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:42:00 -
[352] - Quote
So, more competition for the blue ice?
How terrible
Not. We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Althanaslas Imhari
All Your Machariel Belong to Ham
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:58:00 -
[353] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:So, more competition for the blue ice?
How terrible
Not.
Perhaps a market dominated by bots and isk farmers is okay by you, but for those of us with towers and ships to fuel, it is a valid concern. Also, should you have bothered to read, the original post was about the possibility of the afforementioned demographic having an unfair advantage over players. Then again, I should know better than to feed the trolls. Have yourself a fine day my good sir. |
frightning
Griffin Capsuleers Ad-Astra
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:28:00 -
[354] - Quote
As mentioned a few times re: Wormholes, you could go further than initial blog by: Ensuring that Grav sites are not anoms & warpable due to a "Subspace Communications error". This will offset not having local to check who's in system. [*] Introducing Ice of random varieties as an alternative source of supply. This will generate isk for WH folks plus keep easy prey on the field for gankers. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4754
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:47:00 -
[355] - Quote
Althanaslas Imhari wrote:I'm not a miner myself, but something that I haven't really seen taken into account yet is that ORE ships use oxygen isotopes as well, along with one of the more popular JFs (Anshar). I guess it's good then that I invested in oxygen isotopes over the other types. It was a pretty random decision which one I'd go for. |
Sissy Fuzz
Sissy Fuzz Communications
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:12:00 -
[356] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Sissy Fuzz wrote:10 years of dumbing down EVE! And still going strong!
"We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance."
Love this one: Changing the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players.
I'd say - they won't be hidden anymore, will they. Way to take away one small thing that is actually fun i high sec. Why not add an AutoMine and AutoGank function too? Or even better: Also add a NavigateToAndMine and NavigateToAndGank option to the autopilot!! Then you won't even have to be in the actual system when you get the urge to mine or gank something.
Then it will be really noob friendly for all types of players.
/SF
I sense someone is pissed that they cant mine hidden from gankers anymore...This isnt dumbing eve down its making it less work and more play. Im a miner and I support these changes.
Well, you're sensing wrong.
I am not any more hidden from gankers than the field I am mining was for me, before I scanned it down. It is less work but not more play. On the contrary, I think a lot of people find a lot of "play" in the process of scanning down both mining fields and miners, as per preference.
Risk v reward... or effort v reward, right? The current system demands effort from both miner and ganker to be rewarded in a - from both perspectives - low risk environment. The proposed change is - exactly - dumbing down EVE by removing the effort of employing something that takes skill and time to achieve a goal.
I am not a miner and I don't.
/SF
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
863
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:14:00 -
[357] - Quote
Althanaslas Imhari wrote:Gilbaron wrote:So, more competition for the blue ice?
How terrible
Not. Perhaps a market dominated by bots and isk farmers is okay by you, but for those of us with towers and ships to fuel, it is a valid concern. Also, should you have bothered to read, the original post was about the possibility of the afforementioned demographic having an unfair advantage over players. Then again, I should know better than to feed the trolls. Have yourself a fine day my good sir.
do you realise that a limited and interesting ressource makes being a bot much harder than it currently is ? i for one see competition for the ice belts, i see wardecs, i see bumping, i see hatred, i see all the good stuff. (and i worry if having 80% of all required ice in highsec is enough to promote enough conflict, i would aim for less as a game designer, but i understand a cautious approach, especially since making fuelblocks in 00 makes sense will all the incoming changes, and icemining in 00 opens up so much more possibilities for interesting gameplay than icemining in highsec ever could)
and don't forget the gigantic stockpiles that currently exist, its not like oxygen isotopes will dissapear from all hangars tomorrow (would be pretty funny though) We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1666
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:16:00 -
[358] - Quote
Lunaleil Fournier wrote:Really happy with most of this, but you're missing a huge opportunity with anomalies.
Nullsec Anomalies should be re-done into 3 different sites: one for 2 month old noobs in t1 BS's (dens), one for vets in marauders (hubs), and one for groups of people (sanctums). Each one increases the isk per hour per pilot which means groups would make the highest isk per hour per person. It would be much more scalable and allow more people per system. It also would give noobs a viable income in 00 that the current low level anoms don't provide - if you balance the payout to be worthwhile.
Also - a lot of current anoms are just a pain to run because of the rediculous numbers of frigs and cruisers. Balancing that to be less tedious but still difficult by removing numbers but buffing the rats that remain would be greatly appreciated.
Amen to this.
The current state of Anoms isn't all that great. The way bounteis are paid out in EVE (outside of incursions) makes anoms very "anti-cooperation". It's the exact same in missions and complexes but people don't realy notice it because plexes are about loot and missions don't just pay bounties, but also LP. If you have a high dps ship and you invite a buddy along that does't do as much dps, that buddy STILL gets exactly half of all the bounties. Great for him, crappy for you lol.
I better way might be to apportion bounties according to damage done (do 65% of the damge, get 65% of the bounty total), but I could see downsides to that as well.
Back to what you are talking about, it would be VERY nice to see anoms structured as you say. As it is now, there is no reason for anyone (noob or otherwise) to do an anom lower than a hub and there are reasons why people don't share the good high end anoms very much , leading to this situation we have here were upgraded systems can't accomodate very many ratters.
More ratters means more isk yea, but also more targets/more ships going boom. With a lot of people in local, some ratter usually misses the neut/red coming in and gets killed. The current anoms encourge small ratting system populations making local that much better an intel tool, ie the current situation is pretty anti-pvp. |
Dring Dingle
Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 01:25:00 -
[359] - Quote
Did I miss the part about pos upgrades? Also why not 100% refining at poses!!! |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
326
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 02:11:00 -
[360] - Quote
ThuliHaf...... err go with Thulium Hafnite?
and ProMerc, u were so close to an easy name - Promercurite
the Composites tend to have 'ium' endings to names so promercurium wouldnt fit too well.
|
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 02:43:00 -
[361] - Quote
Considering how easy it will be to find mining ships in WHs after the changes to Grav sites being anomalies found on Dscan, is thijs a stealth nerf in order to reduce the desirability of WH living? Or what reasoning does CCP have in making it so that mining in WHs is now a game of russian roulette.
Even if multiple anoms spawn instead of a single Grav site. With the new tracking camera, it is still easy as hell to locate a ship that's on any of the selectable locations such as anoms, pocos, planets etc. With the ability to select your anom in space instead of using the old align to method, you're indirectly speeding up the ability of an aggressor to locate a ship. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
326
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 03:09:00 -
[362] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Considering how easy it will be to find mining ships in WHs after the changes to Grav sites being anomalies found on Dscan, is thijs a stealth nerf in order to reduce the desirability of WH living? Or what reasoning does CCP have in making it so that mining in WHs is now a game of russian roulette.
Even if multiple anoms spawn instead of a single Grav site. With the new tracking camera, it is still easy as hell to locate a ship that's on any of the selectable locations such as anoms, pocos, planets etc. With the ability to select your anom in space instead of using the old align to method, you're indirectly speeding up the ability of an aggressor to locate a ship.
i think that was the plan all along, one of the main selling points for aggressors when referring to the 'no local' thing was to catch people relatively unawares after jumping in and scanning. i believe this change is to better get the higher speed of the process to more people to show the current system isnt that bad.
plus the mining in WH's thing i think has been nerfed due to their ability to easy (albeit awkwardly) get minerals to highsec markets.
i remember that being one of the bug bears of CSM7 that had never been resolved.
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
864
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 03:30:00 -
[363] - Quote
WHs are still relatively safe
you probescan the whole system and place an alt at every wormhole (a halfway decent WH corp has enough alts that can't mine) doing so allows you to actually hear anyone coming into the system via one of these WHs
another alt is constantly probing the system for new signatures, as soon as one appears you know that you might have a problem and can get the mining fleet safe We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Nitrogen Isotopes
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 03:36:00 -
[364] - Quote
I think CCP is missing an opportunity with the retooling of ice belts with going about it this way. Rather than have ice belts respawn a few hours after depeltion with an expected uptime of a few hours and always in the same systems, a more gold-rush style atmosphere would come about from ice belts respawning after several days or weeks with an amount of available ice estimated to deplete in that same timeframe, and most certainly change locations.
This would encourage a prospecting attitude among ice miners, who would necessarily have to search for and relocate to new resources. It would also avoid a likely downtime of "professional" ice miners waiting out a 4-hour period, and instead fill that downtime with searching for and moving to new sources.
A 2-hour-uptime 4-hour-downtime schedule would just be tedious. Ice mining is tedious enough. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
932
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 04:16:00 -
[365] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:ThuliHaf...... err go with Thulium Hafnite?
and ProMerc, u were so close to an easy name - Promercurite
the Composites tend to have 'ium' endings to names so promercurium wouldnt fit too well.
Those aren't the final names. Although given the existing Hafnite compound, I wouldn't be surprised to see Thulium Hafnite. And Promethium Mercurite would be the obvious candidate, though I suppose "Pro Mercurite" is just as likely. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 04:33:00 -
[366] - Quote
Nitrogen Isotopes wrote: A 2-hour-uptime 4-hour-downtime schedule would just be tedious. Ice mining is tedious enough.
I'd have to disagree.. There's NOTHING tedious about warping 10 alts to a belt in mackinaws, targetting the same ice rock that doesn't deplete.. and then going afk for an hour while the hold fills. |
Nitrogen Isotopes
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 04:35:00 -
[367] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Nitrogen Isotopes wrote: A 2-hour-uptime 4-hour-downtime schedule would just be tedious. Ice mining is tedious enough.
I'd have to disagree.. There's NOTHING tedious about warping 10 alts to a belt in mackinaws, targetting the same ice rock that doesn't deplete.. and then going afk for an hour while the hold fills.
Wrong choice of words... not so much tedium, but more brain numbing. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 04:38:00 -
[368] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
i think that was the plan all along, one of the main selling points for aggressors when referring to the 'no local' thing was to catch people relatively unawares after jumping in and scanning. i believe this change is to better get the higher speed of the process to more people to show the current system isnt that bad.
plus the mining in WH's thing i think has been nerfed due to their ability to easy (albeit awkwardly) get minerals to highsec markets.
i remember that being one of the bug bears of CSM7 that had never been resolved.
But with this system, even a player that's sitting at his keyboard mining will be caught since it takes mere seconds to be able to locate the right anomaly and player, while the align time on the mining ships is crap.. And don't forget, CCP was trying to ENCOURAGE mining in low/null. This way it's just going to be way more rare to see miners in low.
As for the ABC thing from WH to HS markets, that's hardly a valid argument. With the mass amounts and the amount of space the ore took up, there wasn't a lot of WH dwellers EXPORTING their products to the market. Using the refinery is pretty much useless as you're basically just throwing away 1/4 of the materials by using it. I would say majority uses it locally to build stuff and avoid the hassle of importing it instead. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.
In all honesty, it makes no difference to me, since even my WH dweller never mines because of the hassle associated with it. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 04:39:00 -
[369] - Quote
Nitrogen Isotopes wrote:Soko99 wrote:Nitrogen Isotopes wrote: A 2-hour-uptime 4-hour-downtime schedule would just be tedious. Ice mining is tedious enough.
I'd have to disagree.. There's NOTHING tedious about warping 10 alts to a belt in mackinaws, targetting the same ice rock that doesn't deplete.. and then going afk for an hour while the hold fills. Wrong choice of words... not so much tedium, but more brain numbing.
But it would mean that people would be forced to be near their computers to make the moves and to find the new locations for ice mining. |
Haroth
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 05:33:00 -
[370] - Quote
Why would you do something as foolish(being VERY nice) by making grav sites in wh to be able to be scanned by ship scanner and making scanning instant? this will ruin wh mining and wh space entirely. Wh space is the frontier, its supposed to be difficult but now you are downgrading it to the level of the rest of eve simply to satisfy those who don't live in Wh space. |
|
Temba Ronin
213
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 07:03:00 -
[371] - Quote
Nitrogen Isotopes wrote:I think CCP is missing an opportunity with the retooling of ice belts with going about it this way. Rather than have ice belts respawn a few hours after depeltion with an expected uptime of a few hours and always in the same systems, a more gold-rush style atmosphere would come about from ice belts respawning after several days or weeks with an amount of available ice estimated to deplete in that same timeframe, and most certainly change locations.
This would encourage a prospecting attitude among ice miners, who would necessarily have to search for and relocate to new resources. It would also avoid a likely downtime of "professional" ice miners waiting out a 4-hour period, and instead fill that downtime with searching for and moving to new sources.
A 2-hour-uptime 4-hour-downtime schedule would just be tedious. Ice mining is tedious enough. Hmmm ... i'd rather not fly around null sec in my ice mining ship hunting for ice anomalies, that could cause problems even with friendly neighbors, as i come flying into their system to mine all the ice. The only prospecting i might get accomplished is discovering a roaming gang of pvp types, and that story can end badly for the ice miner, in this case me.
Changing infinite ice belts to finite ice anomalies is plenty enough change for right now imho.
Power To The Players! |
Temba Ronin
213
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 07:19:00 -
[372] - Quote
I am looking forward to the changes to the ABC ores and the needed love given to spodumain. One of the shocking realities of Null Sec was how important tritanium became the further from highsec you found yourself. I view this as a positive step in the right direction for Null Sec.
However I do wonder how this will impact the price and desirability of Jump Freighters whom supply a good portion of those needed minerals to Null Sec builders currently.
Power To The Players! |
Ashina Sito
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 07:20:00 -
[373] - Quote
I only have one question.
What happens to the ice belt in the system. The system I live in has 2 belts, one is Ice. Does that mean after the patch it will only have one belt? Not an overly important issue but I am sure someone will ask me if I know the answer. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7706
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 08:05:00 -
[374] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:Regarding Outpost upgrades, let me say one word: Super Capitals. Almost no one uses CSMAs because the risk of them being inaccessible and loosing your 25+ billions ISK ship without at least a fighting chance is completely unappealing. What I propose is why not get rid of the CSMA altogether and replace it with a very expensive Outpost upgrade that allows for at least Super Carriers, to be docked? I'm pretty sure this would top most Super Cap pilot's wish list of Outpost upgrades.
Hell no. If you want to fly a supercapital, either dedicate a character to it or get a holding alt. Supercaps are difficult enough to catch and kill; allowing them to dock is beyond stupid. mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters [url]http://themittani.com/[/url]: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 11:23:00 -
[375] - Quote
And not to mention that the CSMA is required as a part of the supercapital production cycle, because you can't launch directly from the CSAA. I see no reason for CCP to change this, and with the upcoming changes to CSMAs they certainly won't be removed.
And while being able to dock my super would be sorta nice (easy repairing of those random fighters with hull damage? yes please!), I agree with Andski. Supercap proliferation is already high enough without making them require less dedication. |
Verran Skarne
Shadowfire Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 11:26:00 -
[376] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:WHs are still relatively safe
you probescan the whole system and place an alt at every wormhole (a halfway decent WH corp has enough alts that can't mine) doing so allows you to actually hear anyone coming into the system via one of these WHs
another alt is constantly probing the system for new signatures, as soon as one appears you know that you might have a problem and can get the mining fleet safe
Actually, what you do is roll your statics and close them when you don't need them. Then you don't have to waste a body watching a wide-open doorway into your system that could admit a fleet at any point. For any in-holes you happen to have before you start, you close them or mass to critical (closing is preferable). Basically, if you're going to do a real mining op in a wormhole, you shut the system down so that the only thing you're worried about is a new in-hole opening up.
Even doing this today, you *still* have to have the system covered with scan probes (we usually keep either a deep space or combats out) and you *still* need the miners hammering directional every 5-6 seconds. Because humans are not robots and go afk to use the bathroom, get coffee, or start talking and just forget to click the clicky, the combination of everyone doing these things gives you a fairly good chance to spot the hostile coming before he makes it to the juicy mining fleet. Usually. You'll still lose some ships from time to time from people being slow to warp out or just not paying attention like they should be.
That's today.
With this change, d-scan becomes more or less useless for protecting mining fleets in wormholes (or much of anything else, for that matter). The only thing d-scan is going to show you is enemy probes - any hostile roam coming in is more than likely going to be cloak-capable, or at least their scouts will be.
Now, realistically what you'll have to do to keep your wormhole mining op secure is:
- Shut all the holes into the system. - Keep a scanner out with combats or a deep space watching for new sigs. This usually needs to be a main because the scans need to be going constantly, but you can fit a probe launcher on a hauler. - Cage your grav site in warp bubbles and build a safe point for them to warp out that's not in line with any planets. This will delay hostiles warping in long enough to try and get miners out. - Run a combat patrol of ships to run interference while the miners warp away and switch to combat ships for response.
So, is it possible to still mine in a wormhole? Yes. Is it going to be as easy for smaller corps to do it? No. That's my main concern really. This change is really going to hurt the smaller corps inhabiting lower-end wormholes, who have trouble getting more than 5-6 pilots online at a time just due to low membership. You could argue that corps that small shouldn't be in wormhole space, but see my post a few pages back about the available content in a low-end wormhole. You can't drag a bunch of people into space like that and expect them to log in and just sit there if there's nothing for them to do. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8913
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 11:28:00 -
[377] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:I am looking forward to the changes to the ABC ores and the needed love given to spodumain. One of the shocking realities of Null Sec was how important tritanium became the further from highsec you found yourself. I view this as a positive step in the right direction for Null Sec.
However I do wonder how this will impact the price and desirability of Jump Freighters whom supply a good portion of those needed minerals to Null Sec builders currently.
Power To The Players!
given the T2 mats rebalance, I'd expect the cost of JFs to fall significantly.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Verran Skarne
Shadowfire Enterprises
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 11:41:00 -
[378] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
i think that was the plan all along, one of the main selling points for aggressors when referring to the 'no local' thing was to catch people relatively unawares after jumping in and scanning. i believe this change is to better get the higher speed of the process to more people to show the current system isnt that bad.
plus the mining in WH's thing i think has been nerfed due to their ability to easy (albeit awkwardly) get minerals to highsec markets.
i remember that being one of the bug bears of CSM7 that had never been resolved.
But with this system, even a player that's sitting at his keyboard mining will be caught since it takes mere seconds to be able to locate the right anomaly and player, while the align time on the mining ships is crap.. And don't forget, CCP was trying to ENCOURAGE mining in low/null. This way it's just going to be way more rare to see miners in low. As for the ABC thing from WH to HS markets, that's hardly a valid argument. With the mass amounts and the amount of space the ore took up, there wasn't a lot of WH dwellers EXPORTING their products to the market. Using the refinery is pretty much useless as you're basically just throwing away 1/4 of the materials by using it. I would say majority uses it locally to build stuff and avoid the hassle of importing it instead. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that. In all honesty, it makes no difference to me, since even my WH dweller never mines because of the hassle associated with it.
Wormhole ore is a tiny, tiny percentage of total ore. Even if it is higher-end stuff, it's a drop in the bucket.
See the graph on mined ore volume in this dev blog.
That being the case, I highly doubt that this was an "intentional" nerf to wormhole mining. I'm actually not sure what the intent was, since in my experience, miners "hiding" in grav sites was never really a problem for gankers/pirates anywhere else either, but who knows. Just like cloaks, combat scanners are the norm amongst people hunting for kills these days. I think the problem is just that when CCP was thinking about the change to grav sites, they didn't think about how things work in w-space, with the lack of a local channel to warn you that a non-blue is in system. |
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 12:46:00 -
[379] - Quote
Love all the changes except the GRAV site visibility (no defense from alpha volleys of covert snipers or new wh breaching fleet). Probably will squeeze more miners out of WH space than high sec.
But mining wise: the rich will merely get richer
Mining changes will probably strengthen existing null sec owners so much and so quickly that -
you will actually see fewer new independent corps and alliance able to gain a toehold in null sec.
Any expansion in null sec numbers will likely be through existing alliances and corps. With a few wholesale corp additions to existing alliances.
And while the pitch of battle is certain to increase this does not necessarily mean a change to stability of major sovereignty boundaries.
In fact I predict that the Odyssey changes will result in larger alliances squeezing out most or all the current small null sec player alliances and corps - before many major changes in boundaries for large alliances.
The key question will likely become "how large a 24x365 alliance do you have to be to survive in null sec?"
Just saying you probably need at least 1 more major tweak if you want new corps and alliances battling for a place in null -- and not a reduction to a few mega-weight contenders.
How do new corps get resources or opportunity to get that toehold in null now that landlord alliances will not see many systems as valueless and rentable? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8916
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 12:58:00 -
[380] - Quote
Please do explain how the mining changes hinder new alliances in 0.0
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1864
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 13:43:00 -
[381] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Please do explain how the mining changes hinder new alliances in 0.0 Because it's a kneejerk Fox News Talking Point to throw in whenever CCP fixes something unbalanced the poster previously benefitted from. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 14:07:00 -
[382] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:WHs are still relatively safe
you probescan the whole system and place an alt at every wormhole (a halfway decent WH corp has enough alts that can't mine) doing so allows you to actually hear anyone coming into the system via one of these WHs
another alt is constantly probing the system for new signatures, as soon as one appears you know that you might have a problem and can get the mining fleet safe
Warning about new holes works based on need and time for breaching fleet to scan you down with probes - meaning you had 1-3 minutes minimum to detect new whole and search for intruder probes or uncloaked ship before warp to POS.
As you say that is currently plenty of time for alert well manned fleet to handle new wh. But...
Now you have maybe as little as 20-40 seconds from new hole opening until they start arriving at your mining site. Scanning grav sites will now take 5-10 second and no probes or uncloaking. And even the most constant probe spamming loses 5 seconds or so detecting. Since most barges need 15-20 seconds to warp out that does not really leave much time for human problem recognition and communication..and more normal scanning every 10-30 seconds will simply miss out sometimes. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
598
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 14:32:00 -
[383] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote: Please do not add more slots to outposts, except perhaps for additional corporate office slots. Industry in null should take place in POSes, not in outposts. POS industry is better from a game design perspective than outpost industry. First, POSes require fuel, so increased POS use stimulates PI and ice mining; more POSes means more PvE, which means a more active economy, more ISK in player pockets, AND more targets in space to shoot at. Second, POSes are objectives to fight over. Third, a POS is a stake in the ground, and creates a sense of ownership. Fourth, POS industry encourages cooperation between corp members, and creates openings for corp thieves. While I strongly advocated this method, it is not viable given the current state of pos. The outpost changes are a needed bandaid on the problem. |
Lfod Shi
Lfod's Ratting and Salvage
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 14:55:00 -
[384] - Quote
GÖ¬ Shake it up! Ooh ooh! Shake it up. GÖ½ GÖ¬ They'll always be bloodclaws to me GÖ½ ...end transmission... |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
233
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 15:01:00 -
[385] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Gilbaron wrote:Yeah, because having a 24/7 icemining division in highsec has always been mittens favorite wet dream LOL. Seriously... I don't get some of these complaints. Do people seriously believe that GSF is going to devote a significant number of pilots to ice mining in highsec? How deluded could you possibly get?
Who's have thought they'd play faction warfare either?
The fact is that these changes are going to cause massive, and unpredictable, changes in game play and in the market, mostly at the expense of players in high sec. One realistic outcome will be a massive spike in the price of T2, due to the rise in the cost of POS fuel. The other will be that High Sec POS will come to be dominated by large alliances in much the way null sec POS are dominated by large alliances, but it will have less to do with military might than it will to do with manpower and financial wherewithal.
Small players who previously squeaked by with a marginal profit will be driven under or subhumed into larger alliances not due to any player actions, but due to the whims of CCP.
Thus, once more, we see the sandbox is a lie.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
864
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 15:39:00 -
[386] - Quote
As a nullsec player I don't give a **** about highsec pos, especially with these changes, because they finally make industry viable. The problems with pos and Corp roles remain, but for the first time, everything needed to make a nullsec industrial empire happen is there
Ressources (ice, PI products, moon minerals, ore, research facilities, and production facilities) are in place, the only thing missing are the people to use these, but look at the corporations currently renting space from the big guys, many of them list "industry" in their description, however, they currently have nothing to offer to those who want to build stuff, and very little for those who want to mine.
That will change over night. We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Cathrianne
Asteroid Miners Consortium Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 15:48:00 -
[387] - Quote
Making mining sites so they have to be scanned down, and not static, I like that. Making it so that they are found with the on board scanner; hmmmm... while in High, Low, and Null sec this makes little difference as to how quickly a miner can be found. It does however appear to be able too foil the bot miners. In Wild space, this will spell certain doom for miners. It is already difficult to mine in Wild space. With no static belts, and only 'random' spawn of grav sites. The only chance miners have in wildspace is the off chance they catch probes or unknown ships on the D scanner. With targeting being what it is in EVE even having a combat fleet on standby in the grav site with the miners will not stop them from meeting death should someone with less than noble intentions suddenly show their face. It's not like you can sit someone on the gates to the system and know when people come in. Sure you can sit scouts on the known worm holes. But the random incoming holes, the only defense against those is the D scanner. Making mining now more like anomaly sites takes away that slim chance that miners currently have in wildspace.
With the changes to the mining ships and need for support craft to be 'on site' more, mining has taken on a new dynamic. I don't see increasing the mineral count in the low/null sec rocks making it more appealing to mine in dangerous space. Miners will always be the victims of the ' look at my awesomeness, I can gank defenseless miners' crowd. Because of that single fact, most players will not venture in the darkness. Those that do, do so either out of necessity or because they are the adventurous sort. Getting a mining operation from one place to another is a bit of a challenge to begin with. Moving one around in dangerous space is the thing nightmares can be made of, except in areas already controlled by your group and often only done deep in 'home' territory.
All in all this is a move in the right direction. it will add a small immersive component to mining. As well as a feeling of 'ownership' to the pilots that find the mining site. It will solve some problems, but will add a degree of difficulty for another group of players. With the current state of affairs in null sec, and constant blockading of low sec pipe gates, I don't see people rushing to the far parts of space to go mining. Those already in place will take the changes with little more than a shrug and small smile. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:06:00 -
[388] - Quote
islador wrote:Randomly adding high value materials to moons. I like that you're being random about it, but was there really no other way? Those of us that keep moon databases now have to rescan our entire database. That is a HUGE amount of work and isk. Could the production not be balanced further somehow?
Frankly, I was hoping for depletion of minerals from moons and having to scan other nearby systems to find the ones you want again. Nothing as drastic as completely mining it out in a day or so. Maybe a month time frame, but still depletion.
Passive income is bad! And nothing is more passive that moon minerals, ok maybe datacores were.
Short of that, I was hoping to see moon mining take on the characteristics of PI. Even though I have nothing but contempt for PI. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:12:00 -
[389] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you. Ice mining getting moved to anomalies is a "body slam"? Seriously? Check your privilege.
Check your math!
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:19:00 -
[390] - Quote
Xessej wrote:Why leave the ice anoms in the systems that have ice now? Miners have chased the better grav sites around so why not ice? Also it would really put the hurt on the botters.
Yeah, because hating on the botters makes it a good idea.
I am ok with the idea of anomolies, (not the 20% under supply need amount). I would be ok with all belts going to anomolies. Even needing to scan them down. But empire needs something that null has, wh needs something that high has and null needs something that wh has. And all the reciprocals and re-combinations of that. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:37:00 -
[391] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:So question:
If Gneiss and Spodumain has such a low value, how will increasing the amount of minerals they produce help? The end result as I see it is those minerals getting even lower in price, eventually resulting in Gneiss and Spodumain going back to their original low value. The reason for those minerals to be so low in value must after all be due to oversupply, right? Producing even more of those minerals then, to me, doesn't sound like a good solution.
Wouldn't it be better to maybe remove half of the Gneiss and Spodumain asteroids from each belt? That way they neither become an anchor nor do they result in oversupply of those minerals, making them increase in value.
Here is a thought! How about we just remove these two types or asteroids from the game all together. They are worthless now, and the fix is a band-aid. As you are absolutely right.
Or, we could have these two roids produce something entirely "new" or at least different. Maybe you gas mine them for drug gases. Its not unreasonable, as many ores are crushed and if not vaporized, liquified to remove impurities to get the valuable product out.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:47:00 -
[392] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:The income from mining Arkonor could have been easily boosted by simply rebalancing spodumain to be in line with ABC in terms of high end minerals, thus increasing the total ISK/hr of mining out the asteroids in these nullsec grav sites.
These changes will not encourage more miners to head out to null sec. These changes are effectively ensuring that the miners already mining in nullsec will provide more resources, reducing the requirement for sourcing those resources from anywhere else such as shuttling them down from hisec, or employing more miners in null.
To encourage more miners in nullsec, CCP should remove mineral compression. This will put pressure on nullsec industrialist to source their materials locally. In addition, make life easier for miners by reworking refineries. With the coming Surface Infrastructure boosts, industry in low/null will be significantly boosted, allowing nullsec to get closer to the holy grail of being able to supply all their ammo requirements "locally" (and more to the point, being required to do so).
There needs to be pain involved in sourcing materials for war. Making it easier for nullsec by simply adding super-veldspar into the mix is very much a step in the wrong direction. This reduces any incentives to interact with people outside the alliance. I believe that small, surgical changes are all that is required to significantly change the rules of the game, not these sledge-hammer approaches of adding more tritanium to ABC than exist in Veldspar. This is a mess. An unmitigated disaster.
I'll just sit back and try to calm down for a while, before presenting my main question to the round table tomorrow which will be: what proportion of nocxium in EVE was refined from Pyroxeres over the last few months? If CCP cannot answer that question, I will take it as evidence that they didn't pay much attention to the entirety of the material economy, and spent entirely too much time listening to the whinging of null sec "industrialists" whose only purpose in life is to contribute to the proliferation of supercapital ships in Supercapitals Online.
PS: yes, I mad.
I can only like your post one time, so I will do the next best thing, basically repost it!
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Belldrana
WarpCorp
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:55:00 -
[393] - Quote
Would a better idea what with the over abundance of resources in null and low sec, to remove all ice from low and null sec and only have it in empire, reason why the 4 major empires hold the space they do?
Could even need to have 8 or 9 standings with the empire to gain access to the ice belts/annomollies |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
31
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 16:57:00 -
[394] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:and seriously where's the high-sec cheese and/or entertainment for someone who has 45 minutes a night in high-sec? Have you played SWTOR yet? I'm not saying its a better game than Eve. What I am saying is it is a far far better game than Eve for someone who has 45 minutes a night to play.
That my dear. Is not only blasphemy, its impossible! "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
31
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:01:00 -
[395] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :)
IT becomes a whole hell'ava lot MORE dangerous. As there is no warning, no chance of escape and NO FRIGGIN LOCAL! The roids in WH better spit out billions in pure isk, to make it worth while with these changes. I **** you not! "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8922
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 17:19:00 -
[396] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Malcanis wrote:Please do explain how the mining changes hinder new alliances in 0.0 Because it's a kneejerk Fox News Talking Point to throw in whenever CCP fixes something unbalanced the poster previously benefitted from.
Someone should write a law about that
1 Kings 12:11
|
Dave Stark
2948
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 19:23:00 -
[397] - Quote
CCP, you have outdone yourselves.
the mining changes are spot on (now just hurry up and rebalance the mining ships so they are actually balanced and i'll love you long time).
these changes are amazing and if you keep this up i might even stray in to the realm of being your biggest fanboy. i've not been playing for as long as the 10 year vets, but i've never been looking forward to an expansion as much as i'm looking forward to odyssey. |
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
341
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 20:05:00 -
[398] - Quote
As far as hi sec hidden belts - right now, those of us who scan down grav sites know that we almost never find virgin belts. Grav sites are scanned down and rapidly depleted, especially the ones with the juicy ores. Kernite sites, not so much.
What the change will do is make competition for hidden belts in hi sec simply insane because they will be so freakin' easy to find and raid. No skills required - for miners or gankers. Scanning skills are now the prerequisite for access to those hidden resources. As of Odyssey, it's a freebie. I am certainly open minded to alternate perspectives on this.
The other part of the change is gankers: situation unchanged. If miners set up their exhumers with a proper tank, then (I find) the gankers leave us totally alone. The ORE ship changes have completely stopped the ganking for us, simply because we are difficult targets to take out. So, if we are NOT getting ganked in warp-to-zero belts, then why would we look like better targets in a scannable belt ? Yah - situation unchanged.
But, and correct me, static ore belts will continue to exists, unlike ice.
The ice thing has me somewhat confused so let me see if I get this right: we must now use scanning probes to find ice except in the systems listed. Then the part I am fuzzy on - the ice anomalies will deplete especially rapidly due to sped up harvestors and limited ice cube volume.
My first thoughts on this were to agree with those who have predicted that organized fleets will suck up all or most of the ice on a schedule. And the casual ice miner will be a thing of the past. No more mining ice while watching a movie of playing Diablo III.
I guess we will find out. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2663
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 20:32:00 -
[399] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:You must not rat for your isk. I do, and I hate every minute of it. Jenn aSide wrote:Forsaken hubs are the only reasons right now to not completely abbandon null sec for empire incursions and high sec 4/10 farming. The things you have to do to kill ANY frigs in a battleship in an anom means you can do other things , and you can do them at all in an Attack BC except for the Talos which sucks outside of Serp/Angel space. But you missed the point. Sanctums will have LESS frigates and elite cruisers and MORE battlecruisers, so LESS of the stuff that's disproportionally tough to kill compared to their bounties. Not only that but sanctums will still lead to The Maze (or whatever the equivalent is for non-Guristas stuff) which is much better than FSP. no I dind't "miss" it, I mentioned it, it doesn't matter. A SINGLE frig in an anom makes a large gun only ship obsolete unless you are at range and can pop it as it approaches. You dislike doing anoms and so probably don't understand what's happening. I like anoms (because I hated belt ratting) and have created litterly dozens of 1 and 2 ship doctrines to tackle them. This will end up a very serious nerf across multple ships, in case like the Naga it might prove fatal, and the naga is a great ship for poor player to jump in and make some isk. Not the end of the world, but it is going the wrong way (ccp should be helping grunt players and making null income bottom up rather than top down). And yea, even if they remove all but one frig from sanctums. . i swaer it's like Blood Raider Naval Shipyard all over again..... Edit: and 10/10s might be better than FSP because you go to one place, but you can't drop a dread on a maze and be done in 5 minutes likeyou can fsp 3.
I don't mean to troll you here, but if you have "ship doctrines" that are nuked by the addition of a frigate, they were not very good doctrines to begin with.
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 20:33:00 -
[400] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote: One of the shocking realities of Null Sec was how important tritanium became the further from highsec you found yourself.
But there was never a shortage of Veldspar and Scordite in null-sec when I was there.
The problem with tribbles, er tritanium is no one wanted to mine Veldspar for the hassles of null-sec.
So now they're just basically giving us FREE trit if we'll mine almost ANYTHING, including the rare and already valuable stuff.
It's a give-away to null-sec (and I'll happy to have it when I get back to being active), but as I predicted earlier, it isn't going to get any significant number of people out of high-sec and into null-sec.
It's just going to make it so that null-sec dwellers have to travel to high-sec less. Less traffic equals less opportunity for conflict/fun.
But once I'm back to being active, I'll probably like the added autonomy. Hell, a lot of my low and null-sec losses on killboards (those helios losses, especially) are from scouting one system ahead for my hauling alt. Less hauling means losing less ships for me, and less killing ships for gate campers.
Two words describe Odyssey's resource shake-up the most. LESS HAULING.
If you're a null-sec industrialist that's groovy. I've tried my hand at it at times, and these changes will cause me to try it again.
Everyone else (null and low sec PvP-centric players, high-sec industrialists and people who make isk through anything but null-sec industrialism), however, just got crapped on.
I consider myself in the null PvP-centric group when I have real world leisure. But it is mildly interesting that they want to fix a career I have often given up on. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8937
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 21:04:00 -
[401] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:Temba Ronin wrote: One of the shocking realities of Null Sec was how important tritanium became the further from highsec you found yourself. But there was never a shortage of Veldspar and Scordite in null-sec when I was there. The problem with tribbles, er tritanium is no one wanted to mine Veldspar for the hassles of null-sec. So now they're just basically giving us FREE trit if we'll mine almost ANYTHING, including the rare and already valuable stuff. It's a give-away to null-sec (and I'll happy to have it when I get back to being active), but as I predicted earlier, it isn't going to get any significant number of people out of high-sec and into null-sec. It's just going to make it so that null-sec dwellers have to travel to high-sec less. Less traffic equals less opportunity for conflict/fun.But once I'm back to being active, I'll probably like the added autonomy. Hell, a lot of my low and null-sec losses on killboards (those helios losses, especially) are from scouting one system ahead for my hauling alt. Less hauling means losing less ships for me, and less killing ships for gate campers. Two words will describe Odyssey's resource shake-up the most: LESS HAULING.If you're a null-sec industrialist that's groovy. I've tried my hand at it at times, and these changes will cause me to try it again. Everyone else (null and low sec PvP-centric players, high-sec freighter gankers, high-sec industrialists and people who make isk through anything but null-sec industrialism), however, just got crapped on. I consider myself in the null PvP-centric group when I have real world leisure. But it is mildly interesting that they want to fix a career I have often given up on. And before you suggest that sentence is an admission that it needed fixing, I'll point you to all those supercaps that got built by industrialists that didn't give up on it. Every null-sec outpost, POS and every supercap is proof that industry can be done. Soon it will be done with less hauling. All hail the coming autonomous null-sec!
Those supercaps got built by hauling in compressed minerals from hi-sec. The only reason they were built in 0.0 is that's the only place it's allowed to build them.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 21:20:00 -
[402] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:Temba Ronin wrote: One of the shocking realities of Null Sec was how important tritanium became the further from highsec you found yourself. But there was never a shortage of Veldspar and Scordite in null-sec when I was there. The problem with tribbles, er tritanium is no one wanted to mine Veldspar for the hassles of null-sec. So now they're just basically giving us FREE trit if we'll mine almost ANYTHING, including the rare and already valuable stuff. It's a give-away to null-sec (and I'll happy to have it when I get back to being active), but as I predicted earlier, it isn't going to get any significant number of people out of high-sec and into null-sec. It's just going to make it so that null-sec dwellers have to travel to high-sec less. Less traffic equals less opportunity for conflict/fun.But once I'm back to being active, I'll probably like the added autonomy. Hell, a lot of my low and null-sec losses on killboards (those helios losses, especially) are from scouting one system ahead for my hauling alt. Less hauling means losing less ships for me, and less killing ships for gate campers. Two words will describe Odyssey's resource shake-up the most: LESS HAULING.If you're a null-sec industrialist that's groovy. I've tried my hand at it at times, and these changes will cause me to try it again. Everyone else (null and low sec PvP-centric players, high-sec freighter gankers, high-sec industrialists and people who make isk through anything but null-sec industrialism), however, just got crapped on. I consider myself in the null PvP-centric group when I have real world leisure. But it is mildly interesting that they want to fix a career I have often given up on. And before you suggest that sentence is an admission that it needed fixing, I'll point you to all those supercaps that got built by industrialists that didn't give up on it. Every null-sec outpost, POS and every supercap is proof that industry can be done. Soon it will be done with less hauling. All hail the coming autonomous null-sec! Those supercaps got built by hauling in compressed minerals from hi-sec. The only reason they were built in 0.0 is that's the only place it's allowed to build them.
I am aware of that, but as my first sentence points out, null-sec has NO shortage of Veldspar and Scordite. People just (rightly, IMO) found mining it to be not worth the risk or not worth the non-afk attention that had to be paid.
This is a complete giveaway to null-sec TO MAKE IT SAFER to accumulate tritanium because we are now practically GUARANTEEING that you can get trit WHILE you mine the good stuff and thus earn enough to easily replace your ships. Before Odyssey, if we wanted trit without hauling, we had our ass hanging out in space waiting to be bitten for a lot longer before earning the replacement value of our ships. I just worry that having elected my fellow null-sec players to the CSM means that I'm going to come back to an "I win" button when I become active again.
Someone please explain to me how less hauling is good for the game, long-term. |
000Hunter000
Missiles 'R' Us
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 21:23:00 -
[403] - Quote
Oh dear lord, here we go again!
Playing eve for SO long... Hi sec players WIL NOT MOVE to low/0.0 sec... Jeez, u would imagine ccp would get that into their thick skulls after almost 10 years...
Low sec mining is rare to say the least... to much risk involved.. too many pilots needed to fly security, which could be mining or doing fun stuff instead of babysitting barges/exhumers, which still have a chance of getting whacked anyways.
nullsec... well... thats where ccp lives
Then again, if ice is getting rare... it might actually be fun (read profitable) enough to mine.
Good thing also i didn't use up my stockpile of icecubes |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 21:58:00 -
[404] - Quote
If you see me mining in low-sec... I am bait.
no smiley, because, while it is funny, it is 100% truth.
That being said I did lose a covetor once to a guy who succeeded in getting away from the friendly cloakers near me.
Well played, sir. Well played. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
599
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:11:00 -
[405] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote: Someone please explain to me how less hauling is good for the game, long-term.
when minerals are being mined locally instead of battleships being imported there is a lot more content, because there are macks and hulks mining all the time instead of a jump freighter making a weekly stop. |
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:13:00 -
[406] - Quote
Wow - The Pos fuel minerials have exploded.
sigh! |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
599
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:14:00 -
[407] - Quote
a titan can be imported in about 5-10 JF jumps (generally done on cynos on undocks, within about ten minutes, with low risk if properly done)
or it can be mined in like eighty million hulk-hours in nill
which sounds like it creates a more vibrant game |
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:19:00 -
[408] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Liz Laser wrote: Someone please explain to me how less hauling is good for the game, long-term.
when minerals are being mined locally instead of battleships being imported there is a lot more content, because there are macks and hulks mining all the time instead of a jump freighter making a weekly stop.
I guess someone has decided that null sec should be about creating eco systems. However I do think running POS'es is going to get extremely expensive for people that don't have the time to mine.
I can see plenty of POS'es coming down in the coming weeks and perhaps people leaving the game
we will see. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:26:00 -
[409] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Liz Laser wrote: Someone please explain to me how less hauling is good for the game, long-term.
when minerals are being mined locally instead of battleships being imported there is a lot more content, because there are macks and hulks mining all the time instead of a jump freighter making a weekly stop.
Now I'm going to have interview each corp/alliance to make sure it is a COMBAT corp and not just out in null to gank helpless miners? :-)
I mean, I like padding my KB, but pouncing on hulks wouldn't even feel like combat, unless it somehow draws combat ships out.
Who was it that said the only proper play for prey is to flee?
Because I'll add ...and make a sandwich while you wait for the wolves to get bored.
Also, think of your own corp's experience with 23/7 camping of ratting systems. If ratters in GUNBOATS won't just put a point on and sally forth, what do you expect MINERS will do?
Especially all the imaginary new miners from high-sec. :-)
(and if it occassionally sounds like I'm arguing against some of the points I've made earlier, it is only because I am still wrapping my head around the possibilities. I'm more interested in good fights than I am in being right. So I want to be convinced that this brings good fights, rather than just making life simpler for null-sec and renders the rest of the universe unneccessary). |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1865
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 22:43:00 -
[410] - Quote
000Hunter000 wrote:Oh dear lord, here we go again! Playing eve for SO long... Hi sec players WIL NOT MOVE to low/0.0 sec... Jeez, u would imagine ccp would get that into their thick skulls after almost 10 years...
Literally every single person in nullsec was at some point a high sec player who moved out, since that is where our characters spawned when we created them. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Tribal Band
311
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:30:00 -
[411] - Quote
Of all the changes, I like every single one except making ore sites into anoms. I simply cannot understand the reasoning behind this. Good mining sites should be scanned using probes, not the ship-board scanner. The last thing exploration needs is a nerf.
w-space will not like this one bit. At least with the previous system, one had the opportunity, however small, to notice probes on d-scan. Now they will have no notice at all. Mining in w-space will become much riskier.
grav sites gave miners in all regions a chance to escape should something alarm them. With these changes, you take away all that. Please roll back this one change. Everything else looks good.
"How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:31:00 -
[412] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Literally every single person in nullsec was at some point a high sec player who moved out, since that is where our characters spawned when we created them. Nah - that's like saying you are a stupid American, just because you were born in the US, despite that fact that you actually grew up in a more enlightened and educated country, such as Iceland. :)
Seriously though, you aren't a high-sec player because your toon was spawned in high-sec; rather, you are a high-sec player because your toon has never left high-sec. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:36:00 -
[413] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:000Hunter000 wrote:Oh dear lord, here we go again! Playing eve for SO long... Hi sec players WIL NOT MOVE to low/0.0 sec... Jeez, u would imagine ccp would get that into their thick skulls after almost 10 years... Literally every single person in nullsec was at some point a high sec player who moved out, since that is where our characters spawned when we created them.
He was just being sloppy in his phraseology.
He probably means what I've said... you simply cannot flog high-sec players into null-sec. The people that go out there (like me) go out to see what all the fuss is about. They STAY because they like the adventure and teamwork. But no amount of isk carrot is going to make carebears into predators, or make loners into team players.
If you want more people to come out to null-sec, tell more stories about it. Or somehow, make teamwork less of a necessity (though that sounds like an impossibility).
The money that keeps these servers working is largely made up of people who are doing something else when they play. I'm not sure why they even pay $15 a month for a game that isn't fully involving them.When I do it (at around $12/month), I'm just waiting for a long subscription term to run out where I was fully involved in null-sec and then had RL opportunities that I had to seize instead.
There may be no limit to how worthless we can make their contribution to the game. Maybe they'll pay forever. I just worry they won't pay those subscriptions, if we don't need their high-sec toil anymore. It looks like the CSM and CCP are eager to find out though. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
933
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:44:00 -
[414] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote: He probably means what I've said... you simply cannot flog high-sec players into null-sec.
Well he's right about that, up until the point where he uses it as an excuse to justify not buffing nullsec as needed (or not nerfing highsec as needed).
It amuses me that highsec miners treat trit at 5+ and pyerite at 13+ and so on as the natural order of things rather than an aberration, though. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Frying Doom
2425
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:46:00 -
[415] - Quote
It does seem a bit strange to announce that 50% of EvE players, play solo and then introduce more things that require multiple players. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
864
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:51:00 -
[416] - Quote
I wonder where all these industrial (constantly failing because of horrible game mechanics) and ratting corporations found in the nullsec renter empires come from, according to some, they can't exist because carebears never leave highsec We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Malcanis - CSM 8 |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:56:00 -
[417] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:It does seem a bit strange to announce that 50% of EvE players, play solo and then introduce more things that require multiple players.
Imagine how many are doing something else like watching TV, and now we expect them to volunteer for duty that requires careful attention.
Null-sec barons can make it work though, because maybe they can get an FC to pay attention to local and the pipe intel and warp the fleet to a safe POS early. All they have to do is replace lost drones the way they replace ships lost in CTAs. :-)
At least until the 23/7 cloaker shows up. Getting your imaginary hoard of freshly imported from high-sec miners to undock might be a challenge, then.
Einst++rzen Neue Null Sicherheit Bergleute. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 23:57:00 -
[418] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:It does seem a bit strange to announce that 50% of EvE players, play solo and then introduce more things that require multiple players. Not really.
Many solo players opt to have multiple accounts and multi-box, rather than play with others. More than a few of those mining fleets are run by a single solo player.
And, more accounts per player means more money for CCP. |
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 00:02:00 -
[419] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Liz Laser wrote: He probably means what I've said... you simply cannot flog high-sec players into null-sec.
Well he's right about that, up until the point where he uses it as an excuse to justify not buffing nullsec as needed (or not nerfing highsec as needed). It amuses me that highsec miners treat trit at 5+ and pyerite at 13+ and so on as the natural order of things rather than an aberration, though.
Buffing null-sec resources is great if you're a null-sec industrialist (or like me a would-be fail industrialist who hasn't managed to make it a worthwhile endeavor, yet). My only concern is how worthless we can make high-sec before the sheeple quit paying their subscriptions. Maybe they'll pay for our servers forever, while WE are the ones who create the lag nightmares and all the dev work and hardware expenses to solve those lag nightmares. |
Loney
CyberDyne R-D
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 00:31:00 -
[420] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined.
Okay so right now there are 1 trillion blocks of ice in current belts... now many "estimated" blocks of ice will be in the new belts? 10,000, 50,000, 100,000 ? |
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 00:48:00 -
[421] - Quote
I'm repeating this slice of a previous post and hoping people will express an interest in such a census to CCP, as well as an interest in them publishing the results. While I am skeptical of what I call flogging high-sec players into null-sec, the CSM, CCP and the player population needs to know if such measures succeed or not in their intent.
Liz Laser wrote:
It would be very easy for CCP to prove me wrong or right and be able to inform the CSM of the changes in player behavior (or lack thereof).....
THIS week, do a census where you note which players are in hi-sec. Measure 10 times including over the weekend. If on any of those censii they are in null or low-sec throw them out of that hi-sec count. Then 90 days after Odyssey do another 10 censii over a week and see how many of those same players get spotted in null. My prediction is it will be a very very very small number and will be due to other factors (like me regaining the leisure time for null-sec).
While I *hope* high-sec will endure and pay their subs, I'm *convinced* that you won't turn them into null-sec players by making high-sec less rewarding, less fun, or less afk-able.
Prove me wrong. You already have the flogging high-sec into null policies soon to be instituted, so just get them to make the measurements and be scientists about it rather than religious zealots about it. Measure your results and throw them in my face if you're right.
While I myself may sound like a zealot in how firmly convinced I am that you can't flog them into null-sec, just remember that *I* am the one asking for the measurements to be taken.
|
Horny Guy
CyberDyne R-D
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 00:52:00 -
[422] - Quote
Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
+1
|
Master Account
Pure Skunkworks
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 00:55:00 -
[423] - Quote
Horny Guy wrote:Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT +1
I like this idea... Doing this would give much more incentive for moving to 0.0 and mining since its a pain in the @$$ to haul the ice... even when if one chooses to refine it before hauling! |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 04:14:00 -
[424] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Frying Doom wrote:It does seem a bit strange to announce that 50% of EvE players, play solo and then introduce more things that require multiple players. Not really. Many solo players opt to have multiple accounts and multi-box, rather than play with others. More than a few of those mining fleets are run by a single solo player. And, more accounts per player means more money for CCP.
So when CCP says 50% of all players in EvE play alone does that include the many solo players who have multiple accounts? If not then I would imagine the number would be a lot higher? |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 04:20:00 -
[425] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:So when CCP says 50% of all players in EvE play alone does that include the many solo players who have multiple accounts? I would guess "yes". I seem to recall these sorts of questions being asked on one of the recent surveys. |
NAIRA HOKULANI
Bordello of Bleu's
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 04:37:00 -
[426] - Quote
CCP you must never been an industrialist in a Null Sec Alliance.
Alliance 1. We must go help kill that XXXX Dreadnaught/Titan etc over 2 region over. 2. We need everyone to be in a fleet because we might need a Call to Arms to go Save Alliance XXX's bacon. 3. We need everyone in a Fleet because we want to look good/important to our brother Alliance members during this op. 4. Etc
Industrialist 1. We need to have to protection for our ore mining/ice mining Fleets? Alliance: wanker off you wimps we have more important things to do like rat.
I have been in several Null Sec Alliances over my years they all end up like the 1, 2 and 3. Reason why I am in High Sec now. I love being in Null sec just the "Drama" does not make it worth it for myself.
From my years of experience industrialist are the Red Headed Step Children in most if not all Null Sec Alliances.
So Thank You CCP I will stay in High Sec finding ways to not have to go to Null Sec like you wish/desire. |
NAIRA HOKULANI
Bordello of Bleu's
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 04:41:00 -
[427] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Frying Doom wrote:It does seem a bit strange to announce that 50% of EvE players, play solo and then introduce more things that require multiple players. Not really. Many solo players opt to have multiple accounts and multi-box, rather than play with others. More than a few of those mining fleets are run by a single solo player. And, more accounts per player means more money for CCP. So when CCP says 50% of all players in EvE play alone does that include the many solo players who have multiple accounts? If not then I would imagine the number would be a lot higher? Chuckles
I know of a player in a Null Sec alliance that has 14+ eve accounts working his way to 20+ accounts. He is a mining fleet by himself. 2 Rorqual Pilots, 1 Combat Pilot the rest are Mining toons. 1 weeks worth of part time mining was sold for over 7 billion isk. I have seen spod rocks in Grav sites visibly shrink. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1866
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 05:39:00 -
[428] - Quote
NAIRA HOKULANI wrote:CCP you must never been an industrialist in a Null Sec Alliance.
Alliance 1. We must go help kill that XXXX Dreadnaught/Titan etc over 2 region over. 2. We need everyone to be in a fleet because we might need a Call to Arms to go Save Alliance XXX's bacon. 3. We need everyone in a Fleet because we want to look good/important to our brother Alliance members during this op. 4. Etc
Industrialist 1. We need to have to protection for our ore mining/ice mining Fleets? Alliance: wanker off you wimps we have more important things to do like rat.
I have been in several Null Sec Alliances over my years they all end up like the 1, 2
Your inability to see the wood for the trees is impressive. What you describe is a symptom of the existing imbalance between 0.0 and empire - there's currently no reason for sov powers to assist or accomodate industrialists in their space since using Jita jump freighter runs for everything is the outright superior option. Fix that imbalance, incentivise nullsec player activity over moon mining alone, and nullsec powers will either evolve to accomodate you, or lose their space to others that do. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 07:26:00 -
[429] - Quote
Cathrianne wrote: Making mining sites so they have to be scanned down, and not static, I like that. Making it so that they are found with the on board scanner; hmmmm... while in High, Low, and Null sec this makes little difference as to how quickly a miner can be found. It does however appear to be able too foil the bot miners. In Wild space, this will spell certain doom for miners. It is already difficult to mine in Wild space. With no static belts, and only 'random' spawn of grav sites. The only chance miners have in wildspace is the off chance they catch probes or unknown ships on the D scanner. With targeting being what it is in EVE even having a combat fleet on standby in the grav site with the miners will not stop them from meeting death should someone with less than noble intentions suddenly show their face. It's not like you can sit someone on the gates to the system and know when people come in. Sure you can sit scouts on the known worm holes. But the random incoming holes, the only defense against those is the D scanner. Making mining now more like anomaly sites takes away that slim chance that miners currently have in wildspace. Mining in WHs is not worth it, but for completely other reason. Refine rate. As this change obviously increases risk, I advocate to increase reward as well. Time to rethink yeilds of refining array, CCP. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 07:28:00 -
[430] - Quote
I realy dont like that Gravimetrics will no longer need to be scaned with probes.
CCP, you want mining be a bit more popular? So why you do this change? Its only increas numbers of bots.
Let me explain:
Mining very very very boring process. You could mine hour and nothing will happen. For example i use 5 accounts for mining and they all have mackinaws. W\o bonuses it take 30 min to fill 100% ore bay. So i can be still at PC, working or watching moves and cheking every few minutes local for enemy. Becuase i know that it will take a time to find me.
With you change i forced to watch how "interesting" my miners mining... Because enemy need ~30 sec to find me. And nobody will save me. I mean even if i have 100 freindly ppl in a local in a fleet, they just will be late, becuase barge die in a few seconds (no tank and save utility).
In other words - nobody want to sit down and watch how cool barge drill asteroids, only because of fear of potential enemy. And you will be rewarded less then NPC hunting. You need new mining mechanic for make this work. I mean interesing mining, not boring mining. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8942
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 07:36:00 -
[431] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:I'm repeating this slice of a previous post and hoping people will express an interest in such a census to CCP, as well as an interest in them publishing the results. While I am skeptical of what I call flogging high-sec players into null-sec, the CSM, CCP and the player population needs to know if such measures succeed or not in their intent. Liz Laser wrote:
It would be very easy for CCP to prove me wrong or right and be able to inform the CSM of the changes in player behavior (or lack thereof).....
THIS week, do a census where you note which players are in hi-sec. Measure 10 times including over the weekend. If on any of those censii they are in null or low-sec throw them out of that hi-sec count. Then 90 days after Odyssey do another 10 censii over a week and see how many of those same players get spotted in null. My prediction is it will be a very very very small number and will be due to other factors (like me regaining the leisure time for null-sec).
While I *hope* high-sec will endure and pay their subs, I'm *convinced* that you won't turn them into null-sec players by making high-sec less rewarding, less fun, or less afk-able.
Prove me wrong. You already have the flogging high-sec into null policies soon to be instituted, so just get them to make the measurements and be scientists about it rather than religious zealots about it. Measure your results and throw them in my face if you're right.
While I myself may sound like a zealot in how firmly convinced I am that you can't flog them into null-sec, just remember that *I* am the one asking for the measurements to be taken.
More data is always useful. Just one thing, though:
cen-+sus [sen-suhs] noun, plural cen-+sus-+es, verb noun 1. an official enumeration of the population, with details as to age, sex, occupation, etc. 2. (in ancient Rome) the registration of citizens and their property, for purposes of taxation
Not every noun ending in -us takes the -ii plural form. In fact very few do, and they're greek derived words, not latin. This should help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_form_of_words_ending_in_-us
1 Kings 12:11
|
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 07:45:00 -
[432] - Quote
i'm not sure this is the answer to eve's null sec emptyness.
Forcing people to go and play their game in an area that means eve becomes a full time job is not the answer.
I'm not too keen on the idea of increasing the need for R64's and increasing the amount of R64 moons. I feel this will not change the face of null sec. in 2008 the situation was R64's were the catalyst for fights, in todays game that is still the case.
CCP, guys, please STOP thinking with reactive heads. What i mean by this is stop nerfing things and thinking that the only way to solve a situation is by doing something negatively. Start thinking with more proactive heads, think more out of the box. Ice nerf will not force people into null sec they will merely turn their 15 man ice mining fleets into 15 man tritanium mining fleets it's simple, i've been around the game for 8 years and in those 8 years many people entered null sec with idea's of becoming rich beyond belief. The sad story is null sec turns eve into a full time job.
Whilst i believe what makes eve great is the sense of loss, ill be damned if the way i want to play the game means alarm clock ops and mandatory home defence. I did that for 4 years and I will never play the game that way again.
Null sec should be about groups of people creating eco systems. it shouldn't be about the concept that resource allocation will force people to live in an area. At the end of the day people move to null sec so that they can legitametly get away with blowing stuff up. Do us a favour get it into your skulls that blowing stuff up is null sec, n |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 07:49:00 -
[433] - Quote
A question about nullsec ice. Right now, you can only find "precious" - I mean useless - krystallos in systems with best truesec. Most systems also miss glare crust. Are you going to fix that, or it works as intended? |
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 08:02:00 -
[434] - Quote
Quote:Creating a new home for these miners also provides opportunities for pilots interested in PVP, as mining is an activity that can be both disrupted and protected by small gangs of ships.
This simply is not true. it is too easy to counter. |
OkaskiKali
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 08:06:00 -
[435] - Quote
OkaskiKali wrote:Quote:Creating a new home for these miners also provides opportunities for pilots interested in PVP, as mining is an activity that can be both disrupted and protected by small gangs of ships. This simply is not true. it is too easy to counter.
Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance.
This I love. I said it about a year ago that hidden mining belts created a massive disadvantage to hunters. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8942
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 08:20:00 -
[436] - Quote
OkaskiKali wrote:
CCP, guys, please STOP thinking with reactive heads. What i mean by this is stop nerfing things and thinking that the only way to solve a situation is by doing something negatively.
Now this is irony.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
91
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 09:06:00 -
[437] - Quote
Nomad I wrote:the Rorqual is able to compress 500ice blocks per hour. Thats not really much, with the new harvesters.Please adapt the Rorqual too This.
Currently 4-5 hulks fils a rorq's compression slots, if it's ice. With regular ore, it's around 20 or so. With doubling the ice harvesters' performance, something needs to be changed to adjust the rorq's compression performance on ice.
|
ConranAntoni
Empyrean Warriors Insidious Empire
67
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 09:09:00 -
[438] - Quote
As a former high sec dweller who delved into both explosions and industry, I whole heartedly support this product. Stay the course CCP, finally going in the right direction. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 09:14:00 -
[439] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:I'm not spending it mining. I'm spending it in SWTOR. The limited possibilities available for small 45 minute chunks of time in Eve already lost my playing time... If mining doesnt suit into your RL schedule, you can quit EVE to swator or whatever... or you can find something else in EVE, like PI, exploration, ratting, production, etc. Why do you think mining should be adapted for YOUR personal schedule? |
Loney Slave
CyberDyne R-D
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 09:24:00 -
[440] - Quote
Magic Crisp wrote:Nomad I wrote:the Rorqual is able to compress 500ice blocks per hour. Thats not really much, with the new harvesters.Please adapt the Rorqual too This. Currently 4-5 hulks fils a rorq's compression slots, if it's ice. With regular ore, it's around 20 or so. With doubling the ice harvesters' performance, something needs to be changed to adjust the rorq's compression performance on ice.
+1 |
|
Loney Slave
CyberDyne R-D
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 09:25:00 -
[441] - Quote
Master Account wrote:Horny Guy wrote:Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT +1 I like this idea... Doing this would give much more incentive for moving to 0.0 and mining since its a pain in the @$$ to haul the ice/ore... even when if one chooses to refine it before hauling!
I like the idea of making more options for compression instead of just the Rorqual as the bottleneck factor, but I think if they just change some of the stats on the Rorqual there would not be a need for other things like a POS or Station compression mechanics.
My ides for Rorqual:
GOOD THINGS
First - Make the ORE and ICE be taken from the ORE ICE cargo hold of the ship before compression and delivered to the SHIP cargo hold after compression. This will allow for 250 pieces to be compressed in one time instead of the CURRENT LIMIT of the SHIPS cargo hold.
Second - Give the Rorqual a ship bonus of -%5 production time for compression per level of ship skill. So with a level 5 Rorqual pilot you would have a -25% reduction time in the compression of ORE ICE products.
Third - give the ship more production slots. The current 4 slots limits the ships ability to actually be useful for compression when conducting a mining operation. Currently with the Exhumers abilities to mine massive amounts of stuff and with the suggested -50% decrease in ICE cycle time 4 slots is not enough to keep up with mining productions. I say increase the slot to at least 8-11 slots.
Okay now: I understand CCP's whole ISK sink vs faucet debate so I can't give recommendations for making things better without making them worse too!
BAD THINGS
First - For all the above added features of the Rorqual there should be some cost, right? Well I say that you should TRIPLE the Heavy Water usage while in siege deployed mode. This will not only make the extra features of the ship justifiable but also give a rise to the very under utilized and poor market factor of Heavy Water (though not by much honestly).
Second - Okay I don't have any other things.
This is my thoughts and I'm sticking to them! |
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 10:31:00 -
[442] - Quote
OkaskiKali wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. This I love. I said it about a year ago that hidden mining belts created a massive disadvantage to hunters.
Lol @ massive disadvantage. There is a difference between hunting and shooting clay pidgeons, y'know. At least before you had to put some (minimal) effort into hunting what is basically defenseless prey (unless its a bait ship) and now they've dumbed that down to a simple scanner sweep and warp-to action (and I'm saying this from a hunter's perspective). This is wrong as it increases risks for miners extremely while not providing any means of handling it (venture isn't really worth the effort for anything but gas). Yes, you can put wcs in lows of your barge but that just cuts into your mining yield which will very likely be crap to start with due to every frigate jumping into system wanting to get an easy killmail by warping to anomaly and killing you. This change basically turns all grav sites into 'regular' belts, and we all know how well belts have worked for mining in lowsec. |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
2325
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 10:56:00 -
[443] - Quote
I have removed some personal attacks on CCP from this thread. New Eden Community Representative GÇ+ New Eden Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Frezinviper
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 11:11:00 -
[444] - Quote
Loney Slave wrote:Master Account wrote:Horny Guy wrote:Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT +1 I like this idea... Doing this would give much more incentive for moving to 0.0 and mining since its a pain in the @$$ to haul the ice/ore... even when if one chooses to refine it before hauling! I like the idea of making more options for compression instead of just the Rorqual as the bottleneck factor, but I think if they just change some of the stats on the Rorqual there would not be a need for other things like a POS or Station compression mechanics. My ides for Rorqual: GOOD THINGS First - Make the ORE and ICE be taken from the ORE ICE cargo hold of the ship before compression and delivered to the SHIP cargo hold after compression. This will allow for 250 pieces to be compressed in one time instead of the CURRENT LIMIT of the SHIPS cargo hold. Second - Give the Rorqual a ship bonus of -%5 production time for compression per level of ship skill. So with a level 5 Rorqual pilot you would have a -25% reduction time in the compression of ORE ICE products. Third - give the ship more production slots. The current 4 slots limits the ships ability to actually be useful for compression when conducting a mining operation. Currently with the Exhumers abilities to mine massive amounts of stuff and with the suggested -50% decrease in ICE cycle time 4 slots is not enough to keep up with mining productions. I say increase the slot to at least 8-11 slots. Okay now: I understand CCP's whole ISK sink vs faucet debate so I can't give recommendations for making things better without making them worse too! BAD THINGS First - For all the above added features of the Rorqual there should be some cost, right? Well I say that you should TRIPLE the Heavy Water usage while in siege deployed mode. This will not only make the extra features of the ship justifiable but also give a rise to the very under utilized and poor market factor of Heavy Water (though not by much honestly). Second - Okay I don't have any other things. This is my thoughts and I'm sticking to them!
^^^ Make this happen please! |
Argel OTF2
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 11:26:00 -
[445] - Quote
As a new player who has ended up pretty much living in lowsec, I can't help but feel the whole gravimetric thing is wrong. The advantage of such a site is that casual players will not be interested enough - or have the right fit - to probe you down. By opening it up to the point where anyone can just d-scan, see a retriever or other barge, and immediately warp to within 30km is going to put people off lowsec mining. Surely anyone can see that a barge with a 10 second warp time is going to die every time unless they carry ECM drones/mods/stabs and are VERY lucky in facing an opponent who is unprepared for such things. the only way to counter this would be as a mining fleet and as mentioned before in this thread, such things are rare. I've seen one lowsec mining fleet - all the same person with 6 alts - in 4 months of lowsec.
You can add rewards but the fear of death and logistical nightmare of hauling ore through gatecamps - and now knowing that you can't even get a relatively safe spot to mine in peace - are what stops people mining in lowsec. Nothing in this patch will change that dynamic, in fact the very people who cling to highsec space will now see lowsec as a death trap.
I'm all for fear of death, hell I'd love the opp to gank some miners with a new character like this one, but this is not the way to entice people in. The rewards needed to go up but the fear of death is already a massive factor because of vulnerability at gates. I don't see how increasing risk AND reward is meant to rebalance anything? |
Ereilian
Over The Horizon
32
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 12:02:00 -
[446] - Quote
Argel OTF2 wrote:As a new player who has ended up pretty much living in lowsec, I can't help but feel the whole gravimetric thing is wrong. The advantage of such a site is that casual players will not be interested enough - or have the right fit - to probe you down. By opening it up to the point where anyone can just d-scan, see a retriever or other barge, and immediately warp to within 30km is going to put people off lowsec mining. Surely anyone can see that a barge with a 10 second warp time is going to die every time unless they carry ECM drones/mods/stabs and are VERY lucky in facing an opponent who is unprepared for such things. the only way to counter this would be as a mining fleet and as mentioned before in this thread, such things are rare. I've seen one lowsec mining fleet - all the same person with 6 alts - in 4 months of lowsec.
You can add rewards but the fear of death and logistical nightmare of hauling ore through gatecamps - and now knowing that you can't even get a relatively safe spot to mine in peace - are what stops people mining in lowsec. Nothing in this patch will change that dynamic, in fact the very people who cling to highsec space will now see lowsec as a death trap.
I'm all for fear of death, hell I'd love the opp to gank some miners with a new character like this one, but this is not the way to entice people in. The rewards needed to go up but the fear of death is already a massive factor because of vulnerability at gates. I don't see how increasing risk AND reward is meant to rebalance anything?
This is not a real attempt to make lowsec mining viable, that much is pretty clear from the other changes. Rather it is a forced push to make nullsec the only place ingame where mining will be profitable. Considering the attitude towards industry by many nullbears (enjoy the nerfs to your rat faucets) I think nothing CCP can do, apart from removing mining totally to nullsec, will make many of us move out and have to deal with the political bullshit that comes with nullsec. Its not about risk, its about epeen fed alliances that at the same time as buying your work to make their shineys, spits in your faces as carebears. No thanks, pass on that. |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
91
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 12:04:00 -
[447] - Quote
Hardwick Johnson wrote:Fozzie:
I have three main questions.
1) Has any thought been given to seeding all the common ore types to all racial highsec space? Currently, Caldai highsec has no access to isogen, which puts a crimp on manufacturing. All other regions of New Eden contain the 5 common elements needed for basic manufacturing
I wouldn't be so sure. Lots of people in providence are crying, because they have no mexallon (only in grav sites, which doesn't provide enough supply).
But yeah, this issue exists.
|
Nalha Saldana
Sickology
712
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 12:36:00 -
[448] - Quote
Now just fix those POS refining arrays and this will be awesome. |
Nicen Jehr
Swarm Federation
187
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 12:49:00 -
[449] - Quote
I put the devblog through gizoogle:
Quote:Wuz crackalackin' once again n' again n' again brave spacecaptains yo. Hoes call me CCP Fozzie n' IGÇÖm here ta brang you our next Dev Blizzay coverin EVE OnlineGÇÖs 19th free expansion, Odyssey. For tha expansion dat arrives so close ta our gameGÇÖs tenth anniversary, we is turnin our attention ta tha original gangsta promise of EVE; a universe of wonder is waitin fo' you n' yo' playaz ta explore n' exploit fo' realz. As part of our focus on tha adventure of explorin tha nuff star systemz of New Eden, we is plannin ta revamp a shitload of tha rewardz dat tha universe itself provides ta enterprisin capsuleers whoz ass is willin ta reach up n' seize em.
Home is where tha crib is These thangs is basically just straight-up big-ass spaceships right?....... Outposts may seem like a unusual addizzle ta a resource shakeup devB-ta-tha-L-O-Gizzay yo, but up in realitizzle tha fatez of resource harvestin n' industrial gameplay is too intertwined fo' our asses ta improve one without pimpin-out tha other. Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |
Frank Pannon
Emerald Swine Escavations
51
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:03:00 -
[450] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Please reconsider this change, as this basically kills mining in wormholes. Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late. With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time. The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
+1
I wonder how on earth anyone will mine now in WHs. I can not really imagine a guarding fleet. Since guarding duty is dull and people want fun for their time. Hope CCP adjusts this somehow. |
|
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:22:00 -
[451] - Quote
Nalha Saldana wrote:Now just fix those POS refining arrays and this will be awesome.
+1 for this one. There is absolutely no reason for pos refining arrays to be so atrociously ineffective considering they require an active pos and can't be anchored in hi-sec. Also, I think that they should allow moon mining in 0.4 systems. Like, seriously, why was that restriction introduced anyway? |
Tandin
Algorab Technology Mistakes Were Made.
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:29:00 -
[452] - Quote
Outpost Suggestion: Fix the undock on the caldari outpost. As soon as you undock you're automatically kicked out of docking range and this has always been a problem with it. This is part of why they're so uncommon (along with the crappy research/manufacturing line configuration).
I mean, why does the best looking outpost have the worst characteristics? |
Markius TheShed
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
160
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:41:00 -
[453] - Quote
I really can't see the reasoning behind having no Ice spawns in WHs, All these changes to ice are pushing people to ice mine in low sec and create conflict, making high end ores spawn in low as well is trying to get more people to low sec.
So why not create more conflict in whs with more easy to scan ice spawns??? At the minute if you want to get your ice in to the Wh you use a uncatchable bloackade runner and perform 20 mindnumbing trips with no conflict and just tedium as the outcome.
**Murientor Tribe** a capsuleer organization composed of radical Minmatar. Since YC107 http://www.defiant-legacy.com/ |
Hakkon Oskold
Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 13:46:00 -
[454] - Quote
I love every change there is from one part
where in amarr space the Amarr ice is. there is also a few selections of ice systems that are weird were two systems with ice is near each other when more remote ones is removed.
-- I don't ice mine on my main and i think mining is sutch a dull experience that i don't have the "heart" to do it. , others may disagree.
Lets look at the Areas and its highsec icebelts:
Pre Patch: Genessis - Agal, Avyuh , Hadji, Iderion, Mantirid, Sigga, Kador - Chanoun, Dantan, Jakari, Kamda, Koona, Kothe, Miah, Munory, Nebura , Rayeret, Turba, Domain - Aera, Afivad, Azizora, Basahakri. Clarelam, Esteban, Fabum, Gosalav, Isamm, Knophitikoo, Luromooh, Martha, Nalu, Niarja, Pedel, Warouh, Tash-murkon - Anjedin,Goram, Ivih, Jazzalad, Kari, Moutid, Seil, Khanid - Ervekam, Gilalid, Geztic, Kerberz, Moniyyuku, Molea, Moro, Saloti, Talidal kor-azor - Choga, Ordion, Arida, - Avada (highsec iland) The Bleak Lands - Ekrinen (highsec iland) Devoid - Arveyil, Dihra, Esescama, Riavayed, Derelik - Gamis, Gelhan, Ihal, Moh(highsec iland) , Orva, Serad,
Post Patch: Genesis - Agal, Mantirid, Kador - Chanoun, Dantan, Kothe, Miah Domain - Afivad, Esteban, Gosalav, Warouh, Tash-murkon - Jazzalad, Moutid, Seil, Khanid - Talidal kor-azor - Ordion, Arida, - Avada (highsec iland) The Bleak Lands - Ekrinen (highsec iland) Devoid - Dihra,Riavayed, Derelik - Gamis, Gelhan,
result Genesis - only ice in West and middle of area Kador - with Rayeret gone it hits Genesis since its a border system. otherwise its evenly spread. Domain - west part of map got no more ice. Tash-murkon - not hit very mutch Kari could be argued as its a lowsec entry system Khanid - hit hard only ice in the south now. kor-azor - not hit very much. Arida - not hit (only ice in highsec iland) The Bleak Lands - not hit (only ice in highsec iland) Devoid - lost the ice in the highsec iland to lowsec. Derelik - ice only in west south now .... and the belts are close to each other.
I might have missed some and probl. done some spelling errors on the names of the systems but as far as my highsec ice analysis stands Khanid, Genesis, Derelik Domain got hit hard.
I my self wouldn't mind if the ice in the two highsec ilands been moved to other parts of highsec since its practicaly unaccessable from highsec and should be classed as elevated lowsec. that whould hit Arida and Bleak lands but on the other hand thoes system are iland systems in the middle of lowsec. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 15:25:00 -
[455] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:NAIRA HOKULANI wrote:CCP you must never been an industrialist in a Null Sec Alliance.
Alliance 1. We must go help kill that XXXX Dreadnaught/Titan etc over 2 region over. 2. We need everyone to be in a fleet because we might need a Call to Arms to go Save Alliance XXX's bacon. 3. We need everyone in a Fleet because we want to look good/important to our brother Alliance members during this op. 4. Etc
Industrialist 1. We need to have to protection for our ore mining/ice mining Fleets? Alliance: wanker off you wimps we have more important things to do like rat.
I have been in several Null Sec Alliances over my years they all end up like the 1, 2 Your inability to see the wood for the trees is impressive. What you describe is a symptom of the existing imbalance between 0.0 and empire - there's currently no reason for sov powers to assist or accomodate industrialists in their space since using Jita jump freighter runs for everything is the outright superior option. Fix that imbalance, incentivise nullsec player activity over moon mining alone, and nullsec powers will either evolve to accomodate you, or lose their space to others that do.
No, what she is saying is this is how null sec is and the proposed changes do nothing to alter that. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 15:31:00 -
[456] - Quote
Magic Crisp wrote:Hardwick Johnson wrote:Fozzie:
I have three main questions.
1) Has any thought been given to seeding all the common ore types to all racial highsec space? Currently, Caldai highsec has no access to isogen, which puts a crimp on manufacturing. All other regions of New Eden contain the 5 common elements needed for basic manufacturing
I wouldn't be so sure. Lots of people in providence are crying, because they have no mexallon (only in grav sites, which doesn't provide enough supply). But yeah, this issue exists.
As it should, and more so. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
234
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 16:25:00 -
[457] - Quote
CCP Eterne wrote:I have removed some personal attacks on CCP from this thread.
If it wasn't for the fact that CCP seems to struggle with the idea this change was unpopular and poorly thought out, perhaps there would be less name calling?
Didn't CCP used to have an economist on staff? If they bothered to ask him, I'm sure he'd tell them just how badly this is about to crush EvE's economy. Not just in minor ways, I'm talking a massive body blow, and not just to high sec. After all this time trying to bring the value of minerals up, this completely devalues trit. We're talking a major glut of high secs major export.
Frankly, this is the second worst idea I've heard come out of Fan Fest (The worst was to change combat).
I mean, I know the much ballyhooed 'sandbox' is a big fat lie, CCP has been making it clear that we will play as CCP wills it or be punished, but really, you can't find anything better to do than jerk around the few things that almost work rather than fix the things that are still utterly broken?
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 17:24:00 -
[458] - Quote
Ice Change is potentially economy breaking mechanic as limiting the supply of the individual ice types can lead to issues, especially with 0.0 entities being limited on the types of ice each can mine. While the outcome of this may end in content it is undoubtedly going to result in market shortfalls and chaos across New Eden in the long run as things don't balance according to metrics because some idiot will undoubtedly buy a freighter load of isotopes and get ganked or the alternative, smart rich people will merely strip the market because they can allowing for monopolies to form.
To go with this change I would like to request that the regional / racial seedings of the isotope ice be removed and a mixture of ice be seeded everywhere, or at least in 0.0 so sov entities have the ability to supply themselves.
Grav sites scannable like anomalies, that is the ONLY thing a 0.0 miner has going for them, this change is a complete nerf to null sec industry.
The argument that was stated to me complaining about making grav sites scannable like anomalies was to bubble up a dead end pocket and secure it. But There is no ability to secure any 0.0 space if all it takes is 1 cloaking ship with a cyno to sneak in before / after downtime or just you know a tech 3 with interdiction nullified to come in and miss being decloaked because if you put enough things on a gate to 100% stop them from cloaking its an exploit.
Cloaky camping has forever been a broken mechanic and has been augmented recently by the black ops / t3 covert cyno buffs that came earlier this year. I'm not going to suggest what you do, there's plenty of it already out there, just make a change that removes the ability to sit cloaked AFK for an INFINITE amount of time. |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
234
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 18:34:00 -
[459] - Quote
GeeBee wrote:But There is no ability to secure any 0.0 space if all it takes is 1 cloaking ship with a cyno to sneak in before / after downtime or just you know a tech 3 with interdiction nullified to come in and miss being decloaked because if you put enough things on a gate to 100% stop them from cloaking its an exploit.
Cloaky camping has forever been a broken mechanic and has been augmented recently by the black ops / t3 covert cyno buffs that came earlier this year. I'm not going to suggest what you do, there's plenty of it already out there, just make a change that removes the ability to sit cloaked AFK for an INFINITE amount of time.
Cloaks will probably be less of an issue when twitch based combat hits. (According to Massively)
I am starting to wonder, if we need to change mining, and industry, and combat, and missions, what about eve do the devs LIKE, exactly, other than our steady fifteen bucks a month?
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
220
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 19:03:00 -
[460] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. You dont understand less isk per tick is good for deflation... And scram frigs mean more dead nullbears
You are so clueless it's painful. No scramming frigs does not mean more dead nullbears. It means fewer ratters and the ones who bother will be having to pay far more attention, meaning they are far more likely to notice when that neutral is reported in intel or pops into system. And no they won't be scrambled because those frigs will be the first thing dealt with in any wave.
Course we've known for some time that CCP wouldn't address the imbalance by improving other anomalies but would instead nerf forsaken hubs so they suck just as much as all the others.
This is a horrible idea but certainly doesn't surprise me, well at least all the isk I'm rat holing now will be worth more if this ill advised change goes live. To bad for those who come after. |
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
235
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 19:25:00 -
[461] - Quote
The real issue is that CCP is failing to address the fact that this will hit every commodities market in game like a sledgehammer, as it heavily alters one of the most fundamental underpinning of the market: PvP and the the value of minerals.
I mean, this is basic stuff, here that they're ignoring. It's already started rampant speculation (nor surprise there) but also the bottom is now dropping out of the mineral market, since 0.0 will no longer have to be supplied from high sec thanks to a gigantic handout from CCP.
Every corp in eve is now hoarding ice like mad, either on speculation or to prevent being caught 'out in the cold' with thier POS operations.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1678
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 19:25:00 -
[462] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote:MeBiatch wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:if you put frigs (scrambling or otherwise) in forsaken hubs, you will have nerfed the last little bit of good isk making in null sec anoms. The close range battlecruisers that a lot of people use to do them will become un-usable (unless you add drones bays to all the former tier 3s that do't have them, namely the naga).
The frigless forsaken hub is the only anomaly that sub caps can use to match some empire isk making pve techniques (liek incursions and empire DED farming). This seems a big huge mistake as it will only nerf individual pilot isk making. Not fatal, but defineately a serious wound.
A better idea would be scramming cruisers for hubs with like a 35 km scram range. The problem with forsaken hubs is lack of scramming things, not lack of frigs. You dont understand less isk per tick is good for deflation... And scram frigs mean more dead nullbears You are so clueless it's painful. No scramming frigs does not mean more dead nullbears. It means fewer ratters and the ones who bother will be having to pay far more attention, meaning they are far more likely to notice when that neutral is reported in intel or pops into system. And no they won't be scrambled because those frigs will be the first thing dealt with in any wave. Course we've known for some time that CCP wouldn't address the imbalance by improving other anomalies but would instead nerf forsaken hubs so they suck just as much as all the others. This is a horrible idea but certainly doesn't surprise me, well at least all the isk I'm rat holing now will be worth more if this ill advised change goes live. To bad for those who come after.
Bolded up the important part. When CCP nerfed anoms in the past , what happened? A few kept doing anoms as they had or adapted in someway, while many others simply took those ratting alts to empire to do missions and incursions. Their is a threshold (i honestly don't know what it is, but it exists) where too much bother = "go do something else.
The problem with this is that it means fewer pvp targets and less destruction of materials/ships because people are PVEing under CONCORD protection while pumping out similar levels of isk. Any way you cut it, thats bad for the game, which I belive is why CCP had to turn right around and buff the anoms that got nerfed (ie wasting time and money fixing something that should nto have been broken in the 1st place).
Done wrong this anomaly change can have similar effects, and no one cares because anom farming isn't something most people do so they don't know to be concerned.
Also, buffing sanctums and nerfing forsaken hubs also has another negative anti-pvp consequence. Sanctums escalate to DED 10/10s, which take you to ONE location. Forsaken Hubs escalate to Fleet Staging point, which (because it escalates 2 more times are the initial one) can fly you all over the place. More jumping around means more chance for pvp.
I lost a dominix this week going to a Fleet Staging point 3 (who scouts with a domi...I DO!!), with a 10/10, i wouldn't have even been in that region (a region next door to where i rat).
|
Nick Bete
The Scope Gallente Federation
210
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 20:22:00 -
[463] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: I realize you and others like you have no concept of game balance, but that's no reason to accuse CCP of favoritism.
I realize that you and your pals are just null zealots mouthing insults and don't work for CCP as game designers so, I'll just ignore you.
It's obvious that CCP does favor null sec play as they've always maintained that 0.0 was the "end game" (an odd concept for a supposed sandbox style game), many of their senior devs come from the ranks of the largest 0.0 alliances and many dev's posts over the years have spoken of forcing people out of high sec. How is one not supposed to see that as favoritism?
Also, you missed the part where I said that there were broken elements in null that needed to be addressed but, not at the expense of high sec players.
|
Celeste Benal
Deadman W0nderland Tribal Band
42
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 20:38:00 -
[464] - Quote
I was perusing the new T2 component changes when I noted that the values listed do not agree with what is in Evelopedia. Nanoelectrical Microprocessors for example. wiki shows the current values at 13, 1, and 6. This doesn't jive with the changes. Math errors, wiki errors, or all is well, just use the new values?
Just wondering if I made a math error somewhere that needs to be corrected.
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
237
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 21:13:00 -
[465] - Quote
Celeste Benal wrote:I was perusing the new T2 component changes when I noted that the values listed do not agree with what is in Evelopedia. Nanoelectrical Microprocessors for example. wiki shows the current values at 13, 1, and 6. This doesn't jive with the changes. Math errors, wiki errors, or all is well, just use the new values? Just wondering if I made a math error somewhere that needs to be corrected.
Math errors on the part of CCP? Perish the Thought! (Until GSF reveals how much money they made off it.)
Let's be realistic: CCP have been trying to force players out of high sec ofr years, doing what they could to make game-play there either unfun or unprofitable. And there always has been and always will be that sub-segment of nullsec and lowsec players that demands that easy targets be spoon fed to them so they can inflate their KB score just a little larger.
The reality is though, that this is going to **** the in game economy in ways that we cannot predict at this time. It violates one of the basic elements that the eve o economy is based on, and does so in a manner that blatantly favors a certain style of play.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Iosue
Black Sky Hipsters
175
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 21:27:00 -
[466] - Quote
not sure i understand the reasoning behind moving the ice from belts if they will be just as easy to locate? why not just keep the ice in belts and let them respawn on the same timers?
fwiw, i would have liked to see ice moved to grav sites that require probing to find, instead of being insta locatable. in addition, would have been nice to make them spawn at random in potentially all systems instead of being concentrated in just a few. |
Taki Natsu
White Raven Industries Mistakes Were Made.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 21:31:00 -
[467] - Quote
Loney Slave wrote:Master Account wrote:Horny Guy wrote:Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
... +1 I like this idea... Doing this would give much more incentive for moving to 0.0 and mining since its a pain in the @$$ to haul the ice/ore... even when if one chooses to refine it before hauling! I like the idea of making more options for compression instead of just the Rorqual as the bottleneck factor, but I think if they just change some of the stats on the Rorqual there would not be a need for other things like a POS or Station compression mechanics. ...
Just to add some numbers to prove the compression bottleneck:
Current Rorq-Hulk Compression Ratio: PE10 = 39sec per run Runs Per Job: - assumes cargo expanded and t1 rigged Rorqual (126k m3) 126 blocks * 39secs = 4914sec or 81.9mins or 1hr 21.9mins
GǪwith 4 production slots: 504 blocks per compression cycle
Now letGÇÖs have a look at a very conservative fleet size of 5 hulks (the number 1 Rorqual can hold in transit). Perfect Hulk + Roqual Boosts (no Yeti implant): Laser cycle time = 126.4secs
No. of Laser cycles per compression cycle ~= 39cycles (rounding up 38.88 for the purists)
39cycles * 5 hulks * 3 Lasers Each = 585 blocks
So currently there is a deficit in the rate of acquisition to the rate of compression assuming no interruptions in the compression cycle. This puts the current optimal Rorq-Hulk Ratio at:
~ 1 : 4.3
Post patch this will be ~ 1 : 2.15 which is a scary prospect in 0.0 unless the system has a Minmatar Station on hand... |
Grippa Dets
A-Fission Industries
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 21:39:00 -
[468] - Quote
My RL profile isa 40's male with desk job and family. 3 accounts - sometimes paid for by ice mining semi-afk, while at work - hidden being browser (not while watching a movie, or facebooking or surfing net). It's my essential game play, albeit hidden; it allows me to keep my subscriptions off the "ledgers."
I like to just exist in EVE - listen to music and get immersed in graphics, and it has worked for me since 2009. Realistically I cannot dedicated focused time to EVE - and group time, even less. Although group play keeps retention up for youngsters (teens, 20's <35), pushing to adopt group play is not going to retain me - it's will do the opposite.
Does CCP think that Solo older players with heavy RL time constraints will enjoy mining ice. I dont understand why they thought this was broken in the first place?
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1789
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 23:16:00 -
[469] - Quote
Iosue wrote:not sure i understand the reasoning behind moving the ice from belts if they will be just as easy to locate? why not just keep the ice in belts and let them respawn on the same timers?
fwiw, i would have liked to see ice moved to grav sites that require probing to find, instead of being insta locatable. in addition, would have been nice to make them spawn at random in potentially all systems instead of being concentrated in just a few. My guess is the asteroid spawn mechanic is buried so deep in old code that it would be a pain to change, and could break alot of the game if they tried. The anomaly spawn mechanic would do whats needed, so they used it. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.29 23:32:00 -
[470] - Quote
Iosue wrote:not sure i understand the reasoning behind moving the ice from belts if they will be just as easy to locate? why not just keep the ice in belts and let them respawn on the same timers?
fwiw, i would have liked to see ice moved to grav sites that require probing to find, instead of being insta locatable. in addition, would have been nice to make them spawn at random in potentially all systems instead of being concentrated in just a few.
To be sure, a golden opportunity is being squandered.
Why? Because its all stick and no carrot. Had they said, we are moving ice to belts that have to be scanned down, but adding in random, harder to scan down, "make you rich", new type of ice belts, I think many not all would have ignored the nerf bat. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
|
Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 00:01:00 -
[471] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Cathrianne wrote: Making mining sites so they have to be scanned down, and not static, I like that. Making it so that they are found with the on board scanner; hmmmm... while in High, Low, and Null sec this makes little difference as to how quickly a miner can be found. It does however appear to be able too foil the bot miners. In Wild space, this will spell certain doom for miners. It is already difficult to mine in Wild space. With no static belts, and only 'random' spawn of grav sites. The only chance miners have in wildspace is the off chance they catch probes or unknown ships on the D scanner. With targeting being what it is in EVE even having a combat fleet on standby in the grav site with the miners will not stop them from meeting death should someone with less than noble intentions suddenly show their face. It's not like you can sit someone on the gates to the system and know when people come in. Sure you can sit scouts on the known worm holes. But the random incoming holes, the only defense against those is the D scanner. Making mining now more like anomaly sites takes away that slim chance that miners currently have in wildspace. Mining in WHs is not worth it, but for completely other reason. Refine rate. As this change obviously increases risk, I advocate to increase reward as well. Time to rethink yeilds of refining array, CCP. While I applaud the changes, putting Grav sites a simple d-scannable anoms is just plain nuts. Talk about putting a nail in a coffin for many.
In regards to the refinery changes ---- go here and support. HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression - The only way to go! |
Quindaster
Infernal laboratory Infernal Octopus
45
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 00:14:00 -
[472] - Quote
Nice, players in zero space even don't had scambling frigates in zero space...people in lowsec ALWAYS had them.
I think noone will mine ice in lowsec in anomalies and scan them because it's very dangerous, even alliances who live in lowsec on own territory for years. And if even this alliances will not mine it - neutral corporations and solo miners ofcouse will not, because everyone will try to kill them. And you cannot organize any defence for miners, because it will not worth time for defenders, only for own alts maybe. And for this isotop prices will be over 5000 isk I think, and pos fuel prices will be crazy high. Even now not worth to have POSes on cobalt or any other moon under P64 because for many of them you need to have large pos. So I don't know who will be able to have POSes after patch, maybe only zero space alliances like always, because of low fuel usage. For this changes we will not have more people in lowsec.
So CCP like always didn't think enough and they did crazy things.
P.S.: If you want people move to lowsec - buff lowsec missions, because now all people move to zero space for botting in anomalies. And in lowsec live only old skilled pilots who will leave eve soon because of ccp stupid patches like 90% of them before. |
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
341
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 03:34:00 -
[473] - Quote
OkaskiKali wrote:OkaskiKali wrote:Quote:Creating a new home for these miners also provides opportunities for pilots interested in PVP, as mining is an activity that can be both disrupted and protected by small gangs of ships. This simply is not true. it is too easy to counter. Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. This I love. I said it about a year ago that hidden mining belts created a massive disadvantage to hunters. It's not a disadvantge. It is a counter measure. Those of us miners who learned the scanning skills have a counter to gankers, i.e., we can see the probes on Dscan. As it will be, the miners counter measure has been emliminated. This is the real disadvantge in this equation. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 04:35:00 -
[474] - Quote
Grippa Dets wrote:I like to just exist in EVE - listen to music and get immersed in graphics, and it has worked for me since 2009. Realistically I cannot dedicated focused time to EVE - and group time, even less. Although group play keeps retention up for youngsters (teens, 20's <35), pushing to adopt group play is not going to retain me - it's will do the opposite. Why dont you switch to roid mining? In a station-less system rocks could be really big, so you dont need to switch too often. And since you say you were mining for a long time - it was ok for you to pay attention once in a while, before they revamped Exhumers, to drop ice into Orca. So it should be ok after Odyssey, to relock rocks once in a while. You are even prompted to do that by "asteroid depleted" warning! So I cannot agree with your statement that afk-mining is no longer possible. At the same time, I'd wanted to warn CCP to refrain from completely obsoletizing current relaxed mining style when they introduce more engaging "prototype mining". |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 04:45:00 -
[475] - Quote
Urgg Boolean wrote:It's not a disadvantge. It is a counter measure. Those of us miners who learned the scanning skills have a counter to gankers, i.e., we can see the probes on Dscan. As it will be, the miners counter measure has been emliminated. This is the real disadvantge in this equation. Counter measure was always using an intel channel and paying attention on local. (WH is a different story.) Unless we take afk-cloakers into this equation. I guess it's the right time to get rid of them. |
Knorkor
Ministry of Silly Walk
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 04:47:00 -
[476] - Quote
Please do also a rework of the ores descriptions. Many are already outdated and need clarification. Also, not all of the special compressed ores contain the modifier in their description. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 04:53:00 -
[477] - Quote
Captain Semper wrote:Mining very very very boring process. You could mine hour and nothing will happen. For example i use 5 accounts for mining and they all have mackinaws. W\o bonuses it take 30 min to fill 100% ore bay. So i can be still at PC, working or watching moves and cheking every few minutes local for enemy. Becuase i know that it will take a time to find me. ... In other words - nobody want to sit down and watch how cool barge drill asteroids, only because of fear of potential enemy. And you will be rewarded less then NPC hunting. You need new mining mechanic for make this work. I mean interesing mining, not boring mining. You have to use 1 accout to protect from rats, right? So use it for ratting while your Macks fill up their holds. Your being lazy and un-inventive insults me, mkay? |
Doukyou
Deafening Silence Syndiate In Umbra Mortis
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 05:09:00 -
[478] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tippia wrote:One question and one immediate observation:
How much ice will actually be in the new belts? On of the main problem with the current design is that they simply are too large GÇö even at a decent depletion rate, they'd stick around forever.
Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined.
Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. This Ice change is totally retard3d. skip the anomalies, Make ort clouds.
Also, I hate the fact that grav sites no longer need to be scanned down. Not quite as big a mistake as the ice but totally takes the fun out of my exploration skills.
CEO of Evil
Doukyou |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 06:11:00 -
[479] - Quote
Doukyou wrote:Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. Ah, you're also planning to switch doing all your nasty things at outpost, right? Oh wait, you mean you prefer to crumble and die? What a wise way of dealing with challenge! |
Grippa Dets
A-Fission Industries
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 06:25:00 -
[480] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Grippa Dets wrote:I like to just exist in EVE - listen to music and get immersed in graphics, and it has worked for me since 2009. Realistically I cannot dedicated focused time to EVE - and group time, even less. Although group play keeps retention up for youngsters (teens, 20's <35), pushing to adopt group play is not going to retain me - it's will do the opposite. Why dont you switch to roid mining? In a station-less system rocks could be really big, so you dont need to switch too often. And since you say you were mining for a long time - it was ok for you to pay attention once in a while, before they revamped Exhumers, to drop ice into Orca. So it should be ok after Odyssey, to relock rocks once in a while. You are even prompted to do that by "asteroid depleted" warning! So I cannot agree with your statement that afk-mining is no longer possible. At the same time, I'd wanted to warn CCP to refrain from completely obsoletizing current relaxed mining style when they introduce more engaging "prototype mining".
that "warning" comes at the end of a cycle so you loose that cycles yield and since roids don't deplete at the same time you end up having to adjust your beams 3 or 4 times per miner -- trust me there is a reason people AFK ice, not roids.
The point is this semi-passive income is gone in exchange for "more conflict" drivers. Besides I was lost 4 mackinaws so it wasn't without risk. There was no problem with ICE and POS fuel; there was a small profit margin for the miner but stable supply for empires - win/win.
If the result is to be POS coming down to fuel costs, then put more invention slots in stations so we cal all participate in advanced building gameplay. |
|
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 06:49:00 -
[481] - Quote
Grippa Dets wrote:that "warning" comes at the end of a cycle so you loose that cycles yield and since roids don't deplete at the same time you end up having to adjust your beams 3 or 4 times per miner -- trust me there is a reason people AFK ice, not roids. 3-4 times per minute?! You should definitely try mining in 0.5 system without station. Rocks there are big enough to withstand several cycles, I guarantee it. As for optimal timing of cycles, I think it's fair that those, who pay attention, get more ore - dont you agree? |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
91
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 09:40:00 -
[482] - Quote
CCP Eterne wrote:I have removed some personal attacks on CCP from this thread. 22 pages of explanation why the belts-as-anoms is not really good for a couple of cases, issues with the 4 hour respawn time of ice belts, and the utterly **** compression performance of the rorq (it's already bad. with the -50% ice harv cycletime change, it'll be even more worse). and this is the only thing you can say, CCP? really? couldn't you just take some care of your players? like to answer our concerns or something?
|
Tas Nok
Hedion University Amarr Empire
48
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 09:44:00 -
[483] - Quote
ok, after ALOT of tears and whining and bad posting in this thread (finally read all 24 pages) I took a shower and can finally comment.
First off its very unlikely these changes are set in stone, if Ice or R64 goo runs off the rails I'd expect an 'adjustment' similarly if it has no discernible effect apart from tears, they will 'tune' the ice a bit more.
1. WH/Null mining is not dead, but does take a serious hit, the few miners in null will need to pay attention, and those in null will need to to sacrifice efficiency for a prober/extra caution (never understood why losing 1 damn cycle causes many miners fits of rage)
2. I saw the 80% ICE from HS figure in the blog and only two posts here thought to ask "HOW MUCH DOES HS PRODUCE NOW" an answer from a dev to this one question would quiet/confirm most of our speculation (as well as the markets)
3. although it would be very useful to know, I'm not sure CCP would answer the follow-up which would be "what percentage of ice per racial isotope is produced in HS" its almost a given that Gall/Caldari will be higher than Matar/Amarr but knowing by how much would be helpful.
4. Just slightly concerned over the mechanics of re-spawns, if its done poorly and one toon sits at the belt cloaked or not, will it despawn and start the timer? or will that be a new griefing mechanic?
5. will systems that have more than 1 ice belt get more than 1 anom?
Everything else looks like its headed in the right direction, good job to CCP for shaking the sandbox a bit. |
Oliver G
G Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 10:05:00 -
[484] - Quote
Currently, I am running a one-man-POS and have to grab all the fuel myself. At the moment, this is no problem as all the PI product can be gathered easily and the possibility to AFK mine ice enables me to run the computer for a few hours a week to get the necessary ice products. It is tideous work, but I enjoy the research at my POS and building stuff for my local mission hub.
However, with the changes about to be implemented I feel that it becomes virtually impossible for me to retain my POS. Not only can't I AFK-mine ice anymore, I also have to locate the belts first. As far as I can see, not a single high-sec ice anomaly will exists in the whole Khanid Kingdom region. How am I supposed to get the ice? Solo mine in low using a Mackinaw? How is that supposed to follow the risk/reward rule? I simply cannot defend myself there - not even against the NPC belt-rats. Using multiple account? Is that the way the game must be played now? One person - multiple accounts?
All the proposed changes do NOT make ice mining more interesting -- ice mining will become more like mining gravimetric asteroid belts in low sec. Is that fun for a one-man-mining-operation? No. Will I be able to retain my POS? No.
I do agree with CCP that some changes are needed to the whole ice-mining (and mining in general). However, in my opinion, these changes should promote the gameplay and actually introduce some fun in doing the mining. It should NOT make it impossible for solo-players to actually play the game the way they want. What about the sandbox? It is about to become a lot smaller for me. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
65
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 10:39:00 -
[485] - Quote
Oliver G wrote: As far as I can see, not a single high-sec ice anomaly will exists in the whole Khanid Kingdom region. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Khanid/Talidal will be getting Ice anomalies, 3 of them at that. |
Oliver G
G Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 10:51:00 -
[486] - Quote
No just because Dotlan says it does does not necessarily mean that it does.
I am quoting from the DEVBLOG!
Quote: Most systems that currently have ice belts will contain these new ice anomalies, with the notable exception of many systems in Amarrian, Khanid, and Ammatar high security space. Below I will list all the systems in high security space that will contain spawns of Clear Icicle.
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
None of the mentioned systems is in Khanid high-sec. Ergo, no high-sec anomalies. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
65
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 10:58:00 -
[487] - Quote
Oliver G wrote:No just because Dotlan says it does does not necessarily mean that it does. I am quoting from the DEVBLOG! Quote: Most systems that currently have ice belts will contain these new ice anomalies, with the notable exception of many systems in Amarrian, Khanid, and Ammatar high security space. Below I will list all the systems in high security space that will contain spawns of Clear Icicle.
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
These will be the only high security systems that will contain Clear Icicle. None of the mentioned systems is in Khanid high-sec. Ergo, no high-sec anomalies. Please read the bold.
edit: There, I underlined it too. |
Oliver G
G Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 11:04:00 -
[488] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:stuff... edit: There, I underlined it too.
Ah lol. Thanks for pointing it out.
Too bad its on the other side of Khanid for me.
Anyway, we have one system with anomalies for ice mining for a whole region. That still does not look good to me. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
66
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 11:08:00 -
[489] - Quote
It's to keep the numbers of ice belts consistent by type. Amarr-oriented space (includes Khanid/Ammatar) is considerably larger, thus the ice belts are more spread out.
If you're over the Moniyyuku/Palas side of Khanid, you may find the Ordion ice belt convenient. |
Oliver G
G Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 11:10:00 -
[490] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:It's to keep the numbers of ice belts consistent by type. Amarr-oriented space (includes Khanid/Ammatar) is considerably larger, thus the ice belts are more spread out.
Which is something I do not understand. Sholudn't they make the "density in relation to space" constant, not the "number by empire"? |
|
Oliver G
G Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 11:13:00 -
[491] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:If you're over the Moniyyuku/Palas side of Khanid, you may find the Ordion ice belt convenient.
Yes, I am at that side. However, plotting a course from my location to Ordion results in 9 jumps
I think I must completely re-locate my stuff if I want to continue using my one-man-POS. ..... oh man that will be fun. |
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
66
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 11:21:00 -
[492] - Quote
Oliver G wrote:Lord Haur wrote:It's to keep the numbers of ice belts consistent by type. Amarr-oriented space (includes Khanid/Ammatar) is considerably larger, thus the ice belts are more spread out. Which is something I do not understand. Sholudn't they make the "density in relation to space" constant, not the "number by empire"? Because the highsec ice supply is being reduced to provide approx. 80% of the total ice usage, the racial ice types need to be of a similar number. Allowing the Amarr to keep their current number of ice belts would result in highsec being capable of supplying the entire Helium Isotope market, which is obviously not an option for this game design choice.
However, you do have a point in that more systems could have ice if they only have one belt per system. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:08:00 -
[493] - Quote
Oliver G wrote:Lord Haur wrote:If you're over the Moniyyuku/Palas side of Khanid, you may find the Ordion ice belt convenient. Yes, I am at that side. However, plotting a course from my location to Ordion results in 9 jumps I think I must completely re-locate my stuff if I want to continue using my one-man-POS. ..... oh man that will be fun. Stockpile. Mine now while its easy, get many months. When things go bad CCP will adjust things. But it will take them months to do it, so stockpile.
The respawn mechanic does have an odd effect. When one belt runs out you can go to another system and get its belt. Go system to system, farming the belts. Do a little circuit. By the time you get back to the first system its belt will re-spawn.
Now in Gallente space this can easily be done in several places. One area has 5 systems and 8 belts you could cycle through. Matari and Caldari space have areas that make cycling systems easy as well.
But not Amarr space. All the new ice systems are 5 or more jumps apart. Doing a loop, chaining belts will be a pain in comparison to other ices. The result could be Amarr ice will see the most price rises. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5602
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:10:00 -
[494] - Quote
Hey guys, I'm back from Fanfest and my day in bed starting the recovery from the Fanfest flu. I've read through the whole thread now. Thanks for all your feedback. I'm gonna start by answering a few common or important questions from the thread:
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Amarr Lab Upgrade: 3(+5), 5(+13), 7(+21) Copying, ME, PE slots is this correct? cause it looks like a typo to me. It's a typo, good catch. The numbers of slots for each level is correct, the change from old values numbers are wrong. It should be 3(+1), 5(+2), 7(+3). I'll get the blog fixed asap.
Tas Nok wrote:2. I saw the 80% ICE from HS figure in the blog and only two posts here thought to ask "HOW MUCH DOES HS PRODUCE NOW" an answer from a dev to this one question would quiet/confirm most of our speculation (as well as the markets) Currently approximately 94% of ice is mined in highsec. For the people asking about supply in other areas of space, there are aproximately 8 lowsec/0.0 ice belts for every highsec belt, and those belts are a bit larger. This means I am not the least bit worried about us hitting the limit of our supply anytime soon.
Tas Nok wrote: 4. Just slightly concerned over the mechanics of re-spawns, if its done poorly and one toon sits at the belt cloaked or not, will it despawn and start the timer? or will that be a new griefing mechanic?
This bug has already been fixed, staying in a belt will not keep it alive if all the asteroids are mined.
Tas Nok wrote: 5. will systems that have more than 1 ice belt get more than 1 anom?
For the most part yes. As was stated in the dev blog:
Quote:Some systems, mostly those that currently contain two or three ice belts, will contain multiple instances of the Ice Anomalies.
To answer the question about wormholes, we are not currently planning to add moon minerals or ice to wormholes. Ice because we do not want wormholes to be too self sufficient, the logistics of maintaining a starbase there is part of the gameplay. Moon minerals because moons in wormholes are far too defensible, we do not want to place moon minerals in locations that make them that difficult to attack.
I want to make it clear that we are not intending these changes to force people into 0.0 or lowsec from highsec. Many people simply prefer the gameplay of highsec and that's fine. However we want to make sure that for those miners and industrialists that do want to move to nullsec, they have available opportunities that support their playstyle.
We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:34:00 -
[495] - Quote
Hi CCP Fozzie! Tell me: How many ice blocks will a typical high sec belt have? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4001
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:36:00 -
[496] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting?
He did adapt, like many others will do. By playing SWTor.
BTW in that MMO I am on the English PvP server over there, playing a character named... Vaerah. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4001
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:43:00 -
[497] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Currently approximately 94% of ice is mined in highsec. For the people asking about supply in other areas of space, there are aproximately 8 lowsec/0.0 ice belts for every highsec belt, and those belts are a bit larger. This means I am not the least bit worried about us hitting the limit of our supply anytime soon.
In general I love this patch but I have a question that will determine a lot of accounts termination.
If a player logs in at any random hour, is he *reasonably sure* to scan and find an ice belt? Because many have serious RL induced time constraints.
They just can't log in and wait for 3.5 hours because ice went all out in half hour after the 4h respawn, with a cloud of angry miners rabidly spamming scan to jump on the new spawn.
I am certainly going to drop 6 of my accounts if I can't use them when I get my hour to play.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Meltmind2
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
43
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:51:00 -
[498] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. |
Beaver Retriever
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:54:00 -
[499] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? He did adapt, like many others will do. By playing SWTor. BTW in that MMO I am on the English PvP server over there, playing a character named... Vaerah. What a shame, we lost a player who wasn't interested in a sandbox MMO anyway. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:10:00 -
[500] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys, I'm back from Fanfest and my day in bed starting the recovery from the Fanfest flu. I've read through the whole thread now. Thanks for all your feedback. I'm gonna start by answering a few common or important questions from the thread: Any word on ice types that will spawn in nullsec, and its correlation with truesec? Best truesec systems currently only have krystallos, which is useless. |
|
Frying Doom
2433
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:13:00 -
[501] - Quote
Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Or stop mining all together and do something that will be still profitable in hi-sec, like missions or incursions. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Myntelle NicAtoch
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:15:00 -
[502] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: We recognize that the Outpost slot changes do not go as far as many people would have liked, but in this case we want to ensure that we don't design ourselves into a corner later by making outposts impossible to compete with. There may be room to adjust some of the numbers upwards a bit but we probably won't go as high as everyone might hope. The best solutions are the ones we come up with ourselves. Let us anchor multiple stations per system, and WE will deal with production capacity in null sec, you won't need to tweak anything.
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:20:00 -
[503] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We recognize that the Outpost slot changes do not go as far as many people would have liked, but in this case we want to ensure that we don't design ourselves into a corner later by making outposts impossible to compete with. There may be room to adjust some of the numbers upwards a bit but we probably won't go as high as everyone might hope. Once again thanks for all the feedback. To be ungrateful and demanding, is there any way that you'd consider boosting the offices in conquerable stations as well? I don't really have a problem with those being inferior to outposts now but more offices is always helpful.
I really, really, really would like to have a little less arbitration over our vfk offices between membercorps :argh: |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:21:00 -
[504] - Quote
Myntelle NicAtoch wrote: The best solutions are the ones we come up with ourselves. Let us anchor multiple stations per system, and WE will deal with production capacity in null sec, you won't need to tweak anything.
iirc this is less a ccp insists you not do this for game balance issue and more an "oh god eight year old spaghetti code that if we touch will break everything" preventing it |
Ereilian
Over The Horizon
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:24:00 -
[505] - Quote
Welcome back Fozzie and keep taking the Tylanols :D
A couple of questions you sort of addressed but didn't..
1) Can we at least have an estimated number of mining hours needed to pop the new ice anoms please?
2) Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?
3) Will you be rebalancing the POS fuel requirements/fuel block material requirements in the near future?
4) Are you happy that after dealing with one bottleneck in the economy you are now, by omission or commision, creating a new set of bottlenecks that are already having a large impact on the economy?
5) Do CCP actually value high sec customers, or do you see CCP's mission to devalue highsec and force customers into nullsec?
I know that last question is loaded, but it is a general feeling within my own social group that CCP does not value highsec customers. |
MiliasColds
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:25:00 -
[506] - Quote
The thing me and my corp mates are most interested in is this, will these Ice anomalies include all the racial ice types rather than just the one we see in the belts of today, with the expectation of most of the racial ice is correct for the belt it is replacing in the various systems |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1871
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:48:00 -
[507] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY.
Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Or stop mining all together and do something that will be still profitable in hi-sec, like missions or incursions. That would involve adapting which is evidently an unthinkable concept, it's only other people who should Adapt Or Die when changes are made.
Much better to sulk and cry on the forums about it instead. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Taki Natsu
White Raven Industries Mistakes Were Made.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:48:00 -
[508] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products. ...
I can see your point in as much as it means 0.0 can mass export to hisec, but this also dramatically increases the amount of logistics (time/cost/manpower etc.). This scales horribly if you're trying to encourage people to mine for their local POS networks etc.
Let's have a look at some numbers: ~ VERY conservative POS Network of 10 POSs for 30days Fuel Blocks required: 216,000 (sov bonused 30blocks per hour) Isotopes required: 2.16mil units Heavy Water: 810k units Liquid Ozone: 810k units
Ice Blocks required: ~ Dark Gitter ~= 540 blocks ~ Glare Crust ~= 540 blocks ~ 0.0 Ice ~= 6172 blocks
Uncompressed Volume: 7.25mil m3 or 21 Rhea Jumps or 20 Rorqual Jumps Compressed Volume: 725k m3 or 3 Rhea Jumps or 2 Rorqual Jumps
These are very conservative numbers considering that Alliances/Corps in 0.0 often have ten times this size of POS networks.
Can I suggest some potential compromises then:
- Increase the isotopes yield of 0.0 isotopes ice so less ice blocks are required (HW - LO is currently fine imo) - Increase the volume of the compressed ice and keep the Rorq:Hulk compression ratio the same (previously calculated @ 1:4.3). This way it will limit how much leaks to hisec but reduces the massive logistical cost for moving it locally. Not every sov holder is blessed with a Minmatar Refinery station in their ice systems....
I honestly don't know how much 0.0 ice is exported to hisec but it can't be much considering 94% of EvE's current needs is supplied by hisec, but uncompressed ice is pretty hard/expensive to move around in its current state. |
Taki Natsu
White Raven Industries Mistakes Were Made.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:54:00 -
[509] - Quote
double post |
ArmEagle Kusoni
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:55:00 -
[510] - Quote
So, grav sites will not have to be scanned down anymore, right?
Have you considered that there is completely no possible way to detect an attacker when you want to mine in a wormhole then? Before you could at least keep an eye out for probes. |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:58:00 -
[511] - Quote
Do 0.0 ice anomalies all include the three non-racial ices (the ones with a lot of LO, a lot of stront, and a lot of heavy water lawl), or do the distribution of those ices in anomalies match the current distributions? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5610
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 14:58:00 -
[512] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
We recognize that the Outpost slot changes do not go as far as many people would have liked, but in this case we want to ensure that we don't design ourselves into a corner later by making outposts impossible to compete with. There may be room to adjust some of the numbers upwards a bit but we probably won't go as high as everyone might hope. Once again thanks for all the feedback. To be ungrateful and demanding, is there any way that you'd consider boosting the offices in conquerable stations as well? I don't really have a problem with those being inferior to outposts now slot-wise but more offices is always helpful and is more just an adjustment to the fact 0.0 has a lot more corps than it did when they were seeded. I really, really, really would like to have a little less arbitration over our vfk offices between membercorps :argh:
You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow.
Ereilian wrote:Welcome back Fozzie and keep taking the Tylanols :D
A couple of questions you sort of addressed but didn't..
1) Can we at least have an estimated number of mining hours needed to pop the new ice anoms please?
2) Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?
3) Will you be rebalancing the POS fuel requirements/fuel block material requirements in the near future?
4) Are you happy that after dealing with one bottleneck in the economy you are now, by omission or commision, creating a new set of bottlenecks that are already having a large impact on the economy?
editted for my own reading fail :D
1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.
2) We always reserve the right to adjust things as needed. Iteration and all those cool buzzwords.
3) No plans at this time
4) Bottlenecks are a tool for creating incentives in a virtual economy. My job isn't to remove them, it's to ensure they create interesting incentives.
EvilweaselSA wrote:Do 0.0 ice anomalies all include the three non-racial ices (the ones with a lot of LO, a lot of stront, and a lot of heavy water lawl), or do the distribution of those ices in anomalies match the current distributions? I wasn't happy with the way the best truesec systems often lost good ice so each tier builds upon the one before instead of replacing. The best ice anoms found in the lowest truesec will contain all three non-racial ice types. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Taki Natsu
White Raven Industries Mistakes Were Made.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:01:00 -
[513] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Do 0.0 ice anomalies all include the three non-racial ices (the ones with a lot of LO, a lot of stront, and a lot of heavy water lawl), or do the distribution of those ices in anomalies match the current distributions?
Short answer no.
Not all 0.0 regions have Glare Crust (HW), but most afaik DO have Dark GLitter for the LO. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:05:00 -
[514] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow.
yes but it's like a dinner party the people slightly farther away at the less desirable table feel left out :argh:
oh well, the new offices everywhere nearby should help enough, thanks! |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5610
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:07:00 -
[515] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow.
yes but it's like a dinner party the people slightly farther away at the less desirable table feel left out :argh: oh well, the new offices everywhere nearby should help enough, thanks!
You need somewhere to put the children.
Comedy answer: alternatively feel free to have fewer friends. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:08:00 -
[516] - Quote
Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5610
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:10:00 -
[517] - Quote
Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important.
We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Max Teranous
Teranous Productions
47
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:14:00 -
[518] - Quote
How do you feel about moving all the current static ore belts into the anomaly system in the same way you're doing for the ice belts?
P.S. Do it do it do it |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1387
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:15:00 -
[519] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
Are WHs getting the +5/+10 ores as well? The risk in a WH is much greater than everywhere else.
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|
Ereilian
Over The Horizon
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:15:00 -
[520] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
We recognize that the Outpost slot changes do not go as far as many people would have liked, but in this case we want to ensure that we don't design ourselves into a corner later by making outposts impossible to compete with. There may be room to adjust some of the numbers upwards a bit but we probably won't go as high as everyone might hope. Once again thanks for all the feedback. To be ungrateful and demanding, is there any way that you'd consider boosting the offices in conquerable stations as well? I don't really have a problem with those being inferior to outposts now slot-wise but more offices is always helpful and is more just an adjustment to the fact 0.0 has a lot more corps than it did when they were seeded. I really, really, really would like to have a little less arbitration over our vfk offices between membercorps :argh: You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow. Ereilian wrote:Welcome back Fozzie and keep taking the Tylanols :D
A couple of questions you sort of addressed but didn't..
1) Can we at least have an estimated number of mining hours needed to pop the new ice anoms please?
2) Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?
3) Will you be rebalancing the POS fuel requirements/fuel block material requirements in the near future?
4) Are you happy that after dealing with one bottleneck in the economy you are now, by omission or commision, creating a new set of bottlenecks that are already having a large impact on the economy?
editted for my own reading fail :D 1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice. 2) We always reserve the right to adjust things as needed. Iteration and all those cool buzzwords. 3) No plans at this time 4) Bottlenecks are a tool for creating incentives in a virtual economy. My job isn't to remove them, it's to ensure they create interesting incentives. EvilweaselSA wrote:Do 0.0 ice anomalies all include the three non-racial ices (the ones with a lot of LO, a lot of stront, and a lot of heavy water lawl), or do the distribution of those ices in anomalies match the current distributions? I wasn't happy with the way the best truesec systems often lost good ice so each tier builds upon the one before instead of replacing. The best ice anoms found in the lowest truesec will contain all three non-racial ice types.
Thank you for the reply, I do have some follow up.
By my notepad estimate that means each anom will have approx 23 mining hours worth of ice. While that number might seem large for a nullsec system, it is incredibly small for highsec especially for a resource that drives both industry and combat. As sisi is not a real test of the real world implications of this change I ask again can we have a firm commitment of a +x month review of the change. Normally I would not push this way but you must understand the serious and far reaching impact of the change and that it will need to be monitored closely.
Which leads me into the second part of the follow up. While I understand your desire to craft the game into your own vision that vision may not be what we, the customers want. I will not make the usual "omg ragequit" statements but personally I will be allowing most of my mining alts to lapse as I see the new system as taking change too far. The fact you are trying, in a most clumsy jack booted way, to force conflict where no conflict existed on people who are engaged in constructive actions is very much appreciated. I also find it worrying that CCP is not willing to intervene in the legal RMT market systems but are quite happy to hatchet into systems to create more demand for said RMT.
I like alot of what is happening in Odyssey, I love the idea of anomalies but I fear you are basically setting up the multi boxers as Kings of the Ice and removing the ability of single miners to compete. |
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:16:00 -
[521] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
I am sorry to hear that. I guess I will have to cross it off of the things to do. |
TheButcherPete
The James Gang R O G U E
241
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:16:00 -
[522] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
While this is true... cloaking seemingly afk campers will become a lot more of a threat if the new grav sites become anomalies.
Stealthbombers don't normally carry probes, now they won't have to :/ Bzzt.
GÖÑ Punkturis GÖÑ |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
185
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:16:00 -
[523] - Quote
Right now the rorqual can compress ore to match the mining rate of 20 perfect ore miners in perfect boosts with 5% implants. Currently a rorqual can only compress ice to match 4 perfect ice miners. After the expansion it will only be able to match compression rates with 2 ice miners. That's a factor of TEN difference. Please reconsider the compression times for ice BPOs for rorquals |
agrajag119
Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:19:00 -
[524] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I wasn't happy with the way the best truesec systems often missed out on good ice so each tier builds upon the one before instead of replacing. The best ice anoms found in the lowest truesec in all areas of space will contain all three non-racial ice types.
Care to elaborate on this a bit here? Will low truesec belts contain a mix of all three non-racial ice or will you get one additional type per tier of truesec?
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4002
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:19:00 -
[525] - Quote
Beaver Retriever wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liz Laser wrote:
So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills.
Looks like someone moved your cheese. Maybe consider adapting? He did adapt, like many others will do. By playing SWTor. BTW in that MMO I am on the English PvP server over there, playing a character named... Vaerah. What a shame, we lost a player who wasn't interested in a sandbox MMO anyway.
Yeah I am subbed to EvE (8 accounts), Istaria, SWTor, WH Online and of course also play GW2 and others.
It's *clearly* because I am not interested to a sandbox game (it's why I am subbed to 2 sandbox MMOs , was 3 before).
Oh wait, I am *adapting* and just downsizing to do something else since I lost 1 avenue of play. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4002
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:22:00 -
[526] - Quote
Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead.
Spoken like a true ignorant.
Let me speak it slowly for you: moving 30-ish freighters worth of ice is not a small task even if I currently have 2 freigthers and 1 JF so I am in a better situation than most..
Continuosly relocating requires standings with the appropriate stations for perfect refine and grinding standings is not an overnight task either.
Also, I have multiple rocks mining fleets and 4 Orca boosting characters, *maybe* I also mine rocks? Who knows Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4002
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:25:00 -
[527] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Or stop mining all together and do something that will be still profitable in hi-sec, like missions or incursions.
Missions are 2010, incursions too long to setup and join for my limited time, and currently my available bandwidth (I went to live on a nice islands but that has downsides, like pay per megabyte internet fees). Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4003
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:28:00 -
[528] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY.
Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Or stop mining all together and do something that will be still profitable in hi-sec, like missions or incursions. That would involve adapting which is evidently an unthinkable concept, it's only other people who should Adapt Or Die when changes are made. Much better to sulk and cry on the forums about it instead.
The ones who NEVER stop crying on the forums mostly come from your alliance. Just saying... Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
107
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:36:00 -
[529] - Quote
Fozzie, as you plan to improve Outpost... how about improving POS refining? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 15:44:00 -
[530] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:Right now the rorqual can compress ore to match the mining rate of 20 perfect ore miners in perfect boosts with 5% implants. Currently a rorqual can only compress ice to match 4 perfect ice miners. After the expansion it will only be able to match compression rates with 2 ice miners. That's a factor of TEN difference. Please reconsider the compression times for ice BPOs for rorquals please don't those vile ice compression rorquals will steal all our tax monies |
|
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:16:00 -
[531] - Quote
Ereilian wrote:I will not make the usual "omg ragequit" statements but personally I will be allowing most of my mining alts to lapse as I see the new system as taking change too far. Please do. Let the live people enjoy the game. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
385
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:17:00 -
[532] - Quote
Guys my very enthusiastic ice mining operation!!!! bring back images |
Dmitri Ronuken
ReStore of Reset
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:30:00 -
[533] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important.
We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
You and others might be happy with with the "improved" risk/reward balance, but I'm not happy that you've removed a lot of the fun in mining. You just eliminated prospecting from the game, and any reason for miners to pick up scanning and astrometrics skills. Why not just make the "hidden" asteroid fields show up like the static belts? One button click is a joke of a separation. The only challenge left in mining now is ganking, and that's not the same kind of fun as scanning down a 1.25% gravimetric signature and being the first person to mine it was. If miners wanted to play PvP they'd play PvP in something other than mining barges. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4004
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:50:00 -
[534] - Quote
Dmitri Ronuken wrote:You and others might be happy with with the "improved" risk/reward balance, but I'm not happy that you've removed a lot of the fun in mining. You just eliminated prospecting from the game, and any reason for miners to pick up scanning and astrometrics skills. Why not just make the "hidden" asteroid fields show up like the static belts? One button click is a joke of a separation. The only challenge left in mining now is ganking, and that's not the same kind of fun as scanning down a 1.25% gravimetric signature and being the first person to mine it was. If miners wanted to play PvP they'd play PvP in something other than mining barges.
There's also the non secondary factor that true scanning would be harder to bot than the proposed simpleton way. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Iosue
Black Sky Hipsters
177
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 16:58:00 -
[535] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
Fozzie, do you see this changing the calculus of when industry upgrades are installed in null? if the system already has access to ABC ores, there will be less reason to upgrade space. the protection offered by current grav site mechanics gives incentive to spend isk improving even good trusec. if you remove this mechanic, they will be less reason to improve space if attractive ores are already in abundance in that system. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:05:00 -
[536] - Quote
Iosue wrote: Fozzie, do you see this changing the calculus of when industry upgrades are installed in null? if the system already has access to ABC ores, there will be less reason to upgrade space. the protection offered by current grav site mechanics gives incentive to spend isk improving even good trusec. if you remove this mechanic, they will be less reason to improve space if attractive ores are already in abundance in that system.
at the rate people mine out grav anoms the system would be utterly bare every day if they tried just belt mining
they'll keep anom mining |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4833
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:06:00 -
[537] - Quote
So Fozzie. Have you and CCP Rise completely stopped taking feedback on the ship and module balance changes? Are you just going to release things as they are currently presented? We're just over a month from release and the last time you or he posted in any of the Amarr T1 BS or the LET threads was just a handful of posts by Rise completely discarding most of the feedback in the thread from the past 90 pages before his post. And those handful of posts were over a week after anything previously.
What's the point of making such threads then? You haven't really given us much indication that you're doing anything about them, that you're reading them anymore, or even that you care. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5615
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:10:00 -
[538] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:So Fozzie. Have you and CCP Rise completely stopped taking feedback on the ship and module balance changes? Are you just going to release things as they are currently presented? We're just over a month from release and the last time you or he posted in any of the Amarr T1 BS or the LET threads was just a handful of posts by Rise completely discarding most of the feedback in the thread from the past 90 pages before his post. And those handful of posts were over a week after anything previously.
What's the point of making such threads then? You haven't really given us much indication that you're doing anything about them, that you're reading them anymore, or even that you care.
We've been very busy with fanfest and myself with getting these devblogs out the door. We're definitely not done taking feedback on those balance changes. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Meltmind2
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
43
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:18:00 -
[539] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Spoken like a true ignorant. Let me speak it slowly for you: moving 30-ish freighters worth of ice is not a small task even if I currently have 2 freigthers and 1 JF so I am in a better situation than most.. Continuosly relocating requires standings with the appropriate stations for perfect refine and grinding standings is not an overnight task either. Also, I have multiple rocks mining fleets and 4 Orca boosting characters, *maybe* I also mine rocks? Who knows The 4h respawn time means you have plenty of time to relocate, haul stuff around or do ~other things~. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:19:00 -
[540] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Spoken like a true ignorant. Let me speak it slowly for you: moving 30-ish freighters worth of ice is not a small task even if I currently have 2 freigthers and 1 JF so I am in a better situation than most.. Continuosly relocating requires standings with the appropriate stations for perfect refine and grinding standings is not an overnight task either. Also, I have multiple rocks mining fleets and 4 Orca boosting characters, *maybe* I also mine rocks? Who knows out of pure curiosity where do you mine |
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4834
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:22:00 -
[541] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:So Fozzie. Have you and CCP Rise completely stopped taking feedback on the ship and module balance changes? Are you just going to release things as they are currently presented? We're just over a month from release and the last time you or he posted in any of the Amarr T1 BS or the LET threads was just a handful of posts by Rise completely discarding most of the feedback in the thread from the past 90 pages before his post. And those handful of posts were over a week after anything previously.
What's the point of making such threads then? You haven't really given us much indication that you're doing anything about them, that you're reading them anymore, or even that you care. We've been very busy with fanfest and myself with getting these devblogs out the door. We're definitely not done taking feedback on those balance changes. Well that's comforting. At what point before an expansion would you say changes are locked in? A week before? Two weeks? |
DrDethHunter
Shoal of the Intrepid Righteousness LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:25:00 -
[542] - Quote
Everytime you think you need to fix something that is not broken you need to revamp it and make it worse for the the little guy. some of us don't have the time to go searching for worm holes and anomalies or sites. And when your on a fixed income and like to play multiple games then you have to choose what to play and not play. I like playing eve and I have been playing for a long time and from time to time I have posted when I felt something was wrong. like when the Personally owned station got messed up. now you doing the same with the ice belts. I see I serious ecomony backlass where prices are going to skyrocket in player goods instead of being stable or going down. As right now the buy order on ice are going up so that means when the ice disappears into a randopm hidden belt a lot of us are going to be looking for a new game to play because ccp forgets about us bread and butter people in the industry area. Ice harvesting should stay static but make so it spawns and despawns every 4 hrs sounds better,. I don't know just know it will make the ecomony worse for some of us with low isk compare to others like goons or test who have big wallets. I like buying plexes with my isk and with the ice going away guess I wont be buying plexes anymore and my accounts will be shutting down. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4004
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:27:00 -
[543] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Spoken like a true ignorant. Let me speak it slowly for you: moving 30-ish freighters worth of ice is not a small task even if I currently have 2 freigthers and 1 JF so I am in a better situation than most.. Continuosly relocating requires standings with the appropriate stations for perfect refine and grinding standings is not an overnight task either. Also, I have multiple rocks mining fleets and 4 Orca boosting characters, *maybe* I also mine rocks? Who knows out of pure curiosity where do you mine
Feel free to find out. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:27:00 -
[544] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY.
Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Or stop mining all together and do something that will be still profitable in hi-sec, like missions or incursions. That would involve adapting which is evidently an unthinkable concept, it's only other people who should Adapt Or Die when changes are made. Much better to sulk and cry on the forums about it instead.
Adapt. I've always loved that word. Lets all say it... Adapt. Unfortunately, in these forums the word Adapt, is being used as a euphemism for SHUT UP. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4004
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:29:00 -
[545] - Quote
Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Meltmind2 wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie] Scanning? Sure, actually make it harder if anything. Waiting for 3.5 hours for a new spawn like an idiot? NO WAY. Or you could *gasp* move over to another system and/or mine rocks instead. Spoken like a true ignorant. Let me speak it slowly for you: moving 30-ish freighters worth of ice is not a small task even if I currently have 2 freigthers and 1 JF so I am in a better situation than most.. Continuosly relocating requires standings with the appropriate stations for perfect refine and grinding standings is not an overnight task either. Also, I have multiple rocks mining fleets and 4 Orca boosting characters, *maybe* I also mine rocks? Who knows The 4h respawn time means you have plenty of time to relocate, haul stuff around or do ~other things~.
I have 1 hour, I will spend it doing something more fun than space trucking. The *only* good thing about current mining is that it can be done while doing the more fun activities, since they left it as lackluster and boring but just added limitations then it's not worth doing. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5615
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:30:00 -
[546] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:So Fozzie. Have you and CCP Rise completely stopped taking feedback on the ship and module balance changes? Are you just going to release things as they are currently presented? We're just over a month from release and the last time you or he posted in any of the Amarr T1 BS or the LET threads was just a handful of posts by Rise completely discarding most of the feedback in the thread from the past 90 pages before his post. And those handful of posts were over a week after anything previously.
What's the point of making such threads then? You haven't really given us much indication that you're doing anything about them, that you're reading them anymore, or even that you care. We've been very busy with fanfest and myself with getting these devblogs out the door. We're definitely not done taking feedback on those balance changes. Well that's comforting. At what point before an expansion would you say changes are locked in? A week before? Two weeks?
A few days for changes that don't require localization. Obviously the earlier the better though. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:30:00 -
[547] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Feel free to find out.
That's what I'm doing! Who better to ask? |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4004
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:32:00 -
[548] - Quote
Crexa wrote: Adapt. I've always loved that word. Lets all say it... Adapt. Unfortunately, in these forums the word Adapt, is being used as a euphemism for SHUT UP.
It's fun to tell the employer he has to adapt so that the player can adapt to the new EvE schedule. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
937
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:37:00 -
[549] - Quote
I can honestly say that the increased value of low sec ores would have been enough to mine in gravimetric sites, but with them going to anomalies it is still not worth risking you mining barge for. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:45:00 -
[550] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:I can honestly say that the increased value of low sec ores would have been enough to mine in gravimetric sites, but with them going to anomalies it is still not worth risking you mining barge for.
Look, its really simple. Low sec will never ever be worth mining UNTIL, they place something there that is so valuable that the risk = reward but preferably reward outweighs it. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:45:00 -
[551] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Crexa wrote: Adapt. I've always loved that word. Lets all say it... Adapt. Unfortunately, in these forums the word Adapt, is being used as a euphemism for SHUT UP.
It's fun to tell the employer he has to adapt so that the player can adapt to the new EvE schedule.
agreed, i demand all moneymaking options in game be balanced around my unique schedule rather than various options being better for various schedules
accordingly, i demand a complete rebalance of ratting to accommodate my logging in for 5-10 minutes per day to look at the market |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:47:00 -
[552] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:I can honestly say that the increased value of low sec ores would have been enough to mine in gravimetric sites, but with them going to anomalies it is still not worth risking you mining barge for. This. CCP consider two site types: Ore anomalies for ore that normally appears in that type of space. Example: An Omber site popping up in high sec, a Hedergite site in low sec, or small ore sites in W. Ore signature for higher end ores: Example: a Hedergite site in high sec, or Arkonor in low sec, or in W the larger ore sites.
Ships will not be exploding at ore anomalies if no one goes there to mine. The current proposal will lead to ore mining in high sec, secured Null, and little else. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:49:00 -
[553] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Crexa wrote: Adapt. I've always loved that word. Lets all say it... Adapt. Unfortunately, in these forums the word Adapt, is being used as a euphemism for SHUT UP.
It's fun to tell the employer he has to adapt so that the player can adapt to the new EvE schedule. agreed, i demand all moneymaking options in game be balanced around my unique schedule rather than various options being better for various schedules accordingly, i demand a complete rebalance of ratting to accommodate my logging in for 5-10 minutes per day to look at the market
Or how about around your agenda. That always seemed a good one. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:54:00 -
[554] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Huh? The Dev blog only mentioned the 0.0 ore: the ABC ores, Gneiss, Spod and Dark Ochre. Nothing was mentioned about the J-H ores that show in low sec. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
309
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:02:00 -
[555] - Quote
I look forward to doing missions in a kronos again because everything else is prohibitively expensive for my actual amount of game play time.
Its nice to know that the things which are long time known problems are getting fixed yeah?
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:05:00 -
[556] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable)... We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Huh? The Dev blog only mentioned the 0.0 ore: the ABC ores, Gneiss, Spod and Dark Ochre. Nothing was mentioned about the J-H ores that show in low sec.
Low sec grav sites have Null Sec ores. I would be happy with grav sites with low sec ores found in low sec.
Crexa wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:I can honestly say that the increased value of low sec ores would have been enough to mine in gravimetric sites, but with them going to anomalies it is still not worth risking you mining barge for. Look, its really simple. Low sec will never ever be worth mining UNTIL, they place something there that is so valuable that the risk <= reward. Low sec could benefit from a different form of mining. Perhaps booster gases. You know, a half @ss implemented idea that never got any love after it was introduced into the game. An expansion of an idea that at its core is really good but gets no use because of scarcity, lack of knowledge and ignorance.
Low sec has extra issues with security that are not found in Null Sec. It seems that CCP generally thinks of risk as High -> Low -> Null, which makes it difficult to balance risks and rewards for common activities within Low Sec. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:10:00 -
[557] - Quote
Kadl wrote: Low sec has extra issues with security that are not found in Null Sec. It seems that CCP generally thinks of risk as High -> Low -> Null, which makes it difficult to balance risks and rewards for common activities within Low Sec.
It has risks that are not present in sovereign nullsec but most of those are present in NPC null. Really, the only one is you can't anchor defensive bubbles. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:12:00 -
[558] - Quote
Low sec has extra issues with security that are not found in Null Sec. It seems that CCP generally thinks of risk as High -> Low -> Null, which makes it difficult to balance risks and rewards for common activities within Low Sec.[/quote]
Which is the fundamental problem. In reality lowsec is more dangerous than null or even wh under certain circumstances. The only exception to this would be the use of bubbles. But I look at it from an economic danger not purely aship loss danger. Economically, the risks do not equal the rewards thus it is more dangerous.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Darkness of Despair
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:14:00 -
[559] - Quote
BTW, i heard you want to change battleships mineral requirements. Any actual numbers? Or at least what direction it will go (up? down? ) ? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:14:00 -
[560] - Quote
Crexa wrote:^^
Which is the fundamental problem. In reality lowsec is more dangerous than null or even wh under certain circumstances. The only exception to this would be the use of bubbles true. But I look at it from an economic danger not purely a ship loss danger. Economically, the risks do not equal the rewards thus it is more dangerous. you don't have the risk thousands of people will descend on your stations, take them, and lock you out of them and leave you unable to do anything in your space |
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:15:00 -
[561] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Kadl wrote: Low sec has extra issues with security that are not found in Null Sec. It seems that CCP generally thinks of risk as High -> Low -> Null, which makes it difficult to balance risks and rewards for common activities within Low Sec.
It has risks that are not present in sovereign nullsec but most of those are present in NPC null. Really, the only one is you can't anchor defensive bubbles.
And wormhole space is different in other ways as well. The point remains that with respect to low sec it seems like CCP views risk as High -> Low -> Null. Perhaps we can agree that the the risks do not progress in that manner, but rather differ in each individual region. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
937
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:21:00 -
[562] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote:^^
Which is the fundamental problem. In reality lowsec is more dangerous than null or even wh under certain circumstances. The only exception to this would be the use of bubbles true. But I look at it from an economic danger not purely a ship loss danger. Economically, the risks do not equal the rewards thus it is more dangerous. you don't have the risk thousands of people will descend on your stations, take them, and lock you out of them and leave you unable to do anything in your space That is a risk you accepted when you took sov. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:22:00 -
[563] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote:^^
Which is the fundamental problem. In reality lowsec is more dangerous than null or even wh under certain circumstances. The only exception to this would be the use of bubbles true. But I look at it from an economic danger not purely a ship loss danger. Economically, the risks do not equal the rewards thus it is more dangerous. you don't have the risk thousands of people will descend on your stations, take them, and lock you out of them and leave you unable to do anything in your space
Which is one risk among many. It neither weighs heavy or lightly on the balance economic risk. You don't find resources in a station you find them in anoms, belts, moons and planets. I should say, raw resources, as a station can be considered one. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:25:00 -
[564] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.
That's small. Really small. I'm quite surprised that's big enough to supply 80% of all the ice products needed by the game.
After the harvester changes a typical miner will get a block every 40 seconds. One miner could drain an anomaly in 100,000 seconds. But there will not be one miner. As anoms pop the miners will travel to wherever there is ice. The result could well be 100 miners in one belt, mining it out in 1000 seconds, or 17 minutes. They then move to the next system and do it again. The result is all these ice systems will have a belt for 17 minutes and be barren for 93% of the time. To me this does not seem like a desirable state of affairs.
At Fanfest it was stated that the new Discovery scanner was to allow the players to see the answer to the question "what is there to do?" The answer should not be "Nothing, because others already did it all".
Suggestion: The respawn timer starts as soon as any mining takes place. The re-spawn occurs when both the current belt is mined out AND the timer has expired. Result: Its best for miners to spread out and not outmine the respawn timer. If you lengthen the timer to 5 hours (for balance) along with this change, that would be five to six miners per belt. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:31:00 -
[565] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.
That's small. Really small. I'm quite surprised that's big enough to supply 80% of all the ice products needed by the game. After the harvester changes a typical miner will get a block every 40 seconds. One miner could drain an anomaly in 100,000 seconds. But there will not be one miner. As anoms pop the miners will travel to wherever there is ice. The result could well be 100 miners in one belt, mining it out in 1000 seconds, or 17 minutes. They then move to the next system and do it again. The result is all these ice systems will have a belt for 17 minutes and be barren for 93% of the time. To me this does not seem like a desirable state of affairs. Suggestion: The respawn timer starts as soon as any mining takes place. The re-spawn occurs when both the current belt is mined out AND the timer has expired. Result: Its best for miners to spread out and not outmine the respawn timer. If you lengthen the timer to 5 hours (for balance) along with this change, that would be five to six miners per belt.
It also does not take into account refine efficiency. As moving to other systems to mine may require standings with station corps that provide refining. Sure in time that may be gotten around. But how long will CCP tinker with it til all who want or need to refine build required standing. It seems there should be at least an addtional 5% cushion if they insist on going forward with this dubious idea.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
620
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 18:40:00 -
[566] - Quote
Do lowsec/null anoms have similar amounts of ice to highsec anoms, and do nullsec/lowsec systems follow the same "one belt = one anom" rule or will they have more anomolies? |
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
318
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:01:00 -
[567] - Quote
Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance.
Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:05:00 -
[568] - Quote
Maul555 wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true.
Which has been said over and over in this thread with no response. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:13:00 -
[569] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Maul555 wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true. Which has been said over and over in this thread with no response. Actually there has been a response: "We want more conflict". But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict.
In W you will need to lock down the system before mining. Also: mine in pairs. Have each barge double web the other. Align to your POS. The webs will allow you to be at warp speed without flying away from the roid. When someone warps on grid or uncloaks the fleet commander warps you to the POS. As you are at speed the warp is immediate. (Yes its still a race to warp before you are pointed).
Every time you go to the POS to dump return to a different roid. That will give you time to get to warp speed before any cloaked ship gets close enough to attack.
All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
318
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:14:00 -
[570] - Quote
And are you people telling me that Raren is losing its ice belt? wtf guys!!! thats my home your ******* with.... |
|
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
318
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:16:00 -
[571] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Crexa wrote:Maul555 wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true. Which has been said over and over in this thread with no response. Actually there has been a response: "We want more conflict". But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict. In W you will need to lock down the system before mining. Also: mine in pairs. Have each barge double web the other. Align to your POS. The webs will allow you to be at warp speed without flying away from the roid. When someone warps on grid or uncloaks the fleet commander warps you to the POS. As you are at speed the warp is immediate. (Yes its still a race to warp before you are pointed). Every time you go to the POS to dump return to a different roid. That will give you time to get to warp speed before any cloaked ship gets close enough to attack. All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough.
There needs to be a place for solo miners in wormhole space. I cannot lock down a system by myself, and I am very often the only person in my corp that is logged in some evenings... My only recourse has been to pay attention, but now that will not work either. a cloaked ship can find me with no signs of their presence. I am farked... just plain farked... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1791
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:20:00 -
[572] - Quote
Maul555 wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Crexa wrote:Maul555 wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true. Which has been said over and over in this thread with no response. Actually there has been a response: "We want more conflict". But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict. In W you will need to lock down the system before mining. Also: mine in pairs. Have each barge double web the other. Align to your POS. The webs will allow you to be at warp speed without flying away from the roid. When someone warps on grid or uncloaks the fleet commander warps you to the POS. As you are at speed the warp is immediate. (Yes its still a race to warp before you are pointed). Every time you go to the POS to dump return to a different roid. That will give you time to get to warp speed before any cloaked ship gets close enough to attack. All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough. There needs to be a place for solo miners in wormhole space. I cannot lock down a system by myself, and I am very often the only person in my corp that is logged in some evenings... My only recourse has been to pay attention, but now that will not work either. a cloaked ship can find me with no signs of their presence. I am farked... just plain farked...
There is a guy in a friend corp that does lock down the system by himself. He parks an alt at the statics and turns up the sound on the effects. Then logs in his other 5 accounts and mines. If someone jumps in he can hear the wormhole cycle and knows its time to warp the fleet to safety.
Its not a viable method for everyone.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Iosue
Black Sky Hipsters
177
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:24:00 -
[573] - Quote
Kadl wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable)... We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Huh? The Dev blog only mentioned the 0.0 ore: the ABC ores, Gneiss, Spod and Dark Ochre. Nothing was mentioned about the J-H ores that show in low sec. Low sec grav sites have Null Sec ores. I would be happy with grav sites with low sec ores found in low sec.
there's plenty of good ores in npc null belts right now, not sure why you need to wait until Odyssey to mine those. will there be any difference between mining null sec belts and lo sec anoms after the expansion? |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1793
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:27:00 -
[574] - Quote
Iosue wrote:Kadl wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable)... We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Huh? The Dev blog only mentioned the 0.0 ore: the ABC ores, Gneiss, Spod and Dark Ochre. Nothing was mentioned about the J-H ores that show in low sec. Low sec grav sites have Null Sec ores. I would be happy with grav sites with low sec ores found in low sec. there's plenty of good ores in npc null belts right now, not sure why you need to wait until Odyssey to mine those. will there be any difference between mining null sec belts and lo sec anoms after the expansion?
Yes. Low sec has no bubbles and is closer to people who live in high sec.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:30:00 -
[575] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Crexa wrote:Maul555 wrote:Quote:We will also be making a significant change to the way hidden asteroid belts will be found by players. We are phasing out the Gravimetric signature category, and instead pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment. This change will make finding hidden belts much less difficult for both miners and for those who would prey on them, so pilots are always advised to practice vigilance. Is this going to effect WH space too? Are you telling me that probes will no longer be needed to hunt miners in wormholes? This makes "practicing vigilance" nearly impossible if true. Which has been said over and over in this thread with no response. Actually there has been a response: "We want more conflict". But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict. In W you will need to lock down the system before mining Also: mine in pairs. Have each barge double web the other. Align to your POS. The webs will allow you to be at warp speed without flying away from the roid. When someone warps on grid or uncloaks the fleet commander warps you to the POS. As you are at speed the warp is immediate. (Yes its still a race to warp before you are pointed). Every time you go to the POS to dump return to a different roid. That will give you time to get to warp speed before any cloaked ship gets close enough to attack. All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough.
I think most WH residents are aware of the tactics.
A. it is impossible to lock down a wh system. Sure you can collapse extra wormholes minus a reduced static. But gankers roll new wormholes every minute they can just looking for ripe mining boats to kill.
B. Double webs only work if you have an even number of mining ships that all have equally situationally aware players operating them. And alignment issues are always present do to bumps, etc.
C. Cloaked fleets
D Your talking about ideal situations in which amateur at best gankers hit you. Real gankers know those tactics and have adapted for them.
And if you think that the "we want more conflict" supposed response will suffice then there is something seriously wrong. As in what conflict do you see arising from defenseless mining ships to being wiped out from a "cloaking here and now gone" roaming fleet.
And don't give me that support fleet nonsense. They are non-existent to even the most heavily populated alliance. In wh they are even more pointless.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Javajunky
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:37:00 -
[576] - Quote
CCP Fozzie,
Great job with the industry round table discussion on the re-balance. We've been nerding it out over here and trying to dial in on your previous comments.
(a) Will Ice belts have a single material in them or will there be blended amounts of products to an extent like existing null sec belts?
(b) Systems with weak true sec status that have dark glitter, can we expect that dark glitter to be gone or just few signatures up at any one given time?
(c) do you plan on having rat spawns in these types of belts since you are doing away with rats in mags and radars?
Thanks!
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1793
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:41:00 -
[577] - Quote
One of the alts sitting by the WH has to have probes out to see a new sig. That's also a cue to warp to the POS. With the new discovery scanner I think that need goes away: It will show you all the sigs from your Barge.
The double webs works with 3 ships: Each ship aims one web on each of the other two. Only the fleet commander needs to be aware: fleet warp everyone.
Cloaked ships create a race: With the quick lock tackle hit before the fleet commander warps? As I said before "All this helps. A little. I'm not sure it helps enough".
Also: "But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict." Which means CCP's effort to get more conflict will fail.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1389
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:52:00 -
[578] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: There is a guy in a friend corp that does lock down the system by himself. He parks an alt at the statics and turns up the sound on the effects. Then logs in his other 5 accounts and mines. If someone jumps in he can hear the wormhole cycle and knows its time to warp the fleet to safety.
Its not a viable method for everyone.
Not to nitpick, but 6 accounts is hardly solo, as the guy you responded to had said.
Mining in a WH will come down more to luck than any skill. Some days you're the windshield, others you're the bug.
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:54:00 -
[579] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:One of the alts sitting by the WH has to have probes out to see a new sig. That's also a cue to warp to the POS. With the new discovery scanner I think that need goes away: It will show you all the sigs from your Barge.
The double webs works with 3 ships: Each ship aims one web on each of the other two. Only the fleet commander needs to be aware: fleet warp everyone.
Cloaked ships create a race: Will the quick lock tackle hit before the fleet commander warps? As I said before "All this helps. A little. I'm not sure it helps enough". After all there are poor gankers, and even good ones do not all use cloaked ships. Even those that do fail. I once had my Viator attacked by 3 stealth bombers. They failed.
Also: "But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict." Which means CCP's effort to get more conflict will fail. (I'm considering a very broad concept of "conflict", covering preparation and strategies, not just the actual encounter).
So i point out issues with what you say are good defenses and you reiterate them. Which is fine. And under the status quo thats perfectly understandable.
Yet the fact is, finding mining ships will become alot easier under the current proposal. No current tactics change that. And it goes back to your last sentence, from your previous post. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
939
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 20:39:00 -
[580] - Quote
I understand the desire for more conflict, but moving gravimetric sites to anomalies will decrease the amount of conflict. Empire null, low sec will most likely see no increase and maybe even a decrease in mining. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
|
Mithril Ryder
Genstar Inc Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 20:44:00 -
[581] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
4) Bottlenecks are a tool for creating incentives in a virtual economy. My job isn't to remove them, it's to ensure they create interesting incentives.
That is so laughable I don't even know where to start. Yes, bottlenecks that involve player time, skill and even luck do what you say, but artificial and static supply side bottlenecks do not. Basing how much supply their is on the assumption that all of the supply will be mined, with presumably no loss, and a mechanic that doesn't ensure all of it can be mined is hopelessly out of touch with reality.
Speaking of static supply, station resources in NPC stations need some player-drive way of being expanded (outside of the extremely limited pool of FW systems), or perhaps standings based access at NPC stations to "vip" facilities, or somesuch.
I'm going to stockpile minerals before someone gets the brilliant idea to do the same thing with 'roids.
Also, I predict goon fleets keeping an eye on the timers and warping in SB BS to pop all the miners that warp in when a belt finally respawns. Wait a second, no that makes too much sense... /me leaves thread to go make a shiny tinfoil hat. |
Kelmurdoch
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 20:50:00 -
[582] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Do 0.0 ice anomalies all include the three non-racial ices (the ones with a lot of LO, a lot of stront, and a lot of heavy water lawl), or do the distribution of those ices in anomalies match the current distributions? I wasn't happy with the way the best truesec systems often missed out on good ice so each tier builds upon the one before instead of replacing. The best ice anoms found in the lowest truesec in all areas of space will contain all three non-racial ice types.
Does this mean the best truesec belts have additional ice or an equal amount of ice with a different distribution?
And in general, if a highsec belt contains 25,000 ice units, how many will a lowsec and nullsec belt contain?
|
Doukyou
Deafening Silence Syndiate In Umbra Mortis
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:13:00 -
[583] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Doukyou wrote:Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. Ah, you're also planning to switch doing all your nasty things at outpost, right? Oh wait, you mean you prefer to crumble and die? What a wise way of dealing with challenge!
No, its not a expression of my lack of desire for a challenge. I like challenges that make sense. This new way of setting up the ice fields is absolutely retard3d the amount of ice should NEVER be determined by player needs. It should be in an ort cloud, or if there is anomalies they should be comets. Ort clouds should be be non regenerative and be present in all systems in varying degrees based on security status. IE how long the system has been occupied and used in empire. The longer its been in use the less ice should be initially put in the cloud. The total high sec ice should be enough to take eve thru it's 20th anniversary.
Anomalies should be comets which are moving till the ice is gone. Comet mining anyone?
I think CCP has gotten stuck on the idea of being a driver of conflict. I have no problem with this on a small scale, but to radically shift a basic item like this is ABSOLUTELY the wrong direction to take the game. You want players to be active doing things like PVP, then don't make them go hunting and pecking for ice fields. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. How does this change make sense? Only if Stupidity is the most common element on Fozzie's team.
Can you tell I am a little upset about the repercussions of this change? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:35:00 -
[584] - Quote
Mithril Ryder wrote: That is so laughable I don't even know where to start. Yes, bottlenecks that involve player time, skill and even luck do what you say, but artificial and static supply side bottlenecks do not.
yeah that's wrong, so I would start with by being right instead of wrong |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9030
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:40:00 -
[585] - Quote
Doukyou wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:Doukyou wrote:Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. Ah, you're also planning to switch doing all your nasty things at outpost, right? Oh wait, you mean you prefer to crumble and die? What a wise way of dealing with challenge! No, its not a expression of my lack of desire for a challenge. I like challenges that make sense. This new way of setting up the ice fields is absolutely retard3d the amount of ice should NEVER be determined by player needs. It should be in an ort cloud, or if there is anomalies they should be comets. Ort clouds should be be non regenerative and be present in all systems in varying degrees based on security status. IE how long the system has been occupied and used in empire. The longer its been in use the less ice should be initially put in the cloud. The total high sec ice should be enough to take eve thru it's 20th anniversary. Anomalies should be comets which are moving till the ice is gone. Comet mining anyone? I think CCP has gotten stuck on the idea of being a driver of conflict. I have no problem with this on a small scale, but to radically shift a basic item like this is ABSOLUTELY the wrong direction to take the game. You want players to be active doing things like PVP, then don't make them go hunting and pecking for ice fields. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. How does this change make sense? Only if Stupidity is the most common element on Fozzie's team. Can you tell I am a little upset about the repercussions of this change?
The worst part of this change is that it really only affects you. No one will will be operating under these changed conditions, and nothing else in the game (like market prices) will change either, so you specifically will be operating at a huge disadvantage compared to the global EVE economy.
In the face of it, it does seem rather unfair that you personally will be bearing the entire cost of these changes, and I would like to thank you for "taking one for the team" while the kinks are worked out. Hang in there, and I'm sure it'll get sorted out.
1 Kings 12:11
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:45:00 -
[586] - Quote
Doukyou wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:Doukyou wrote:Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. Ah, you're also planning to switch doing all your nasty things at outpost, right? Oh wait, you mean you prefer to crumble and die? What a wise way of dealing with challenge! No, its not a expression of my lack of desire for a challenge. I like challenges that make sense. This new way of setting up the ice fields is absolutely retard3d the amount of ice should NEVER be determined by player needs. It should be in an ort cloud, or if there is anomalies they should be comets. Ort clouds should be be non regenerative and be present in all systems in varying degrees based on security status. IE how long the system has been occupied and used in empire. The longer its been in use the less ice should be initially put in the cloud. The total high sec ice should be enough to take eve thru it's 20th anniversary. Anomalies should be comets which are moving till the ice is gone. Comet mining anyone? I think CCP has gotten stuck on the idea of being a driver of conflict. I have no problem with this on a small scale, but to radically shift a basic item like this is ABSOLUTELY the wrong direction to take the game. You want players to be active doing things like PVP, then don't make them go hunting and pecking for ice fields. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe. How does this change make sense? Only if Stupidity is the most common element on Fozzie's team. Can you tell I am a little upset about the repercussions of this change? that is an incredibly dumb idea
"lets make the game have a finite amount of this consumed resource for absolutely no reason other than i said it should be that way for reasons that are beyond logical comprehension" |
Frying Doom
2443
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:55:00 -
[587] - Quote
I will admit it is a rather large shift of the game.
We have gone from a player driven economy, now to having a limited resource, Ice.
So now prices will no longer be determined by the number of players that feel like mining it, but rather based on the limited supply compared to a larger demand.
Personally I think price of fuel blocks will actually go higher when this goes live. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4006
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 21:56:00 -
[588] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Crexa wrote: Adapt. I've always loved that word. Lets all say it... Adapt. Unfortunately, in these forums the word Adapt, is being used as a euphemism for SHUT UP.
It's fun to tell the employer he has to adapt so that the player can adapt to the new EvE schedule. agreed, i demand all moneymaking options in game be balanced around my unique schedule rather than various options being better for various schedules accordingly, i demand a complete rebalance of ratting to accommodate my logging in for 5-10 minutes per day to look at the market
So, by seeing previous responses, if I ask CCP Fozzie about the schedule so that I decide if I adapt by unsubbing 6 of my accounts, I am crying on the forums.
If I ask if the schedule could be different (avoiding me to adapt in a CCP damaging way), then I am "demanding".
I feel ever more surprised by the lengths people are ready to accept any kind of abuse thrown at them. Sorry I am not in your club, I have so many subs in many MMOs (not one paid with PLEX even in EvE) that I am free to choose which game wins my free time and how much I'll invest in it.
If EvE becomes incompatible with my schedule, it's CCP's bad, not mine. I'll keep 2-4 subs and let the others lapse. That's the 101 of adapting without bending over and without gifting money away. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4006
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:01:00 -
[589] - Quote
Maul555 wrote: There needs to be a place for solo miners in wormhole space. I cannot lock down a system by myself, and I am very often the only person in my corp that is logged in some evenings... My only recourse has been to pay attention, but now that will not work either. a cloaked ship can find me with no signs of their presence. I am farked... just plain farked...
You are meant to leave the WH and join a blobby 10000 men corp and stay in their own secured space.
As they say in this thread, you have to adapt! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4008
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:13:00 -
[590] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I will admit it is a rather large shift of the game.
We have gone from a player driven economy, now to having a limited resource, Ice.
So now prices will no longer be determined by the number of players that feel like mining it, but rather based on the limited supply compared to a larger demand.
Personally I think price of fuel blocks will actually go higher when this goes live.
The new way is better, in RL most of the times there is a scarcity of resources and prices factor in that scarcity.
The old way had a BIG flaw: with the multiboxers and botters, ices price would slowly tend to zero over time (actually to the equivalent of 1 PLEX a month). Now divide 1 PLEX value for the hours in a month (bots don't sleep) and you'll get how low ice was destined to go if CCP did not step in and create a finite resources system.
The only big defect of this new system is that it's a "go in and hoard all ice with 70 alts FAST, leaving smaller miners ZERO chances and 4 hours to wait again". Every of the very few ice systems will have its 2-3 big hoard sharks, the others will just be crushed and will quit. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
40
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:16:00 -
[591] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Are wormholes getting the +5%/+10% asteroids, since their truesec is -1?
If so, I'll lean towards agreeing. If not, I still need to lean towards disagreeing. Adding more low-ends to the belts might increase the on-paper value of the belt, but the low-ends present logistics difficulties for wormhole dwellers that might make them not worth it to ship.
Even if the reward doubles (doubtful), the risk has far more than doubled, since there is nothing a miner can do to avoid getting ganked by a new arrival to the wormhole system, unless they gimp their yield by using a probe launcher to continuously scan for new sigs--at which point the reward has gone way down.
I guess at this point there are still too many variables to determine if it will actually be worth it: - Will low-end mineral prices remain high enough for the additional low-end yield to be a significant contributor to the value? - Will ice prices be low enough to make rorqual compression worth it? - Will people end up moving out of the low- and medium-class WHs due to increased ice prices? If so, mining in a C1 will still be "relatively" safe since there will be fewer opportunities for people to get wormholes into your system.
I'll wait and see, but I'm not hopeful for the future of mining in wormholes. |
Frying Doom
2443
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:18:00 -
[592] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Maul555 wrote: There needs to be a place for solo miners in wormhole space. I cannot lock down a system by myself, and I am very often the only person in my corp that is logged in some evenings... My only recourse has been to pay attention, but now that will not work either. a cloaked ship can find me with no signs of their presence. I am farked... just plain farked...
You are meant to leave the WH and join a blobby 10000 men corp and stay in their own secured space. As they say in this thread, you have to adapt! No to adapt, you leave the WH, close all of your accounts bar one, and then go and do mission running or incursions.
Not as much fun, but after you sell all the mining ships ect.. you can plex your last remaining account and use some other suckers money to pay for your account. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Nick Bete
The Scope Gallente Federation
212
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:20:00 -
[593] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: The worst part of this change is that it really only affects you. No one will will be operating under these changed conditions, and nothing else in the game (like market prices) will change either, so you specifically will be operating at a huge disadvantage compared to the global EVE economy.
In the face of it, it does seem rather unfair that you personally will be bearing the entire cost of these changes, and I would like to thank you for "taking one for the team" while the kinks are worked out. Hang in there, and I'm sure it'll get sorted out.
You just can't help making sarcastic, douchebag posts can you? Will you take this same tack when players contact you regarding their concerns to be brought up with CCP?
If you don't agree with someone's views you could either try to explaining why you feel differently or, simply ignore them. Your snarky messages don't do a thing to further discourse and only makes you look like a churlish tool.
|
Frying Doom
2443
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:23:00 -
[594] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I will admit it is a rather large shift of the game.
We have gone from a player driven economy, now to having a limited resource, Ice.
So now prices will no longer be determined by the number of players that feel like mining it, but rather based on the limited supply compared to a larger demand.
Personally I think price of fuel blocks will actually go higher when this goes live. The new way is better, in RL most of the times there is a scarcity of resources and prices factor in that scarcity. The old way had a BIG flaw: with the multiboxers and botters, ices price would slowly tend to zero over time (actually to the equivalent of 1 PLEX a month). Now divide 1 PLEX value for the hours in a month (bots don't sleep) and you'll get how low ice was destined to go if CCP did not step in and create a finite resources system. The only big defect of this new system is that it's a "go in and hoard all ice with 70 alts FAST, leaving smaller miners ZERO chances and 4 hours to wait again". Every of the very few ice systems will have its 2-3 big hoard sharks, the others will just be crushed and will quit. It was a rather strange move by CCP, they make a fortune from multi-boxers, but with this new system it will be first come first served, so if you are fast you will get a fair amount, if not you lose.
And multi-boxing ore mining is a lot harder than ice mining was. I can see even the multiboxers closing accounts down, as now they will have to scan for hours before they can start mining. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4008
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:24:00 -
[595] - Quote
Nick Bete wrote:Malcanis wrote: The worst part of this change is that it really only affects you. No one will will be operating under these changed conditions, and nothing else in the game (like market prices) will change either, so you specifically will be operating at a huge disadvantage compared to the global EVE economy.
In the face of it, it does seem rather unfair that you personally will be bearing the entire cost of these changes, and I would like to thank you for "taking one for the team" while the kinks are worked out. Hang in there, and I'm sure it'll get sorted out.
You just can't help making sarcastic, douchebag posts can you? Will you take this same tack when players contact you regarding their concerns to be brought up with CCP? If you don't agree with someone's views you could either try to explaining why you feel differently or, simply ignore them. Your snarky messages don't do a thing to further discourse and only makes you look like a churlish tool.
I warned on GD a lot of times that "today's Malcanis" is not the same good ole Malcanis who had his famous Law linked in his signature. If people still kept voting him basing on his "version 1.0" and not on the new "version 2.0" then they did it wrong and have only themselves to blame. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
20
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:25:00 -
[596] - Quote
CCP Fozzie,
These proposed changes are perfect and a great way to improve low and nullsec industry, If afk cloaky camping is changed. AFK cloaking is a mechanic that has been argued over for many years, typically defended by useless forum trolls who know it is broken and defend it because they utilize it. Its primary use is griefing and supports stagnant gameplay.
A change in this mechanic is relevant to the proposed changes to support 0.0 and low sec ice mining, the mechanics of limited ice belts makes them prime targets for afk cloaky camping. AFK cloaky camping is a broken, boring, and abused mechanic that needs to removed. We'll be happy to defend mining operations, but defending mining operations from 1 cloaking ship is a useless effort that ends in people getting bored with the game.
Regards, GeeBee |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:30:00 -
[597] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:The new way is better, in RL most of the times there is a scarcity of resources and prices factor in that scarcity.
The old way had a BIG flaw: with the multiboxers and botters, ices price would slowly tend to zero over time (actually to the equivalent of 1 PLEX a month). Now divide 1 PLEX value for the hours in a month (bots don't sleep) and you'll get how low ice was destined to go if CCP did not step in and create a finite resources system.
The only big defect of this new system is that it's a "go in and hoard all ice with 70 alts FAST, leaving smaller miners ZERO chances and 4 hours to wait again". Every of the very few ice systems will have its 2-3 big hoard sharks, the others will just be crushed and will quit.
So the old system was flawed because there was infinite ice, but now the new system is flawed because there is a limited amount of ice.
Got it. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:30:00 -
[598] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: It was a rather strange move by CCP, they make a fortune from multi-boxers, but with this new system it will be first come firstonly served, so if you are fast you will get a fair amount, if not you lose.
Corrected where your sentence does not give the true dimension of the new system.
It will be SO BAD it will make the current ores spawns look good. As of now some time zones are basically screwed as they log in just to find many emptied belts.
But at least they can always move to another, more distant ore belt that also has the correct standings corporation station.
The new and improved ice mining system, instead, will make depletion FAST and being belts so few (imagine super-mined caldari ice belts) you'll just have a bunch of people insta-clearing them in the first minutes then... twist their thumbs for 3 hours and 40 minutes. If you move (since ice systems are so few) you will NOT find your correct standings corporate station, you WILL face substantial logistic nightmares all to get to the new system and... learn that the residents mined it too in 20 minutes so you did all of the effort for naught.
Fun times ahead!
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:33:00 -
[599] - Quote
smaller miners can mine ice just fine
it's the people who expect to log in their 10 accounts to mine for an arbitrary hour at a time can't mine ice
oh dear they have to mine ore instead and there is a significant difference between the two |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:34:00 -
[600] - Quote
EI Digin wrote: So the old system was flawed because there was infinite ice, but now the new system is flawed because there is a limited amount of ice.
Got it.
Nope, study better.
It's not just "limited" (which would be fine), it's "limited to those who can log in at the spawn hour and deplete it in minutes".
If you can't see how that's bad for a number of smaller players then you need your logic circuits checked. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:36:00 -
[601] - Quote
plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:36:00 -
[602] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:smaller miners can mine ice just fine
it's the people who expect to log in their 10 accounts to mine for an arbitrary hour at a time can't mine ice
oh dear they have to mine ore instead and there is a significant difference between mining ore and ice in highsec now, for the first time ever adding some variation to it
You bring in your vast experience in the field to produce that statement right?
Because my multi-years experience tells me that Orca + 10 Macks "soloers" / bots will smash the beegezus of the "1 retriever" guys. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:36:00 -
[603] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. Are wormholes getting the +5%/+10% asteroids, since their truesec is -1? If so, I'll lean towards agreeing. If not, I still need to lean towards disagreeing. Adding more low-ends to the belts might increase the on-paper value of the belt, but the low-ends present logistics difficulties for wormhole dwellers that might make them not worth it to ship. Even if the reward doubles (doubtful), the risk has far more than doubled, since there is nothing a miner can do to avoid getting ganked by a new arrival to the wormhole system, unless they gimp their yield by using a probe launcher to continuously scan for new sigs--at which point the reward has gone way down. I guess at this point there are still too many variables to determine if it will actually be worth it: - Will low-end mineral prices remain high enough for the additional low-end yield to be a significant contributor to the value? - Will ice prices be low enough to make rorqual compression worth it? - Will people end up moving out of the low- and medium-class WHs due to increased ice prices? If so, mining in a C1 will still be "relatively" safe since there will be fewer opportunities for people to get wormholes into your system. I'll wait and see, but I'm not hopeful for the future of mining in wormholes.
I think this will pretty much kill WH mining for any low-medium sized corps. All but the big boys who are constantly fielding fleets will be able to mine secured now. I'm quite sure this will take c1-c3 people off the mining path since those tend to have the smaller corps and the risk vs reward is really not worth it anymore. It was still fairly shifty to mine in a WH since you had to actually pay attention with your Dscan and couldn't just AFK like you do in HS, (or even in some areas of null). Now with it not only being just 1 click, but also instant (if the auto scanning that the fanfest video showed is in fact true) and your opponent hasn't even broken WH cloak before he has you on his Dscan pinpointed on which belt. Add to that the TEDIOUSNESS with which ore is dealt with in the smaller class WHs that do NOT have rorquals to compress their ore, and like I said before. Will just kill the industry there. Having another 5%-10% yield will not offset the ease with which you can get ganked after the changes in a WH.
Perhaps if CCP would tell us what their end game is for WHs. I know they said before it wasn't INTENDED to be lived in permanently.. but now that it's oppened up another whole new world of combat, industry etc. Perhaps they should re-evaluate their intent. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:37:00 -
[604] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
You bring in your vast experience in the field to produce that statement right?
Because my multi-years experience tells me that Orca + 10 Macks "soloers" / bots will smash the beegezus of the "1 retriever" guys.
you keep explaining, using yourself as an example, why they won't |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:37:00 -
[605] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise
The small miner will only find a respawn timer, not a piece of the now more valuable pie. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:38:00 -
[606] - Quote
basically ice spawns in an ice system are now fun happy times for extra riches in mining!!!
instead of a thing you botmine for however long you wish to mine
so basically think of it as semi-predictable faction mining spawns |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:39:00 -
[607] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise The small miner will only find a respawn timer, not a piece of the now more valuable pie. the small miner will find an ice anom given the amount of time he is logged in the exact same percentage of the time the 10 account "small miner" does for the amount of time he is logged in |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1793
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:41:00 -
[608] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
The only big defect of this new system is that it's a "go in and hoard all ice with 70 alts FAST, leaving smaller miners ZERO chances and 4 hours to wait again". Every of the very few ice systems will have its 2-3 big hoard sharks, the others will just be crushed and will quit.
Or: one hoarder that cycles through several systems over a 4 hour period. You could follow the hoard........
2500 units of ice can be mined out by 100 miners in 17 minutes. Add 3 minutes more for unloading and moving, and you get 3 belts an hour, 12 in the 4 hour cycle. A hoard of 100 miners (and I think there is at least one multiboxer who flies 100 miners). can keep 12 belts cleared. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:43:00 -
[609] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise The small miner will only find a respawn timer, not a piece of the now more valuable pie. the small miner will find an ice anom given the amount of time he is logged in the exact same percentage of the time the 10 account "small miner" does for the amount of time he is logged in
Welcome to the new Eden booking system! Where you log in to play and... find a spawn timer. But hey, it's a FAIR spawn time for everyone, how could it be wrong?
Here's how it WILL go:
1) Log in.
2) Scan.
3) Find there's nothing in system and of course no clue about when respawn will occur.
4) (Only the first days) move the whole fleet to another system 5-6 jumps away either in slowass Orca or in 17s aligment time ships that can't even travel a medium size system in one jump.
5) Discover that not only you don't have standings in there, but also that the ice belt's cleared up there as well.
6) (Only the first days) return back to "home".
7) Log off. Or try PvP with the money you made with minin... oh wait. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:43:00 -
[610] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise The small miner will only find a respawn timer, not a piece of the now more valuable pie. the small miner will find an ice anom given the amount of time he is logged in the exact same percentage of the time the 10 account "small miner" does for the amount of time he is logged in
True.. but the 10 account miner will pull in 10 times more in that few minutes the belt is actually alive. |
|
Frying Doom
2443
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:43:00 -
[611] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:basically ice spawns in an ice system are now fun happy times for extra riches in mining!!!
instead of a thing you botmine for however long you wish to mine
so basically think of it as semi-predictable faction mining spawns Yeah the joys of waiting for hours for the ice to spawn.
I can hardly contain the excitement.
People will be better off getting out of Ice mining and doing something with a steady income. Ice mining has now become the working on commission, life style, if your lucky you make the sale, if not well your living in a box. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Gaufres
Old Timers Guild Inc.
49
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:44:00 -
[612] - Quote
It looks like the Amarr are really getting screwed on the Ice. They have the largest Empire, it is reasonable to expect that they would have the most Ice available.
As far as the changes to the High End Ore, it is not needed. There is plenty of Null to mine Veldspar and Scordite in. The fact that they do not choose to do so is their problem. Some of the Ore did need changing some, the infamous Spud and the Gneiss, but why were the Pyro left out of the changes? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:47:00 -
[613] - Quote
Soko99 wrote: True.. but the 10 account miner will pull in 10 times more in that few minutes the belt is actually alive.
well of course
but VV is claiming, somewhat improbably, that the solo guy will never see the ice anom. of course he will, and he'll get the same boost to his profit the multiboxer does. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:47:00 -
[614] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:basically ice spawns in an ice system are now fun happy times for extra riches in mining!!!
instead of a thing you botmine for however long you wish to mine
so basically think of it as semi-predictable faction mining spawns Yeah the joys of waiting for hours for the ice to spawn. I can hardly contain the excitement. People will be better off getting out of Ice mining and doing something with a steady income. Ice mining has now become the working on commission, life style, if your lucky you make the sale, if not well your living in a box. ice mining is no longer basically reskinned veld mining, yes |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:49:00 -
[615] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Welcome to the new Eden booking system! Where you log in to play and... find a spawn timer. But hey, it's a FAIR spawn time for everyone, how could it be wrong?
then you mine ore, woe is you |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:50:00 -
[616] - Quote
i mean woe is actually you you're highsec mining in your spare time, but it's not like your life has actually gotten worse because of this change, you were a highsec miner beforehand too
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: 4) (Only the first days) move the whole fleet to another system 5-6 jumps away either in slowass Orca or in 17s aligment time ships that can't even travel a medium size system in one jump.
you know you could scout it before you move everything right
most eve players would figure that out
you know i'm even going to do you a solid and show you how to scout the owners of refineries in systems without warping ten accounts there: http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Jita |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 22:56:00 -
[617] - Quote
If you can do the extra effort it takes to set up an organization that can get enough miners into an ice belt to one cycle it the second it spawns why shouldn't you be able to screw over people who aren't quite as organized?
If you don't like it maybe you should do something to disrupt organized playergroups like, wardec, wait no no, I know, suicide gank, no that won't work, Bump, no that's stupid. Well I guess you're boned because you are never going to leave highsec. Bye! |
Martis Gradivus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:00:00 -
[618] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Soko99 wrote: True.. but the 10 account miner will pull in 10 times more in that few minutes the belt is actually alive.
well of course but VV is claiming, somewhat improbably, that the solo guy will never see the ice anom. of course he will, and he'll get the same boost to his profit the multiboxer does.
Yeah, but you are assuming that the solo miner will arrive before the belt is mined out.
4 hour spawn timers will hurt the casual player a lot.
Most people, myself included, play EVE around my schedule, and don't plan my schedule around EVE.
This seems like a half-baked idea.
Already, the price of Ice Blocks and products is skyrocketing. Glacial mass went from a buy price of 95,000 isk to about 190,000 isk per block.
Those who were in the know have profited like crazy, and this again is problematic for the casual player for whom that same amount of ISK that would by him 5 apples on Monday will now only buy him 2.
Unless I am not seeing this right, and I just might not be, the winners here will be the early-birds as well as the secure SOV alliances. Unfortuately for may people, myself included, I work all day and no SOV alliance will allow me to go mine in their secure SOV.
Change is needed, yes, but brought about gradually while looking at the effects as you apply them.....not by wielding a sledgehammer and wondering why you broke the wall you were trying to drive a nail into. |
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
221
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:06:00 -
[619] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
CCP Fozzie, question: assuming perfect navigation skills, how long does it take a Hulk to go from a standing start to align and warp out? And now, how long does it take a standard scout frigate (for arguments sake, lets say a dramiel) to land in system, scan and warp to an anomoly?
While I appreciate the time honored tradition of risk and reward, there is risk, and then there is suicide. For your information, nul-sec miners do not ever mine in asteroid belts, with the sole except of the very limited time spent in order to generate the first grav site. The reason being that to do so is suicide. This proposal, as it currently stands, is not going to help or generate content, but instead is going to kill off a huge swade of current, happy, gameplay.
Alot of people are telling you here that you need to revist this and think very hard about it.
And before anyone chimes in with the standard "mine while aligned", I swear I'll scream. I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
318
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:15:00 -
[620] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) IT becomes a whole hell'ava lot MORE dangerous. As there is no warning, no chance of escape and NO FRIGGIN LOCAL! The roids in WH better spit out billions in pure isk, to make it worth while with these changes. I **** you not!
Yup... As a WH mininer for the past 3 years who currently lives in a C4, I will be stockpiling "cheap/disposable" mining barges to deal with the coming onslaught. I should probably skill my scan alts better, as I will probably be needing to find my way back into the WH very often now. My WH Hulk and Mackinaw will never undock again... I will probably just ship them back to highsec for safe storage. |
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:23:00 -
[621] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:The new way is better, in RL most of the times there is a scarcity of resources and prices factor in that scarcity.
The old way had a BIG flaw: with the multiboxers and botters, ices price would slowly tend to zero over time (actually to the equivalent of 1 PLEX a month). Now divide 1 PLEX value for the hours in a month (bots don't sleep) and you'll get how low ice was destined to go if CCP did not step in and create a finite resources system.
The only big defect of this new system is that it's a "go in and hoard all ice with 70 alts FAST, leaving smaller miners ZERO chances and 4 hours to wait again". Every of the very few ice systems will have its 2-3 big hoard sharks, the others will just be crushed and will quit. So the old system was flawed because there was infinite ice, but now the new system is flawed because there is a limited amount of ice. Got it.
Wow, there is something to be said about the density of water. Anyway... that is not what is being said. Its the implementation of the scarcity that is flawed.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:23:00 -
[622] - Quote
Yes, everyone stay out of the belts. It is too dangerous to be there, you totally shouldn't do it, it's suicide! |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:29:00 -
[623] - Quote
Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. CCP Fozzie, question: assuming perfect navigation skills, how long does it take a Hulk to go from a standing start to align and warp out? And now, how long does it take a standard scout frigate (for arguments sake, lets say a dramiel) to land in system, scan and warp to an anomoly? While I appreciate the time honored tradition of risk and reward, there is risk, and then there is suicide. For your information, nul-sec miners do not ever mine in asteroid belts, with the sole except of the very limited time spent in order to generate the first grav site. The reason being that to do so is suicide. This proposal, as it currently stands, is not going to help or generate content, but instead is going to kill off a huge swade of current, happy, gameplay. Alot of people are telling you here that you need to revist this and think very hard about it. And before anyone chimes in with the standard "mine while aligned", I swear I'll scream.
Because the idiots advocating it don't mine, never have, or are ignorant.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:30:00 -
[624] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:plus, the ice will become much more valuable so the "small miner" that people complaining about their 10 account mining setup are supposedly championing will earn far more in the period he can get at the ice anom than he would otherwise The small miner will only find a respawn timer, not a piece of the now more valuable pie. the small miner will find an ice anom given the amount of time he is logged in the exact same percentage of the time the 10 account "small miner" does for the amount of time he is logged in
No doubt, and you are correct the probability is the same.
BUT
There are approx 23 mining hours per anom. That means the larger your fleet the more of those hours you can take per anom.
The maths bit ... 10 man fleet (9 miners 1 max boost orca) vs solo miner.
Assuming max skills the boosted miners will hit 60 second cycles, the individual 97 seconds. So immediately there is a mining multiplier of 33%. So the 9 man fleet is actually acting as 12 solo miners.
Again assuming 108 blocks per mining hour that leaves our poor solo miner will reap in 1.2 mining hours worth or approx 130 blocks.
That gives us an average per hour (mining time plus potential respawn time) of 26 blocks per hour IF this scenario was over a complete day.
Under the current system the very same solo miner can bring in 36 blocks per hour constant.
A simple percentage calculation means that unless the price of the ice increases by 28% then the solo miner is losing out with the new system.
I would point out that the 23/7 model is totally unrealistic (and would prob end up with a ban for botting :D ) as is the idea that the high sec anoms will not be flooded with miners within the first few minutes of the anom spawning. There is no way that a solo miner will be able to make a fraction their current income under the new system, it is a multi boxer charter.
edit - some of my maths may be a bit off doing this in my head on the fly so please dont get too neckbeard .. the general principle still holds. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:33:00 -
[625] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Because the idiots advocating it don't mine, never have, or are ignorant. I'd say the problem is that miners are ignorant to the fact that you can actually work with other people in a way that everyone would benefit from because they've been stuck in antisocial land all alone for such a long time. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:33:00 -
[626] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Yes, everyone stay out of the belts. It is too dangerous to be there, you totally shouldn't do it, it's suicide!
What would anyone from PL know about it anyway? See I can make dumb@ss comments too. Now you just move along and suckle up to the teet of your Tech moons. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:13:00 -
[627] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Welcome to the new Eden booking system! Where you log in to play and... find a spawn timer. But hey, it's a FAIR spawn time for everyone, how could it be wrong? then you mine ore, woe is you
*I* can, because I have both ice rigged MAcks with Orca at ice and roids other ships in 2 other places in EvE. Most won't, nor it'll be practical to have to fly around like a moron flipping between ice fleet in caldari lands and mining fleet at Amarr vast hi sec country land.
You infer the game should be balanced on 10k men organizations like yorus and and hundreds of billions rich people like me I guess? Well then it's sad. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Lithorn
The Dark Tribe
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:20:00 -
[628] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Myntelle NicAtoch wrote: The best solutions are the ones we come up with ourselves. Let us anchor multiple stations per system, and WE will deal with production capacity in null sec, you won't need to tweak anything.
iirc this is less a C.C.P insists you not do this for game balance issue and more an "oh god eight year old spaghetti code that if we touch will break everything" preventing it
That sounds alot like what C.C.P-Soundwave would say and i'm sure that's correct. This would present additional problems in the unintended consequences category of conquering systems. You would now have to R.F. each and every station X number of times for each station in the system in order to take Sov if C.C.P allowed that under current Sov bashing mechanics. If you think doing R.F. timers for multiple constellations sucks now try doing this with a crap load of stations in each system . Other misc concerns like this would make systems too campy and self sustaining so people would not ever need to travel much. Etc. Etc.. I think adding more office slots is a great idea and one that does not really negatively impact game play in any significant way, if anything its quite the opposite for station owners. |
Grippa Dets
A-Fission Industries
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:21:00 -
[629] - Quote
Seems the real problem is not the mining or the ice, but the lack of access to T2 production.
T2 building basically requires a POS for invention, and the ice prices will make POS fuel go up. Without the passive ice mining we can't earn as well, and our fuel expenses get inflated.
So solo POS and production is out.
How about group POS sharing in an indy corp - well no way, not in a game that celebrates robbery and betrayal. Shaming or bounty-ing wont make up for stolen BPOs. It's too bad because players with time constraints could work together on production, popping in when they can to move product to the next stage.
So group work is out.
How about public stations -- the lines are way too long to be effective.
I want to like these changes, but I'm still not convinced I'm going to take quite a hit. And it still feels like I'm being pushed into conflict, when all I want to do is enjoy the environment and build stuff. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:23:00 -
[630] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:If you can do the extra effort it takes to set up an organization that can get enough miners into an ice belt to one cycle it the second it spawns why shouldn't you be able to screw over people who aren't quite as organized?
If you don't like it maybe you should do something to disrupt organized playergroups like, wardec, wait no no, I know, suicide gank, no that won't work, Bump, no that's stupid. Well I guess you're boned because you are never going to leave highsec. Bye!
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt. And seriously, nobody with a soul is going to waste 4 hours of their time for ice, even if it costed 1200 ISK pu. The quantity would not justify it. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4009
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:31:00 -
[631] - Quote
A much friendlier implementation would be a new skill: "mining permit" (yeah James, that's in your honor).
Each rank allows to mine for 1 more hour a day, then the account is disabled at ice mining till next downtime.
Doing this, everyone who has RL time constraints could still log in and do his job, while the total quantity would be reduced by 5-6 times vs today. That reduction would still cause prices to go above Hulkageddon days prices so the profitability CCP wants would be there. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
882
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:46:00 -
[632] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow.
yes but it's like a dinner party the people slightly farther away at the less desirable table feel left out :argh: oh well, the new offices everywhere nearby should help enough, thanks! You need somewhere to put the children. Comedy answer: alternatively feel free to have fewer friends.
The problem is, to organize and secure anything you need corporate hangers. So why not decouple corporate hangers from offices so we are not forced into not being able to do real production in a station when any station with a refinery and slots (that you need hangers in) can't have many offices.
People want offices for corp hangers, it is silly to have some artificial limit on that. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Cabal Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
622
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:49:00 -
[633] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success
some things in this game are for the better players
(also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times) |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 00:57:00 -
[634] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success some things in this game are for the better players (also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)
No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success.
Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
939
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:00:00 -
[635] - Quote
Crexa wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success some things in this game are for the better players (also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times) No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success. Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec. Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:02:00 -
[636] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Crexa wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success some things in this game are for the better players (also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times) No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success. Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec. Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.
Where are you getting that number? "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:07:00 -
[637] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:11:00 -
[638] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?
Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine? "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:32:00 -
[639] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine? Not enough to finish completely 80+ new ice anomalies within 4 hours and lock players out from ice mining in highsec.
Crexa wrote: And anyone who mines the ice nearest the hubs has an advantage. So while there may be ice in another system, you won't know that for sure. And one of the worst enemies of the industrialist is travel time.
No one will know for sure when the site respawns (except for the people who were in the site when it was last finished, but if you put effort into scouting the site you should be rewarded), so everyone gets a fair shot at finding the next one. |
Frying Doom
2444
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 01:55:00 -
[640] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? 80 high sec systems? Are you sure? Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
|
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:03:00 -
[641] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? 80 high sec systems? Are you sure?
24 Amarr systems (listed from blog) 19 Minmatar systems with Glacial Mass and secstatus above 0.5 23 Caldari systems with White Glaze and secstatus above 0.5 15 Gallente systems with Blue Ice and secstatus above 0.5
is 81 systems
|
Frying Doom
2445
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:25:00 -
[642] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Frying Doom wrote:EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? 80 high sec systems? Are you sure? 24 Amarr systems (listed from blog) 19 Minmatar systems with Glacial Mass and secstatus above 0.5 23 Caldari systems with White Glaze and secstatus above 0.5 15 Gallente systems with Blue Ice and secstatus above 0.5 is 81 systems Thanks for that. I dont normally Ice mine but I will admit when I re-read the blog I noticed. " All low-security and null-security systems that currently contain static ice belts, as well as all high security systems in Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar space that contain static ice belts, will contain the new ice anomalies."
I thought it was just hi-sec that was getting the change. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Nitrogen Isotopes
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:27:00 -
[643] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.
High sec might produce ~66% more isotopes than it needs. Interestingly enough, there is more to ice than isotopes. |
Dasquirrel715
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:31:00 -
[644] - Quote
Ereilian wrote:Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?
I know this is a little late in this thread, but you guys who whine about your poses not being worthwhile do realize that as fuel prices go up, the price of the things produced on, and by, those poses will go up naturally as well. That is how a market works. The current prices on things weren't set arbitrarily. They have evolved and developed as the market expanded. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:39:00 -
[645] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Crexa wrote:Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine? Not enough to finish completely 80+ new ice anomalies within 4 hours and lock players out from ice mining in highsec. Its not about numbers to clear all 80, its about concentration. Take for instance the belt in Halaima, Caldari space on average their are 60-100 mining the belt at any given time. Now you are telling a good portion of them to **** off and go somewhere else. Which ok lets for arguments sake is just what we do. Now they go next door to Kamio and it has a likewise number of miners at any given time and surprise surprise that belt is gone too. So you would have the dog chasing its tail all over Caldari space looking for a belt to mine. In the mean time lets say 5 hours have elapsed, you have now added not just the numbers from Kamio, but all those who have logged on in the mean time. Will people spread out like water following the least path of resistance? Normally this is true, until frustration sets in and people just say frak it! Crexa wrote: And anyone who mines the ice nearest the hubs has an advantage. So while there may be ice in another system, you won't know that for sure. And one of the worst enemies of the industrialist is travel time.
No one will know for sure when the site respawns (except for the people who were in the site when it was last finished, but if you put effort into scouting the site you should be rewarded), so everyone gets a fair shot at finding the next one. But we made it "easier to find and mine grav sites" not my words Fozzie's. You just added a whole level (by implying scouting) of complexity and headache the average miner doesn't want. How is that easier? "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 02:43:00 -
[646] - Quote
Dasquirrel715 wrote:Ereilian wrote:Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms? I know this is a little late in this thread, but you guys who whine about your poses not being worthwhile do realize that as fuel prices go up, the price of the things produced on, and by, those poses will go up naturally as well. That is how a market works. The current prices on things weren't set arbitrarily. They have evolved and developed as the market expanded.
Ill tell that to the guys using it for research. I'm sure they will see things your way.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
940
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 03:13:00 -
[647] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote: Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.
Where are you getting that number? It doesn't mean that higher prices won't influence some to mine it in 0.0 and return it to empire. Besides, if that was a concern you would think pos heavy alliances would want a lower ice price as it reduces their cost. Unless they already have so much isk that its of no concern and high pos costs keeps the riff raff out.
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Currently 98.4% of all isotope ice is mined in highsec.
While highsec uses less than 15% of the isotopes in EVE.
I suppose I should have said isotopes. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Star Dragonsbane
Haifa Shipworks and Logistics
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 03:21:00 -
[648] - Quote
This is nothing more than a setup to try to push miners into Null Sec or get rid of high sec miners by drying up demand for there labor in high sec. While that lasts anyway, doing away with high sec there Fozzie? I'll put it this way, I came to eve back in 2006 because I admired that vast world you guys had created. You even had a nice healthy balance of Good and Evil in the game i.e. High Sec - Good Null - Evil. Light and dark call it what you will it was balanced. As I see you guys progressing here, I cring at the thought you will suredly take high sec away. You do and I for one will quit Eve. The rest of you all probably will bash my post and knock yourself out but I know I speak for a lot of other capsuleers that don't bother with these forums that you will ultimately be changing Eve in a way that it no longer appeals to me. CCP major disappointment if this is your intentions. Over the years I have been a EON subscriber, clothing purchaser, PLEX purchaser and alt. holder. Add that revenue up and then multiply it by a modest guess of at least 5000 other members that are going to quit eve but for good if you go through with this type of change. My post is not to bash you but to put you on notice of the ramifications. You will lose the majority of the miners in this game, other than quad boxers and you might even lose a few of them. Good luck getting your crap built after that happens but hey it could happen I guess. And before you guys ask, yes my cotter does hurt. But mostly because I feel like CCP doesn't care about miners just PVP and in actuality that is fine if your prepared to face the ramifications. It will just be with one less subscriber :( and I don't say that happily or arrogantly but extremely sorrowful! Star |
Doukyou
Deafening Silence Syndiate In Umbra Mortis
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 04:43:00 -
[649] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Doukyou wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:Doukyou wrote:Thanks alot Fozzie you just shut down my pos. ! No, its not a expression of my lack of desire for a challenge. I like challenges that make sense. This new way of setting up the ice fields is absolutely retard3d the amount of ice should NEVER be determined by player needs. It should be in an ort cloud, or if there is anomalies they should be comets. Ort clouds should be be non regenerative and be present in all systems in varying degrees based on security status. IE how long the system has been occupied and used in empire. The longer its been in use the less ice should be initially put in the cloud. The total high sec ice should be enough to take eve thru it's 20th anniversary. Anomalies should be comets which are moving till the ice is gone. Comet mining anyone? that is an incredibly dumb idea "lets make the game have a finite amount of this consumed resource for absolutely no reason other than i said it should be that way for reasons that are beyond logical comprehension"
Notice I said in High Sec. Plus I left room for anomalies like comets and upon further thought I think we could add Ice rings a round some gas giants. Either way the point is that even that would be better than an absolute limit of 80% of current needs. Further 10 more years supply out of high sec is a long time off. It also makes perfect sense, that something in the game can have a limit to it. This also forces people to move around instead of warping to the same spot every day, mining the same chunk of ice which magically regenerated in the 30 minutes the server was down. Also I am pointing out that CCP really needs to ease the players in to new ways of doing things instead of announcing what will happen.
I'll make a prediction " If they go thru with this change, it will become the next spinning ship issue." Something they just foisted on the players saying "Oh isn't your capsuleer's buttocks so perfect?"
NO MotherF#$Ker we want our God D@mn Spinning ship back!
I think I am going to have to write and article on this subject on theMittany.com , cause this is probably the 3rd or maybe 4th time I have seen something like this since 2009 when I started playing. I am beginning to think its a CCP corporate culture issue more than just CCP Fozzie being momentarily mentally handicap. I would say about 25% what his team does is great for the game, 85% of it is good for the game, But that last 15% usually falls in to the category of "why the hell did you think that was a good idea?" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4010
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 06:54:00 -
[650] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success some things in this game are for the better players (also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)
A WoW player classic.
"We have loads of time in our no-life, we raid 14 hours a day to grind gear quicker thus we are better". Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4010
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 07:00:00 -
[651] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?
They systems that matter are Caldari. They are not 80, they feature *right now* 100+ mining ships. Come the patch, that number will possibly rise, in order to sgnatch the most ice ASAP and leave the belt empty.
How many *minutes* will such a belt last? Barely the time for a newly logged in guy to undock his Orca and 2-3 Macks and get there, just to find it strip bare. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
594
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 07:03:00 -
[652] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
you don't have a right to success some things in this game are for the better players (also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)
Pretty much this.
This solution is not perfect, Ice should only exist in lowsec and nullsec. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
594
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 07:04:00 -
[653] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? They systems that matter are Caldari. They are not 80, they feature *right now* 100+ mining ships. Come the patch, that number will possibly rise, in order to sgnatch the most ice ASAP and leave the belt empty. How many *minutes* will such a belt last? Barely the time for a newly logged in guy to undock his Orca and 2-3 Macks and get there, just to find it strip bare.
Go to lowsec or nullsec. Risk vs Reward, Ice shouldn't eve exist in highsec. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4010
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 07:58:00 -
[654] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:It's not effort, it's T I M E R S. There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours? They systems that matter are Caldari. They are not 80, they feature *right now* 100+ mining ships. Come the patch, that number will possibly rise, in order to sgnatch the most ice ASAP and leave the belt empty. How many *minutes* will such a belt last? Barely the time for a newly logged in guy to undock his Orca and 2-3 Macks and get there, just to find it strip bare. Go to lowsec or nullsec. Risk vs Reward, Ice shouldn't eve exist in highsec.
Balls.
CCP are slowly bleeding hi sec through a years long "many small papercuts" campaign (aka "slowly boiling the frog), fully endorsed by individuals like you, who have NO AUTHORITY on what other players SHOULD (or, better suiting your mentality, MUST) do or not do.
I have mined in low and null sec even years ago and you know what? It requires a decent organization, many hours spent in game and so on.
For many of us with a life this is NOT an option any more.
I wish I could return being a basement dweller like your kind, but no, at a certain age RL begins to matter and then games take a second rank seat. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9033
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 08:37:00 -
[655] - Quote
Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4010
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 08:41:00 -
[656] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once.
Tripling the rate = nerf in income. All agents Q20 (plus FW selling faction items) = a nerf to all those who knew where to go find the good stuff.
As usual you have messed up by confusing making the game needlessy easier / streamlined / dumbed down with "locking somebody out of a feature". Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 09:16:00 -
[657] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. It is nice to see that your election to the CSM has humbled you, and turned you into a man of the people. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 09:36:00 -
[658] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. It is nice to see that your election to the CSM has humbled you, and turned you into a man of the people.
That was never part of the platform. I mean I've been pretty open about my game philosophy and never walked away from it.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 09:37:00 -
[659] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Tripling the rate = nerf in income.
Then logically, the biggest hi-sec buff would be to reduce every ore belt into a single 1-unit rock that spawns once per week.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 09:47:00 -
[660] - Quote
Seriously the V.V., you make the mistake that clever people often make which is to think that everyone else is stupid.
If I get 30 pies a day to sell and you get 30 pies a day to sell, then we both make about the same income: we each have half the pie market.
If your pie production triples to 90 pies, then even if the pie price falls by 50% to reflect increased supply, you're now getting 3/4 of the pie market, so you make 3 times as much as me from selling pies, and 50% more than you used to anyway.
If you then follow this up about how it's an unfair nerf when my pie allowance gets increased to 33 pies, you're not going to get much sympathy from anyone when they see that you're still getting 90 pies but you have become accustomed to getting 3x as much pie revenue and believe that you're entitled to it.
Certainly not from me, anyway.
This has been a pieconomics lesson from Malc, your CSM8 representative responsible for attacking bullshit wherever he sees it.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 09:48:00 -
[661] - Quote
In before he explains that 0.0 is actually Somalia, therefore it's god's plan that we don't get as many pies.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:02:00 -
[662] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Seriously the V.V., you make the mistake that clever people often make which is to think that everyone else is stupid.
If I get 30 pies a day to sell and you get 30 pies a day to sell, then we both make about the same income: we each have half the pie market.
If your pie production triples to 90 pies, then even if the pie price falls by 50% to reflect increased supply, you're now getting 3/4 of the pie market, so you make 3 times as much as me from selling pies, and 50% more than you used to anyway.
If you then follow this up about how it's an unfair nerf when my pie allowance gets increased to 33 pies, you're not going to get much sympathy from anyone when they see that you're still getting 90 pies but you have become accustomed to getting 3x as much pie revenue and believe that you're entitled to it.
Certainly not from me, anyway.
This has been a pieconomics lesson from Malc, your CSM8 representative responsible for attacking bullshit wherever he sees it. Actually the current setup is more that 90 pies are made by hi-sec and Null only makes 3 but because of the great demand of pies in Null you buy another 75.
Now with the new changes you can make more pies, an extra 30, with ingredients you can pick mostly from your own fields. So now you can make your own pies, you only need 45 more to meet your demand. So those that bake pies or make ingredients can either sell the pies or ingredients for half the price or they can change professions, for example to a scrap metal dealer. Once enough people stop baking pies the balance will once again be restored. As long as not to many bakers jump out of windows that is. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4011
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:06:00 -
[663] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Tripling the rate = nerf in income. Then logically, the biggest hi-sec buff would be to reduce every ore belt into a single 1-unit rock that spawns once per week.
No, as Tippia would say, this is a logical fallacity. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4011
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:09:00 -
[664] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Seriously the V.V., you make the mistake that clever people often make which is to think that everyone else is stupid.
If I get 30 pies a day to sell and you get 30 pies a day to sell, then we both make about the same income: we each have half the pie market.
If your pie production triples to 90 pies, then even if the pie price falls by 50% to reflect increased supply, you're now getting 3/4 of the pie market, so you make 3 times as much as me from selling pies, and 50% more than you used to anyway.
If you then follow this up about how it's an unfair nerf when my pie allowance gets increased to 33 pies, you're not going to get much sympathy from anyone when they see that you're still getting 90 pies but you have become accustomed to getting 3x as much pie revenue and believe that you're entitled to it.
Certainly not from me, anyway.
This has been a pieconomics lesson from Malc, your CSM8 representative responsible for attacking bullshit wherever he sees it.
You "just" forget how there's a personal cap to the amount of pies that can be taken. Even mulitplying pies by 10, I would still be able to eat as many as I can, which is even below the pre-multiplication day quantity. So the net result is I still can grab just so many pies as before, while the amount of pies available rose considerably and when there's sovra-abundance of supply, price goes down.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:10:00 -
[665] - Quote
You're selling the pies, not eating them.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9034
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:11:00 -
[666] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:Seriously the V.V., you make the mistake that clever people often make which is to think that everyone else is stupid.
If I get 30 pies a day to sell and you get 30 pies a day to sell, then we both make about the same income: we each have half the pie market.
If your pie production triples to 90 pies, then even if the pie price falls by 50% to reflect increased supply, you're now getting 3/4 of the pie market, so you make 3 times as much as me from selling pies, and 50% more than you used to anyway.
If you then follow this up about how it's an unfair nerf when my pie allowance gets increased to 33 pies, you're not going to get much sympathy from anyone when they see that you're still getting 90 pies but you have become accustomed to getting 3x as much pie revenue and believe that you're entitled to it.
Certainly not from me, anyway.
This has been a pieconomics lesson from Malc, your CSM8 representative responsible for attacking bullshit wherever he sees it. Actually the current setup is more that 90 pies are made by hi-sec and Null only makes 3 but because of the great demand of pies in Null you buy another 75...
The ratio is actually going to about 90:9
1 Kings 12:11
|
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:15:00 -
[667] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The ratio is actually going to about 90:9
That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9036
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:32:00 -
[668] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:The ratio is actually going to about 90:9
That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null.
Again this bizarre assumption that "Null can't mine".
I have an exhumers 4 character on both my accounts.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:36:00 -
[669] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Malcanis wrote:The ratio is actually going to about 90:9
That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null. Again this bizarre assumption that "Null can't mine". I have an exhumers 4 character on both my accounts. Well if you believe Null sec alliances have enough miners for all your needs and you do not need to attract more, then I stand corrected. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7732
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:54:00 -
[670] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null.
Someone will mine those rocks even if hiseccers don't want to. mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
|
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 10:56:00 -
[671] - Quote
Andski wrote:Frying Doom wrote:That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null. Someone will mine those rocks even if hiseccers don't want to. Glad to hear it. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9041
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 11:28:00 -
[672] - Quote
Andski wrote:Frying Doom wrote:That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null. Someone will mine those rocks even if hiseccers don't want to.
Yeah, I don't get where this "stop forcing us into Null!!!!" meme comes from
You're staying right the hell there in hi-sec. These are our rocks.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Frying Doom
2447
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 11:31:00 -
[673] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Andski wrote:Frying Doom wrote:That is only if Null is unable to attract miners to Null, but after years of carebear abuse, I would not blame miners for not wanting to go to Null. Someone will mine those rocks even if hiseccers don't want to. Yeah, I don't get where this "stop forcing us into Null!!!!" meme comes from You're staying right the hell there in hi-sec. These are our rocks. Thank god for that, I wouldn't go to Null to mine. Just to kill miners, especially as the grav sites no longer will need probes to find Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 12:59:00 -
[674] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once.
Hey Init cap pilots look what this goon is doing, thats right where does your topes come from?
You have you "playstyle" we have ours, if you think its privileged stop being a space hobo and stop making 25 mil ticks from anom ratting and come to 6 mil tick missioning, or 12 mil per hour mining in highsec. Alternately dont get off that short bus you're on and keep licking the windows. |
Grippa Dets
A-Fission Industries
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 13:03:00 -
[675] - Quote
Lots of miners are Lo/null sec alts. And a lot of those are semi-afk. That's who Fozzie is trying to move to null if anyone. |
Frying Doom
2448
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 13:12:00 -
[676] - Quote
Grippa Dets wrote:Lots of miners are Lo/null sec alts. And a lot of those are semi-afk. That's who Fozzie is trying to move to null if anyone. I do hope he succeeds in that, but he definitely did shaft C1-C4 WH miners that is for sure.
Will be interesting to actually see the population levels if the Null alts leave Hi-sec. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 13:30:00 -
[677] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Hey Init cap pilots look what this goon is doing, thats right where does your topes come from? You have you "playstyle" we have ours, if you think its privileged stop being a space hobo and stop making 25 mil ticks from anom ratting and come to 6 mil tick missioning, or 12 mil per hour mining in highsec. Alternately dont get off that short bus you're on and keep licking the windows.
Don't worry, they've bought *****ton of ice products well before prices spiked "betting" on ice changes being the one to actually be introduced. Also they've prepped for moon nerf ahead of time by implementing renting programmes. Betting on the changes that just by pure chance actually get introduced, not that must one hell of a lucky strike. Heh, this tinfoil ain't half as comfortable as they told me it would be... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9046
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 13:36:00 -
[678] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Hey Init cap pilots look what this goon is doing, thats right where does your topes come from? You have you "playstyle" we have ours, if you think its privileged stop being a space hobo and stop making 25 mil ticks from anom ratting and come to 6 mil tick missioning, or 12 mil per hour mining in highsec. Alternately dont get off that short bus you're on and keep licking the windows.
I've been telling people to buy ice for weeks.
If you think any remotely well run alliance has not stocked up on topes, I don't know what to say to you.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Frying Doom
2448
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 13:40:00 -
[679] - Quote
Garan Nardieu wrote: Heh, this tinfoil ain't half as comfortable as they told me it would be... Don't worry you get used to it and it stops the aliens from using your brain as a telepathic transmitter. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
624
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:17:00 -
[680] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:A WoW player classic.
"We have loads of time in our no-life, we raid 14 hours a day to grind gear quicker thus we are better". eve is a competitive game
when you lose, it is very often right and proper that you lost rather than something that means the game design should be accommodated to suit you
there is still plenty of content for you, the low man on the totem pole, and it is not at all unfortunate that there are higher rewards for higher people on the totem pole |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4013
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:30:00 -
[681] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:A WoW player classic.
"We have loads of time in our no-life, we raid 14 hours a day to grind gear quicker thus we are better". eve is a competitive game when you lose, it is very often right and proper that you lost rather than something that means the game design should be accommodated to suit you there is still plenty of content for you, the low man on the totem pole, and it is not at all unfortunate that there are higher rewards for higher people on the totem pole
It's not about "losing", because I have 140B in ice bought in the past months so I am certainly not going to /wrist.
However, the *design* of excluding people just with an artificial respawn mechanic is awful and nothing can stop me to say it very loud. It is AWFUL, it's already unrealistic enough to see belts repopping out of magic once a day, making it a staple mechanic kicking it all the time instead of altering the boring and outdated mining mechanic (aka taking the low hanging fruit) is just bad. End of. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
625
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:41:00 -
[682] - Quote
i am not excluded (because i, as a space lord, have access to many belts you peons do not)
but with a limited supply in highsec people will be excluded, and the mechanism of the popping anomolies is an excellent one for ensuring that people are excluded on a semi-random basis rather than specific timezones being excluded |
Hershman
Creepers Corporation Creepers Alliance
198
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:42:00 -
[683] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Not permanent Ice belts, but add an ice belt to the list of mining anomalies that can spawn. So that we have a small chance of getting one of them from time to time.
+1 |
ihcn
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:45:00 -
[684] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Hey Init cap pilots look what this goon is doing, thats right where does your topes come from? You have you "playstyle" we have ours, if you think its privileged stop being a space hobo and stop making 25 mil ticks from anom ratting and come to 6 mil tick missioning, or 12 mil per hour mining in highsec. Alternately dont get off that short bus you're on and keep licking the windows. i want someone to take that "drinking republican tears" gif and photoshop it to say "hisec tears" |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:53:00 -
[685] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i am not excluded (because i, as a space lord, have access to many belts you peons do not)
That is too hilarious. That you might even believe yourself makes it even funnier. Eve is a sandbox not a race. Your imagined status as a "space lord," is a funny bit of role play. I think I am going to imagine you as the crazy homeless man calling himself Napoleon. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:54:00 -
[686] - Quote
ihcn wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once. Hey Init cap pilots look what this goon is doing, thats right where does your topes come from? You have you "playstyle" we have ours, if you think its privileged stop being a space hobo and stop making 25 mil ticks from anom ratting and come to 6 mil tick missioning, or 12 mil per hour mining in highsec. Alternately dont get off that short bus you're on and keep licking the windows. i want someone to take that "drinking republican tears" gif and photoshop it to say "hisec tears"
You could also shop it to "Nullbears tears" or the fist pumping baby to "Blued everyone, we own". |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1796
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 14:56:00 -
[687] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:One of the alts sitting by the WH has to have probes out to see a new sig. That's also a cue to warp to the POS. With the new discovery scanner I think that need goes away: It will show you all the sigs from your Barge.
The double webs works with 3 ships: Each ship aims one web on each of the other two. Only the fleet commander needs to be aware: fleet warp everyone.
Cloaked ships create a race: Will the quick lock tackle hit before the fleet commander warps? As I said before "All this helps. A little. I'm not sure it helps enough". After all there are poor gankers, and even good ones do not all use cloaked ships. Even those that do fail. I once had my Viator attacked by 3 stealth bombers. They failed.
Also: "But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict." Which means CCP's effort to get more conflict will fail. (I'm considering a very broad concept of "conflict", covering preparation and strategies, not just the actual encounter). So i point out issues with what you say are good defenses and you reiterate them. Which is fine. And under the status quo thats perfectly understandable. Yet the fact is, finding mining ships will become alot easier under the current proposal. No current tactics change that. And it goes back to your last sentence, from your previous post. "All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough." So where do you stand? I am opposed to such a change. Not because I live in wh space, I don't anymore. But because I am sick of the "want more conflict" rationale being applied without any thought to how. Believe me I do want more conflict, but not defenseless slaughter with no recourse. It doesn't matter if its in WH or high sec.
Id rather they stay signatures. Or at least some of them stay signatures, like the ones with rare ore. But if CCP does all this I may be able to adapt (This pilot lives in W, all my others are in high sec). Im just not sure it will work out, or if we stop mining in W. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4016
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 15:52:00 -
[688] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i am not excluded (because i, as a space lord, have access to many belts you peons do not)
but with a limited supply in highsec people will be excluded, and the mechanism of the popping anomolies is an excellent one for ensuring that people are excluded on a semi-random basis rather than specific timezones being excluded
I bet the belts will reset at downtime, so no, not all are excluded in the same way and yes some time zones will be favored over others. When I lived in Italy I really reaped all the benefits of playing at DT. Now I live on a luxury island but it's on GMT. Almost as good, just a bit worse. Strictly EvE speaking of course. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 16:47:00 -
[689] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Remember that time CCP bled hi-sec by tripling the rate at which belts spawned?
Or that time when they utterly shafted hisec by making all agents Q20?
Or.., ah sod it you get the idea. Stop whining because your incredibly priviliged lifestyle isn't at the front of the queue for once.
I won't say high sec hasn't got perks. But thats rich coming from someone who's alliance sucks at the teet of Tech. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
309
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 16:48:00 -
[690] - Quote
I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?
the implication in EvilweaselSA post was that there was someone being excluded now on ice.
As i understand it the problem with ice is that its boring and take a long time to do. too long to actually have to watch a screen in null which is why most people do not mine ice in null. that and the glaring safety issues which are the subject of much trolling and tears on the forums.
are these not the underlying problems of ice or am i missing something?
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 16:57:00 -
[691] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?
the implication in EvilweaselSA post was that there was someone being excluded now on ice.
As i understand it the problem with ice is that its boring and take a long time to do. too long to actually have to watch a screen in null which is why most people do not mine ice in null. that and the glaring safety issues which are the subject of much trolling and tears on the forums.
are these not the underlying problems of ice or am i missing something?
Most people don't mine Ice in null because, its boring as shiat, but more its because they have a huge arse tit to suck called moon mining. It allows them to buy all the ships, items and ice for their drinks that they ever could want. And it comes at the expense of anyone who has ever bought a T2 module or ship. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 16:59:00 -
[692] - Quote
Crexa wrote: I won't say high sec hasn't got perks. But thats rich coming from someone who's alliance sucks at the teet of Tech.
init, as a southern alliance, didn't have any tech
so good work there expert on eve online nullsec Crexa, scourge of the supposedly tech holding alliance forum posters |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:01:00 -
[693] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?
nobody is excluded now, that is changing thanks to it changing from an infinite resource to a capped supply
so once that happens, the people who are too late get no ice until the next ice anom pops |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:01:00 -
[694] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote: I won't say high sec hasn't got perks. But thats rich coming from someone who's alliance sucks at the teet of Tech.
init, as a southern alliance, didn't have any tech so good work there expert on eve online nullsec Crexa, scourge of the supposedly tech holding alliance forum posters
They weren't always in the south. Good work on history. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:05:00 -
[695] - Quote
Crexa wrote: I won't say high sec hasn't got perks. But thats rich coming from someone who's alliance sucks at the teet of Tech.
Crexa wrote: They weren't always in the south. Good work on history.
"sucks" as the present tense, indicates that they currently own tech, and cannot be reconciled with a claim that you were actually talking about some time in the past
you were wrong and then you tried to play semantics to hide the depths of your wrongitude and failed at that too |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:07:00 -
[696] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote: I won't say high sec hasn't got perks. But thats rich coming from someone who's alliance sucks at the teet of Tech.
Crexa wrote: They weren't always in the south. Good work on history.
"sucks" as the present tense, indicates that they currently own tech, and cannot be reconciled with a claim that you were actually talking about some time in the past you were wrong and then you tried to play semantics to hide the depths of your wrongitude and failed at that too
What? Tech is but one example. Plenty of other moon goo to go around. Take your pick. And you really have no clue what moons they control, nor do I for that matter. Yet, alliance location doesn't matter as I mentioned with PL moon control.
Besides who cares about the Initiative anyway. Lets talk about Goons. About an alliance that can't find enough to do in null (ice mining) they have to raid high sec mining for shaits and giggles. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:12:00 -
[697] - Quote
Lets not, you tried to discredit Malcanis, a noted goodposter (such a goodposter he was elected to the CSM!), by claiming something obviously factually wrong (not that it would have discredited him if it were true, it's just exceptionally hilarious it wasn't even true)
when called on this statement you first tried to lie about what you posted, and when that was wrong tried to claim that when you wrote "tech" you actually meant "tech or anything that is not tech" and glossed over that you'd just gotten caught red-handed lying about what you wrote not an hour ago
so let's stay on this issue until we've cleared it up to everyone you should not be listened to, ever.
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:15:00 -
[698] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Lets not, you tried to discredit Malcanis, a noted goodposter (such a goodposter he was elected to the CSM!), by claiming something obviously factually wrong (not that it would have discredited him if it were true, it's just exceptionally hilarious it wasn't even true)
when called on this statement you first tried to lie about what you posted, and when that was wrong tried to claim that when you wrote "tech" you actually meant "tech or anything that is not tech" and glossed over that you'd just gotten caught red-handed lying about what you wrote not an hour ago
so let's stay on this issue until we've cleared it up to everyone you should not be listened to, ever.
Oh wow. He was elected because of a twisted election process which foists major alliance members on the rest of us. How many member of the vaunted CSM are high-sec'er with no alliance affiliation? "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:41:00 -
[699] - Quote
if you would like to take your csm comments to a relevant thread i would be happy to continue ownzoning you on facts, since it appears we have settled this little technetium fact issue |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:45:00 -
[700] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:if you would like to take your csm comments to a relevant thread i would be happy to continue ownzoning you on facts, since it appears we have settled this little technetium fact issue
You brought up the CSM not me. But your right, they are irrelevant to a thread about resource allocation, distribution, and scarcity. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
|
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
309
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 17:49:00 -
[701] - Quote
Soundwave wrote: the POS system by itself would only affect a small portion of the community.
oh its not so?
..
lets **** with fuel until its true and then we dont have to fix POS's
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Lord Haur
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
66
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:13:00 -
[702] - Quote
And while INIT was in the old Northern Coalition, that was during 2008/9 and before Tech was the T2 bottleneck. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
774
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:15:00 -
[703] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:And while INIT was in the old Northern Coalition, that was during 2008/9 and before Tech was the T2 bottleneck.
butbutbut grrr nullbear grrr blue donut
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:24:00 -
[704] - Quote
Lord Haur wrote:And while INIT was in the old Northern Coalition, that was during 2008/9 and before Tech was the T2 bottleneck.
For crying out loud! Not going to let it rest are you. It doesn't matter what high end moon goo you choose. Technetium, Promethium, Dysprosium, Neodymium, Thulium. The point is its an isk faucet that is essentially major money maker for any alliance. And crying over ice production when you got a faucet like that make you look a fool.
And Malcanis is a big boy, he can defend himself if he chooses to. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
774
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:34:00 -
[705] - Quote
Crexa wrote:[quote=Lord Haur]It doesn't matter what high end moon goo you choose. Technetium, Promethium, Dysprosium, Neodymium, Thulium. The point is its an isk faucet that is essentially major money maker for any alliance. And crying over ice production when you got a faucet like that make you look a fool.
It does matter, as only 3 of those have been economically profitable to mine, and they are localized in certain areas of nullsec, meaning that the majority of nullsec alliances derive little or no income from moon-mining. Therefore, your statement of "major money maker for any alliance" is blatantly wrong, thereby invalidating your entire argument. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:39:00 -
[706] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:[quote=Lord Haur]It doesn't matter what high end moon goo you choose. Technetium, Promethium, Dysprosium, Neodymium, Thulium. The point is its an isk faucet that is essentially major money maker for any alliance. And crying over ice production when you got a faucet like that make you look a fool. It does matter, as only 3 of those have been economically profitable to mine, and they are localized in certain areas of nullsec, meaning that the majority of nullsec alliances derive little or no income from moon-mining. Therefore, your statement of "major money maker for any alliance" is blatantly wrong, thereby invalidating your entire argument.
They ALL are profitable. And I never said one alliance is equal to another in income receipts. I said there is major income gain from moon mining and alliances do gain from it. Why else do it? Don't try and argue this point you will lose. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
774
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:43:00 -
[707] - Quote
Crexa wrote:They ALL are profitable.
No, thulium has been economically and financially unprofitable to mine, while promethium has been economically so.
You can keep trying to pretend that you know what you're talking about, but it's clear to anyone with any knowledge of moons and nullsec finance that you don't.
The vast majority of nullsec alliances get little or no income from moons. Therefore, your already weak argument that moon income invalidates a group from discussing any other form of income is ultimately invalid.
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:47:00 -
[708] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:They ALL are profitable. No, thulium has been economically and financially unprofitable to mine, while promethium has been economically so. You can keep trying to pretend that you know what you're talking about, but it's clear to anyone with any knowledge of moons and nullsec finance that you don't. The vast majority of nullsec alliances get little or no income from moons. Therefore, your already weak argument that moon income invalidates a group from discussing any other form of income is ultimately invalid.
See the tree for the forest why don't you. Good god. Should I just edit out thulium from my post would that make you happy and invalidate all moon mining as profit making? "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
774
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:52:00 -
[709] - Quote
Crexa wrote:See the tree for the forest why don't you. Good god. Should I just edit out thulium from my post would that make you happy and invalidate all moon mining as profit making?
No, because there are still huge swathes of space, including that belonging to the alliance Malcanis is a member of, that do not have moons that contribute a large or often even any share of an alliance's income. Therefore, your assertion that moon-mining contributes a large portion to all nullsec alliances' incomes is false; not only false, but extremely far off in that the majority don't derive a large or even any portion of their income from moon-mining. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9059
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 18:58:00 -
[710] - Quote
Crexa wrote:
And Malcanis is a big boy, he can defend himself if he chooses to.
You haven't really left me much to do.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:04:00 -
[711] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:See the tree for the forest why don't you. Good god. Should I just edit out thulium from my post would that make you happy and invalidate all moon mining as profit making? No, because there are still huge swathes of space, including that belonging to the alliance Malcanis is a member of, that do not have moons that contribute a large or often even any share of an alliance's income. Therefore, your assertion that moon-mining contributes a large portion to all nullsec alliances' incomes is false; not only false, but extremely far off in that the majority don't derive a large or even any portion of their income from moon-mining.
You should just quit null then, if you reside there on the character you are posting with or another. As you and your fellows point out, there is no pvp, nothing to do and now no profit.
Init chose to move to where they are now not me. And owning a region of space does not preclude you from "controlling" moons elsewhere AS I HAVE SAID. Of course you could ask anyone in Pandemic Legion how to make money from moons if your having trouble with the concept.
And "all" is such an absolute. Should I have used most, some, a portion of. Does it matter? No. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
776
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:13:00 -
[712] - Quote
Well, ignoring the senselessness of your post, you made a (weak) argument about who was allowed to talk about other forms of income and who wasn't based on an assertion about moon income. That assertion is unequivocally false. Therefore, your already weak argument about who can talk about what is invalidated, and Malcanis can, even according to your own lofty and unjustified standard, now proceed with discussing ice. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4017
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:16:00 -
[713] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: 1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.
In my opinion , by stating each anom will contain 2500 units, you have overlooked a relevant factor.
You can't just search and replace the current belts with the new ones.
You have in mind to balance ices to a certain percentage of demand. That's fine, as long as you don't forget that ices are created equal but their demand is far from equal.
As is well known, Caldari empire ice is demand and consumption is massively predominating.
With the current "almost infinite belts" there's no problem, all you see is the market volume for white glaze towering over the others by large and that's it.
But once you apply these "horizontal cuts", 2500 units of Caldari ice will not cut it.
If you really want to rebalance on volume demand, you can't just calculate the grand total of ice and take 80% and then evenly distribute the new belts, you have to take into account the various proportions of ice. So it's perfectly possible that applying your method, some hi sec ices (say Gallente's) will provide for 150% of the demand (making your patch pointless) while Caldari's will provide just 20% and then the whole POS network will suffer an HUGE crysis.
Therefore please check the various empires volumes (i.e. a yearly average of volume, you CAN do it, I can myself as a player) and then create as many Caldari belts are required to cover Caldari ice actual 80% of demand, not just a "one quarter" flat proportion.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Linament
Lokis Veil
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:23:00 -
[714] - Quote
As I read all of the changes that are coming I cant help but feel that this expansion /update is simply catering to the vocal minority.
Since i have been playing (2007) there has always been this "chipping away of High sec", which is fine, if thats what you want to do. However it seems that the game has devolved into an exercise in supportive psychopathy. If you take the psychopathy checklist and apply it to the game and to what I call the vocal minority of players, it becomes clear that the game is pushing and supporting pyschopathic tendencies and attracting a population of players that are mentally unnhealthy and find solace amongst others of likemindedness. Whether this is intentional or a simple nature of the beast its quite visible and no attempts are made at trying to mask it or otherwise spin this behavior into a more positive light. Indeed its the basis of the game. The game stopped being a sandbox game a long time ago..if indeed it ever was one. Psychopathy Checklist
Now the point is not to attack anyone or any group of players...its simply to place, into perspective, what I and others are seeing from a long term player perception.
There was a lot of talk in one of the CSM meeting minutes about CCP not going to worry about player retention and focus on new players. There was also talk of CCP working on counting actual human players vs accounts. There was also a lot of talk about the next 2 years, 5 years even 10 years down the road. CCP wanted the CSM's to be in on that high level conversation. There was also some talk of removing some of the barriers to entry for 0.0 and other areas where it has become obvious that newer and some older players cannot access...large alliances / corporations ect ect ect.
And maybe its not advertised that much anymore but for a long time CCP advertised EVE as a game thats "not for everyone". And thats still true today...its not a game for everyone.
So given the above ill post a few questions for a dev to answer -
How does the upcoming expansion relate to - Removing barriers to entry,
Set a path to the next few years of EVE development as a product, Not catering to long time veteran players /alliances /corporations in 0.0 (largest share of the vocal minority), Increasing new player accounts, Reducing the "Drowning in Minutia" syndrome (Spreadsheets for everything and an excel based UI),
Making the game "a game for everyone"
Also one last note here....In order to make EVE a game "for everyone" instead of "not for everyone" CCP will have to move away from the Psychopath model to something more people can relate to. There are only so many people that can tolerate / like /understand/ or succeeed inside this model and as long as CCP continues to build upon this model, then by default, they are undermining thier own goals. CCP are the ones saying this..im just wondering how this update relates to those goals..the vison that they were trying to convey to the CSM. As at first glance, with the info provided, it certainly looks like those goals that were listed and spoke about in the CSM meeting minutes I read, have been discarded and its the same ole same ole. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
776
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:26:00 -
[715] - Quote
It's not a game for everyone. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:33:00 -
[716] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Well, ignoring the senselessness of your post, you made a (weak) argument about who was allowed to talk about other forms of income and who wasn't based on an assertion about moon income. That assertion is unequivocally false. Therefore, your already weak argument about who can talk about what is invalidated, and Malcanis can, even according to your own lofty and unjustified standard, now proceed with discussing ice.
And had he been posting instead of denigrating another, I would agree with you. Since the post that started this bs was, I find your argument weak and invalid.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9060
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:36:00 -
[717] - Quote
Linament wrote:As I read all of the changes that are coming I cant help but feel that this expansion /update is simply catering to the vocal minority.
Since i have been playing (2007) there has always been this "chipping away of High sec",
Fun fact: no there hasn't.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
385
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:57:00 -
[718] - Quote
Furthermore,
abloobloobloo bring back images |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:02:00 -
[719] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Linament wrote:As I read all of the changes that are coming I cant help but feel that this expansion /update is simply catering to the vocal minority.
Since i have been playing (2007) there has always been this "chipping away of High sec", Fun fact: no there hasn't.
Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home.
True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. Lets start with Incursions, the only equivelent to isk generation that nullbears have as standard (hi there forsaken cashcows!!). Several "balances" have been made to them ALL being negative to isk generation.
Lets take missions and the deployment of sleeper esque AI. Great, slightly smarter rats that decide that drones, even when idle, are Adolf Hitlers lovechildren and must be executed regardless of the tactical situation. Thank you and goodnight anyone wishing to use drones, oh and the 2009 "balance" pass on missions that killed the reward system. Add in the inclusion of the mostly abused Faction Warfare LP giveaway that further drives certain popular mission corps LP value into the ground.
So excuse us highsec dwellers, we tend to look down on risk averse moon goo/OMFGForsaken Isk/RMT fueled windowlickers that think just because they are in null they are the pinnacle of the game. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
776
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:09:00 -
[720] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years.
So hisec has received both nerfs and buffs over the last three years, just like every other security area of space?
Great, sounds like balanced development.
|
|
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
386
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:09:00 -
[721] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:abloobloobloo
So what you're mad about is that after a few ten thousands of man hours a group of nullsec players is coming close to the isk generation abilities of worry free highsec bring back images |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
243
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:19:00 -
[722] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote: Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home.
True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. Lets start with Incursions, the only equivelent to isk generation that nullbears have as standard (hi there forsaken cashcows!!). Several "balances" have been made to them ALL being negative to isk generation.
Lets take missions and the deployment of sleeper esque AI. Great, slightly smarter rats that decide that drones, even when idle, are Adolf Hitlers lovechildren and must be executed regardless of the tactical situation. Thank you and goodnight anyone wishing to use drones, oh and the 2009 "balance" pass on missions that killed the reward system. Add in the inclusion of the mostly abused Faction Warfare LP giveaway that further drives certain popular mission corps LP value into the ground.
So excuse us highsec dwellers, we tend to look down on risk averse moon goo/OMFGForsaken Isk/RMT fueled windowlickers that think just because they are in null they are the pinnacle of the game.
Sadly, the truth is that 50% of eve are solo players who do not wish to move to 0.0, or pucker up and kiss Mitten's ass, and make do with what we do in empire. And we pay for this game, too, nulltards. However, CCP continues to **** vigorously on half it's subscribers. Now I'm not going to panic and scream 'The end of eve is near' but customer retention is important in any MMO. And if CCP says they don't care about it, they're lying. (See Incarna for what happened when suddenly a large number of long time players pulled their subs)
When will high sec have it's expansion, CCP? I know some of this stuff is shared, like new ship graphics, but let's have an expansion where we really develop high sec instead of a non-0stop Christmas for 0.0.
Oh, and I liked the above just for the 'windowlicker' comment alone, having seen members of GSF playing in two other games and wondered if they were high or what as they proclaimed goonswarm to rule World of Tanks. Pro tip: My E100 trumps a WZ131, I don't care what clan, guild, or alliance you are a member of, particularly if you drive it directly at me.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:23:00 -
[723] - Quote
Dramaticus wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:abloobloobloo So what you're mad about is that after a few ten thousands of man hours a group of nullsec players is coming close to the isk generation abilities of worry free highsec
Not at all, I fully agree that null>low>high in isk generation. However it seem many nullbears think that high is a land of milk and honey where there is nothing but isk falling into your lap as soon as you log in. That misconception is perpetuated by certain nullsec leaders, and by those who need to craft a narrative to justify griefing mechanics.
I am, in the parlance, not mad. I am excited by the changes that are coming. I worry as both a researcher and T2 inventor that some of the changes are going to put me out of business, I am only a small timer without the moon goo/rat tax income of other larger entities. Is it too much to voice your concern when you can see your primary income being chipped away in favour of groups who already have huge income potential?
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
776
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:26:00 -
[724] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Is it too much to voice your concern when you can see your primary income being chipped away in favour of groups who already have huge income potential?
When you converse remotely like a reasonable adult, like in this latest post, no. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:27:00 -
[725] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. So hisec has received both nerfs and buffs over the last three years, just like every other security area of space? Great, sounds like balanced development.
And yet the net effect has always been negative to isk generation.
Admittedly the trusec nerf hurt many i nullsec but as has been seen, the income is still massive beyond what can be realised in highsec.
Balancing also assumes that the system in place gets tweaked and changed in small way, not wholesale reworking. I like the ice changes, I think that CCP is attempting to socially craft people out of highsec and into the political nutfuck that is nullsec. That sort of engineering is not a nerf or buff, it is an agenda that fuels the current feeling that CCP if for null. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:29:00 -
[726] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Is it too much to voice your concern when you can see your primary income being chipped away in favour of groups who already have huge income potential? When you converse remotely like a reasonable adult, like in this latest post, no.
It's okay, I took my pills this morning |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
243
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:37:00 -
[727] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:I think that CCP is attempting to socially craft people out of highsec and into the political nutfuck that is nullsec. That sort of engineering is not a nerf or buff, it is an agenda that fuels the current feeling that CCP if for null.
And what they seem to fail to understand is that some of us simply do not want to. My own personal experience with the nullsec clusterfrag left a bad taste in my mouth and frankly, i see anyone who 'wants' to go take part in that as being either mentally disabled or a total sociopath who just wants to get his jollies greifing without having to work for anything.
Granted, that's only based on my experience with... every single person I have ever encountered past 0.1, and in fact, one of the more hilarious ones was a bunch of idiots blowing me up and costing their own corp in the process, they had such a hard on for one more kill. (Never mind being blue AND the fact I was carrying billions in goods they had already paid for.)
If CCP wants to get people into null sec, it's not the people in high sec that need to change, it's the people in null.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
778
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 20:47:00 -
[728] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:And yet the net effect has always been negative to isk generation.
I can't confirm this either way, but it would be disingenuous to not admit that this is also my impression.
It basically comes down to "how far is too far?" and "what are you replacing it with?"
As to the first, I guess we'll see. There's not much point in engaging in the hyperbole of who's going to cancel more accounts, and this is an area that CCP is dedicated to tracking closely with their superior resources. Furthermore, the discussion of what will likely be better for the overall health of the game is already over, the result of which are the changes we're seeing.
As to the latter issue, I think CCP has dropped the ball somewhat here, and every change that limits the gameplay of hisec by shifting it to nullsec should be matched by fresh gameplay that is appropriate for casual players that isn't just another isk-generation sop of the sort that started this problem in the first place.
I highly doubt there's anything that can be done to turn back the tide of development as it now stands. The die is cast, and we'll have to wait to see if The Great Unsubbing actually comes to pass. However, if I was a casual hisec player, I would be lobbying my new CSMs hard to ensure that new casual and hisec appropriate content was being brought in to replace the "supply nullsec with stuff" content that is being moved to nullsec. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5653
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:07:00 -
[729] - Quote
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:12:00 -
[730] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
le sigh, makes me want to post some ascii art from Delve '10.
|
|
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
223
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:28:00 -
[731] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread.
Thank you for not surprising anyone with the direction you plan on taking to address the imbalance in null anomalies. I mean it is so comforting to see the normal process of saying "gee people like doing this one type of content and avoid all the others. Obviously the solution is to make forsaken hubs suck just as much as all the others" rather than simply adjusting the other anomalies to be more like hubs and perhaps encourage people to spend more time out ratting where maybe they might get blown up.
Sarcasm aside it's amusing to see all the highsec tears about ice and the ranting about how much CCP is trying to push people to null in the very same thread where the intention of killing off the a major income source of null sec grunts is announced.
|
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
619
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:33:00 -
[732] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:However it seem many nullbears think that high is a land of milk and honey where there is nothing but isk falling into your lap as soon as you log in.
Ice mining is welfare. You show up to the welfare office (ice belt) and get a small check every month (five minutes in our case) if you ask nicely (press F1 then wait) and have to take it to the bank (Jita) to cash it. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:34:00 -
[733] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread. Thank you for not surprising anyone with the direction you plan on taking to address the imbalance in null anomalies. I mean it is so comforting to see the normal process of saying "gee people like doing this one type of content and avoid all the others. Obviously the solution is to make forsaken hubs suck just as much as all the others" rather than simply adjusting the other anomalies to be more like hubs and perhaps encourage people to spend more time out ratting where maybe they might get blown up. Sarcasm aside it's amusing to see all the highsec tears about ice and the ranting about how much CCP is trying to push people to null in the very same thread where the intention of killing off the a major income source of null sec grunts is announced.
Ah, but to use an overused rejoinder so popular with the null crowd, adapt or die. Adding in a few elite frigates does nothing but slow you down, so rather than 8 minutes it now takes you 9 to complete a FH. Removing ice to anom and reducing them to 23 mining hours with a 4 hour respawn is a tad bit more serious, both economically and to the foundation of POS ownership. Remember earlier in this thread currently 99% (ish) of ice products are produced in highsec, so please a small balance of an open isk tap is not really in the same league as the ice changes. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:37:00 -
[734] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:However it seem many nullbears think that high is a land of milk and honey where there is nothing but isk falling into your lap as soon as you log in. Ice mining is welfare. You show up to the welfare office (ice belt) and get a small check every month (five minutes in our case) if you ask nicely (press F1 then wait) and have to take it to the bank (Jita) to cash it.
Honestly I chuckled. I never said the current system is right, its broken to buggeration but the new system does nothing to address the real issues behind ice mining. Sad to say it is a band aid to fix a sliced off arm. |
Linament
Lokis Veil
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:38:00 -
[735] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
No interest in frogs...but point taken. Could you then speak to the following?
How does the upcoming expansion relate to - Removing barriers to entry, Set a path to the next few years of EVE development as a product, Not catering to long time veteran players /alliances /corporations in 0.0 (largest share of the vocal minority), Increasing new player accounts, Reducing the "Drowning in Minutia" syndrome (Spreadsheets for everything and an excel based UI), Making the game "a game for everyone"
Or for that matter how does it relate to anything in the meeting minutes that were posted from the CSM ?
I mean you guys are the ones tossing out this word salad stuff and CCP is the one that keeps pushing this CSM stuff...we just got through with an election....why go through all this if its ..well meaningless. Is the CSM and the meeting you have some kind of internal CCP meta game?...let me be clear..im no fan of the CSM..i personally think its a complete waste of everyones time and if what is being posted in the meetings is just lip service or some other layer of garbage..then whats the point.
Im not really attacking anything or any idea here..its that if the updates and expansions are not going to match what were being told through the CSM...why bother with it at all.
So if you could..could you just elaborate a bit more on how this expansion / update relates to any of the CSM discussions. |
ChYph3r
Unlawful Unit Here Be Dragons
99
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:40:00 -
[736] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
I say dissect the frogs, learn from them! http://evepodcasts.com PODSIDE Producer @chyph3r-á on Twitter
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 21:46:00 -
[737] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
Ribbet Ribbet Croak |
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
225
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 22:34:00 -
[738] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614? I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1872
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 22:37:00 -
[739] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote:Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread. I believe this to be my very first post in this thread.
Amarr Militia - Fweddit - http://fweddit.com Poetic Discourse - http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.com |
Kynric
Sky Fighters Talocan United
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 22:44:00 -
[740] - Quote
It is curious that there is a game design goal to make null sec industrialists self sufficient, but to on purpose not allow wormhole industrialist to be self sufficient. Why not add random ice belts to wormholes? Why is increasing the game play of null sec industrialist valued and not that of wormhole industrialists? More ships moving and doing more things makes the game better imo.
Also, IMO why make the spawns so predicatabile (4 hour interval and always in the same systems?) Variability usually makes the gaming experience better. |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5660
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 22:51:00 -
[741] - Quote
Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614?
I advise using https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24359, it makes answering these kinds of questions much easier. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
1892
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 23:09:00 -
[742] - Quote
Linament wrote: No interest in frogs...but point taken. Could you then speak to the following?
How does the upcoming expansion relate to - 1. Removing barriers to entry, 2. Set a path to the next few years of EVE development as a product, 3. Not catering to long time veteran players /alliances /corporations in 0.0 (largest share of the vocal minority), 4. Increasing new player accounts, 5. Reducing the "Drowning in Minutia" syndrome (Spreadsheets for everything and an excel based UI), 6. Making the game "a game for everyone"
Ok, so. Some stuff we're working on that I can remember off the top of my head:
- A bunch of stuff from Team PE, most notably a completely revised radial menu plus assorted very neat "basic controls" UI gubbins that I can't remember if we've shown yet but that you'll definitely notice once you hit the test server that all combine to make the core task of flying your ship easier and more intuitive - 1, 3, 5, 6 off the bat, hopefully 4 as part of a general effort to improve early-game experience, and by addressing 5 as it relates to core UX, 2 as well
- New scanner overlay to seamlessly highlight and provide access to exploration content for which you previously needed specialist tools just to know it was there - 1, 3, 5, 6 and with the same reasoning as above, 2 and 4
- A raft of other adjustments to how scanning and exploration work, including probe formations, a more comprehensible scanner window, and various other things that again you'll find when it hits the test server - 1, 3, and 6, 5 to a somewhat lesser degree, and hopefully again at least 4 and arguably 2
- New hacking/archaeology mechanics that turn "activate module, wait an arbitrary amount of time" into an engaging, skill-driven puzzle, derived from a new drive towards prototyping stuff - 3, 5, 6, and definitely 2
...and then a bunch of other stuff that my somewhat tired brain is failing to recall right now. And yes, Fozzie, with some help from Bettik, is doing a bunch of changes to resource distribution, which is one of the I want to say three (but I may be forgetting one, see previous disclaimer) major features that one of the five (I think) main EVE feature teams is working on for this expansion. We're hoping it's going to make a big impact on the economic/industrial ecosystem as the changes propagate through the system, but there's plenty of other stuff going on. |
|
Maul555
Nuts and Vindictive Remix Technologies
319
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 23:24:00 -
[743] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
If I paint frogs all over my barges, will you rethink this whole grav site change in wormholes?
/pretty please? //with sugar on top? ///I have cherries... |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1798
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 23:29:00 -
[744] - Quote
Maul555 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. If I paint frogs all over my barges, will you rethink this whole grav site change in wormholes? /pretty please? //with sugar on top? ///I have cherries... Or if you do not, please track W space mining, and consider doing something if it drops to the floor. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Frying Doom
2456
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 23:47:00 -
[745] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Maul555 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. If I paint frogs all over my barges, will you rethink this whole grav site change in wormholes? /pretty please? //with sugar on top? ///I have cherries... Or if you do not, please track W space mining, and consider doing something if it drops to the floor. I honestly dont know if I could be stuffed moving back to a wormhole, it took me days to get everything out.
Lets face it the only reason to mine in a WH now, is to act as bait. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Star Dragonsbane
Haifa Shipworks and Logistics
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 00:15:00 -
[746] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
I would like to respond back if I may. You have been telling us subscribers for a couple months now that you are making this change and that change benefiting null sec. No problem. You tell us your changing scanning, a huge game mechanic for some of us now useless not to mention obliterating the joy of working and then reaping from said challenge of probing for it in the first place. You just took a awesome part of mining and once again screwed it for us veteran miners that actually appreciated a little challenge in finding something worth while in high sec without going to null. Still no problem, stupid as it may be. Still think you guys did that because someone on your team was to lazy to probe but whatever. Then you release that video of the new change, where empires are crumbling and dying. Really and you want us to not think your planning to kill hi sec. What the hell, we aren't stupid and if this isn't your intention, fire that graphic designer you had come up with that video and issue a new one correcting the obvious condentation. Please stop being vague in coming soons, we don't need a carrot, what we want is straight forwardness and honest. Very simple things to ask yet never receive it seems. I like your work in the past and I hope for a promising future for eve, but if you want trust and admiration, please just tell us where you are planning to take eve so we don't waist each others time. Thanks Star |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 00:16:00 -
[747] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614? I advise using https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24359, it makes answering these kinds of questions much easier. In all seriousness however, I do expect that the increase in rewards will motivate people to use creativity and teamwork and overcome the extra challenge.
No idea what frogs have to do with resource allocation in EvE (i do get the attempt at humor) . But what are these increases in rewards you speak of? I see a lot of things moving around but no increases just reductions. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
940
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 00:19:00 -
[748] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614? I advise using https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24359, it makes answering these kinds of questions much easier. In all seriousness however, I do expect that the increase in rewards will motivate people to use creativity and teamwork and overcome the extra challenge. Point was it will take less time to get to you than for you to get out and combat pilots as a general rule hate defensivly waiting in an gravimetric site or asteroid belt in hopes some will come along. As was stated many times before the increased reward would have been good enough if the sites still needed to be scanned down, but with the proposed changes the reward are not worth the absolute rush that will be in mining in low and empire null sec. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
351
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 01:06:00 -
[749] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:when called on this statement you first tried to lie about what you posted, and when that was wrong tried to claim that when you wrote "tech" you actually meant "tech or anything that is not tech" and glossed over that you'd just gotten caught red-handed lying about what you wrote not an hour ago
so let's stay on this issue until we've cleared it up to everyone you should not be listened to, ever.
This is why I prefer to post anonymously... lol. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 01:17:00 -
[750] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home. I dunno. High-sec is awfully big for just a training ground.
I think that if CCP really wanted to nerf high-sec over the years, the right place to start would be by gradually lowering system sec status to below 0.5, for most of high-sec. Certainly, this would have been more effective than making weird obscure changes which have not seemed to have affected high-sec population numbers much, if at all. |
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 01:18:00 -
[751] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. You don't boil frogs... you fry them, in batter. Yum, yum...
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 01:21:00 -
[752] - Quote
More seriously, Fozzie - I would like to see some fixes for T1 module manufacturing to encourage noob industrialists.
How about it? Is it even on the list of things to do? |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
969
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 01:51:00 -
[753] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. You don't boil frogs... you fry them, in batter. Yum, yum...
It's a euphemism. The idea is that if you want to cook a frog you can't just throw it into a pot of boiling water, it'll jump back out. So you stick it in the water, and it thinks its pretty nice, and then you sloooooooooowly turn up the temperature.
In EVE terms it would be like a whole bunch of small incremental nerfs, none of which individually is big enough to be a concern, but the sum of which reduces the thing being nerfed to uselessness. Or the opposite, a series of tiny buffs that leave the thing overpowered, as the case may be. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7734
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 02:22:00 -
[754] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home.
True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. Lets start with Incursions, the only equivelent to isk generation that nullbears have as standard (hi there forsaken cashcows!!). Several "balances" have been made to them ALL being negative to isk generation.
Lets take missions and the deployment of sleeper esque AI. Great, slightly smarter rats that decide that drones, even when idle, are Adolf Hitlers lovechildren and must be executed regardless of the tactical situation. Thank you and goodnight anyone wishing to use drones, oh and the 2009 "balance" pass on missions that killed the reward system. Add in the inclusion of the mostly abused Faction Warfare LP giveaway that further drives certain popular mission corps LP value into the ground.
So excuse us highsec dwellers, we tend to look down on risk averse moon goo/OMFGForsaken Isk/RMT fueled windowlickers that think just because they are in null they are the pinnacle of the game.
what did hiseccers do to earn and keep their ability to run incursions?
absolutely nothing, get lost mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 02:23:00 -
[755] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:More seriously, Fozzie - I would like to see some fixes for T1 module manufacturing to encourage noob industrialists.
How about it? Is it even on the list of things to do? T1 modules were removed from NPC drop tables in order to make manufacturing them better for new players. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 02:33:00 -
[756] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote: Point was it will take less time to get to you than for you to get out and combat pilots as a general rule hate defensivly waiting in an gravimetric site or asteroid belt in hopes some will come along. As was stated many times before the increased reward would have been good enough if the sites still needed to be scanned down, but with the proposed changes the reward are not worth the absolute rush that will be in mining in low and empire null sec.
The idea of nullsec is that you create your own safety through player interaction instead of obtaining it for free through game mechanics.
Sitting in a site and being given enough time to escape by forcing players to scan you out, either via probes or the system scanner is hiding behind a game mechanic and hurts players' ability to interact meaningfully.
The increased reward provided by rebalanced mining sites and increased ice cost because of the new bottleneck on supply make this trade fairer. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 03:05:00 -
[757] - Quote
mynnna wrote:It's a euphemism. The idea is that if you want to cook a frog you can't just throw it into a pot of boiling water, it'll jump back out. So you stick it in the water, and it thinks its pretty nice, and then you sloooooooooowly turn up the temperature. Yeah, mynnna, I got it. Thanks.... lol.
BTW, congrats on the CSM election. Hope you keep posting in MD.
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
969
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 03:13:00 -
[758] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:mynnna wrote:It's a euphemism. The idea is that if you want to cook a frog you can't just throw it into a pot of boiling water, it'll jump back out. So you stick it in the water, and it thinks its pretty nice, and then you sloooooooooowly turn up the temperature. Yeah, mynnna, I got it. Thanks.... lol. BTW, congrats on the CSM election. Hope you keep posting in MD.
I wasn't sure if you were joking or actually didn't get it.
And yes, I will keep posting. Never stop posting. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 03:16:00 -
[759] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:More seriously, Fozzie - I would like to see some fixes for T1 module manufacturing to encourage noob industrialists.
How about it? Is it even on the list of things to do? T1 modules were removed from NPC drop tables in order to make manufacturing them better for new players. I know. And, it didn't work out, because the NPC meta drops were not adjusted at the same time.
Barring a few exceptions, low meta modules are better and cheaper than their T1 counterparts. They are also readily available, making almost all T1 module manufacturing and sales a rather profitless and pointless endeavor. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 03:38:00 -
[760] - Quote
Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home.
True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. Lets start with Incursions, the only equivelent to isk generation that nullbears have as standard (hi there forsaken cashcows!!). Several "balances" have been made to them ALL being negative to isk generation.
Lets take missions and the deployment of sleeper esque AI. Great, slightly smarter rats that decide that drones, even when idle, are Adolf Hitlers lovechildren and must be executed regardless of the tactical situation. Thank you and goodnight anyone wishing to use drones, oh and the 2009 "balance" pass on missions that killed the reward system. Add in the inclusion of the mostly abused Faction Warfare LP giveaway that further drives certain popular mission corps LP value into the ground.
So excuse us highsec dwellers, we tend to look down on risk averse moon goo/OMFGForsaken Isk/RMT fueled windowlickers that think just because they are in null they are the pinnacle of the game. what did hiseccers do to earn and keep their ability to run incursions? absolutely nothing, get lost
Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing. |
|
Acks
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 03:45:00 -
[761] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.
So I have held off on commenting on the ice changes until now as I was waiting to see what the actual numbers were going to be.
I would start by stating that am fully on board with changing the ICE mechanics. Moving ice away from infinite static belts is a good thing. That being said, the current proposal of 2500 units of ice then a fixed 4 hour respawn seems very arbitrary and poorly thought out. I am sure whoever worked on this made up some spreadsheets, and did some moderately impressive math to arrive at these two values. What I do not think was taken into account was the impact on play style.
I have seen numerous comments on this thread, mostly from non industrial players, stating that miners can / should just move to the next ice system when the one they are in is depleted. When you are mining roids, every system has them so moving systems is less painful. There are also multiple belts in almost every system of EVE. Ice systems though tend to be many jumps apart and so moving is not a simple or straightforward idea. For the solo miner this is less of an issue, but on an organizational level it is a major hassle.
Everything related to mining / industry has been designed from the beginning of EVE to be slow, cumbersome, and extremely vulnerable. There is a massive amount of infrastructure, planning, and logistics that goes into any kind of non casual industry. For the player who mines once in a while to make a frigate, or just to do something different, these changes are going to have little impact. But for career industrial players, this is a change in mechanics that does not take into account the infrastructure and logistics involved in the CAREER PATH of mining / industry.
So what do I propose? My perspective here is that CCP is trying to remove GÇ£infiniteGÇ¥ resources, make people work harder for ice in particular, and remove some of the fire and forget aspects to ice mining. These are all fine. I do think however that the belts should have more units in them (10,000 - 20,000) or should respawn in a new location when the old one pops (at a minimum faster than 4 hours). My corp alone will frequently collectively mine 10,000 units in a normal week night session.
My pie in the sky solution would be what CCP floated a while back about removing all moon mining and static belts and replacing them with one massive system wide asteroid belt per system. Each belt would be comprised of ore, ice, and moon goo rocks seeded randomly amongst thousands upon thousands of "junk" roids like we have in missions and sleeper sites. This would turn mining into a real profession where you could prospect the belt to find what you wanted to mine. No more warp to 0 on the belt and zone out. Newer players with basic skills could scan out "easy" sites using ship scanners and more skilled pilots could use probes to find harder to find and more lucrative pockets of the belt. This would greatly reduce, if not eliminate the bot mining issues. Miners in harder to reach parts of the belt would require probes to find for gankers, etc. There is SOOO much you could do with this if it was the foundation for mining. "Prospecters / Surveyers" could scan out good mining sites for miners for a fee, etc. This would utilize multiple disciplines from across EVE. Mining could actually be somewhat .... fun....
If nothing else EASE into these changes. These are some pretty sizeable "first steps".
Thanks, Acks |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7734
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:13:00 -
[762] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing.
It's a welfare ISK fountain and you seem unaware that many of those running them in the very same fleets as you are nullseccers mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
Holderof Corp
Behind the Horizon
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:23:00 -
[763] - Quote
Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing. It's a welfare ISK fountain and you seem unaware that many of those running them in the very same fleets as you are nullseccers
I love that you continue to attempt to craft the narrative that highsec = welfare. It says everything that need saying about the attitude you have towards those who produce the materials you need to hold your space, and quite frankly coming from the Techniwhores it is laughable. If nullsec was oh so awesome, or if you had not blued most of nullsec and had a decent war (again Delve '10 springs to mind) maybe you wouldn't need to mindlessly post as you are.
And yes, you are well kelmad. |
Frying Doom
2457
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:24:00 -
[764] - Quote
Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing. It's a welfare ISK fountain and you seem unaware that many of those running them in the very same fleets as you are nullseccers Oh look it's the null sec is everywhere narrative now. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4844
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:53:00 -
[765] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing. It's a welfare ISK fountain and you seem unaware that many of those running them in the very same fleets as you are nullseccers Oh look it's the null sec is everywhere narrative now. So you're denying that what he says is true? Sorry to burst your bubble, but it most definitely is true. |
Felix Crusher
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:54:00 -
[766] - Quote
Fozzie, if you're going to force sov 0.0 miners to be exposed in anomalies instead of requiring probe use to locate, can you at least do something about people who sit cloaked in system all day?
You're right about it being about the risk vs reward ratio. While it may be worth it to mine in an ore anomaly when a system is usually clear of unfriendlies, it is very easy for a decent sized alliance to put a cloaked cyno/covert cyno equipped ship in every viable mining system of entire regions of enemy space. Anyone intending to mine in these regions either mines at an unknown risk/reward ratio since the cloaked camper may or may not be afk- there is usually no way to tell, or simply doesn't mine at all, as these players can't be cleared out beforehand unless they are moving between systems, or are already executing their hotdrop, at which point it's usually too late. |
Frying Doom
2458
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 04:59:00 -
[767] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Quality input from a Goon.
The fact remains that Incursions are universal content, the problem of course is that the organised pilots who run them are well aware of certain entities and have taken steps to ban them. U kelmad Goon?
Yet more proof of the mindless narrative that certain nullsec dwellers insist on perpetuating to justify their griefing. It's a welfare ISK fountain and you seem unaware that many of those running them in the very same fleets as you are nullseccers Oh look it's the null sec is everywhere narrative now. So you're denying that what he says is true? Sorry to burst your bubble, but it most definitely is true. There are now some 400,000 - 450,000 accounts in EvE.
Now there only seem to be 50-100,000 characters in Null Alliances. So even if we say 100,000 with 200,000 alts in Hi-sec. That is a small drop compared to the over 1,000,000 characters in Hi-sec.
At best you are 20% of Hi-sec, at best. more likely you are 10% or below. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Frying Doom
2458
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 05:00:00 -
[768] - Quote
Felix Crusher wrote:Fozzie, if you're going to force sov 0.0 miners to be exposed in anomalies instead of requiring probe use to locate, can you at least do something about people who sit cloaked in system all day?
You're right about it being about the risk vs reward ratio. While it may be worth it to mine in an ore anomaly when a system is usually clear of unfriendlies, it is very easy for a decent sized alliance to put a cloaked cyno/covert cyno equipped ship in every viable mining system of entire regions of enemy space. Anyone intending to mine in these regions either mines at an unknown risk/reward ratio since the cloaked camper may or may not be afk- there is usually no way to tell, or simply doesn't mine at all, as these players can't be cleared out beforehand unless they are moving between systems, or are already executing their hotdrop, at which point it's usually too late. You have a better risk vs reward than a WH miner, they dont even get a warning in local. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
224
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 06:07:00 -
[769] - Quote
Holderof Corp wrote:Skex Relbore wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread. Thank you for not surprising anyone with the direction you plan on taking to address the imbalance in null anomalies. I mean it is so comforting to see the normal process of saying "gee people like doing this one type of content and avoid all the others. Obviously the solution is to make forsaken hubs suck just as much as all the others" rather than simply adjusting the other anomalies to be more like hubs and perhaps encourage people to spend more time out ratting where maybe they might get blown up. Sarcasm aside it's amusing to see all the highsec tears about ice and the ranting about how much CCP is trying to push people to null in the very same thread where the intention of killing off the a major income source of null sec grunts is announced. Ah, but to use an overused rejoinder so popular with the null crowd, adapt or die. Adding in a few elite frigates does nothing but slow you down, so rather than 8 minutes it now takes you 9 to complete a FH. Removing ice to anom and reducing them to 23 mining hours with a 4 hour respawn is a tad bit more serious, both economically and to the foundation of POS ownership. Remember earlier in this thread currently 99% (ish) of ice products are produced in highsec, so please a small balance of an open isk tap is not really in the same league as the ice changes.
My point is that the changes aren't targeted at or against either group, I'm skeptical on the idea that the ice changes are going to disproportionately affect high sec compared to null anyway, Null and to a lesser extent low and W space are going to feel most of the financial pain brought on by these changes, we're the ones who are going to see the operating costs of our capitals and infrastructure explode. Currently it costs me roughly 20 mil to fuel my JF from our low sec staging system to our null home 1 way, that's 40 million to jump to empire and jump back. If these changes only result in a doubling of ice cost then that's 80 mil and there is a good chance that's a low estimate. Our capital fleets will become far more costly to operate hell even our jump bridge networks are going take a hit.
This combined with a significant hit on our ability to generate income and the adjustments to moon goo are going to put a huge squeeze on null sec, so pretending this is some sort of screw high sec buff null is so much nonsense.
I could of course post a long diatribe on why changing the anomalies is a bad idea but it would be a complete waste of my time to do so since any effort would be met with the same ole "Null bear blah blah blah" that is the counterpoint to any argument a high sec dweller will make regarding the ice changes.
Seriously this is not a null vs high sec thing, this is the usual CCP ******* around with game mechanics in a game they don't actually play or understand.
As to the whole adapt or die thing, Personally I hate that saying since it completely misrepresents the concept of evolution and implies that there is some sort of action an organism takes to adapt to an environment, which is not what natural selection is at all. In evolutionary terms organism do not "Adapt" to survive they mutate and if that mutation does not adversely affect procreation they survive, simple as that. There is no action on the part of the organism to adjust to their environment they are either "fit" to operate in it or they are not.
The difference if any between the attitude of null sec residents and high seccers is that most of us in null, rather than stamp our feet and cry in protest to said changes, we will find ways to operate and function in the new reality.
That doesn't change the fact that many of these changes are ill conceived and if history is any guide will be poorly executed nor does it prevent us from pointing out how they are flawed, we just won't be making empty threats about cancelling our subscriptions in protest. |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 06:48:00 -
[770] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. Why even bring up the Gallente in all this??
|
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4845
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 07:52:00 -
[771] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:There are now some 400,000 - 450,000 accounts in EvE.
Now there only seem to be 50-100,000 characters in Null Alliances. So even if we say 100,000 with 200,000 alts in Hi-sec. That is a small drop compared to the over 1,000,000 characters in Hi-sec.
At best you are 20% of Hi-sec, at best. more likely you are 10% or below. ...okay? That doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion. The point he was making is that there are a lot of nullsec players that have alts specifically for running highsec incursions because they're just that profitable. They're just as profitable as any PVE you can do in nullsec, at less risk. |
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
225
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 08:00:00 -
[772] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614? I advise using https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24359, it makes answering these kinds of questions much easier. In all seriousness however, I do expect that the increase in rewards will motivate people to use creativity and teamwork and overcome the extra challenge.
It was a rhetorical question Fozzie. I would like a buff to the allign time of all mining barges. I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4018
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 08:23:00 -
[773] - Quote
Andski wrote:Holderof Corp wrote:Fun fact, CCP have stated multiple times that they want to see highsec as a training ground and not as a permanent home.
True fact, Several highsec isk generating systems have been nerfed/downgraded over the oast 3 years. Lets start with Incursions, the only equivelent to isk generation that nullbears have as standard (hi there forsaken cashcows!!). Several "balances" have been made to them ALL being negative to isk generation.
Lets take missions and the deployment of sleeper esque AI. Great, slightly smarter rats that decide that drones, even when idle, are Adolf Hitlers lovechildren and must be executed regardless of the tactical situation. Thank you and goodnight anyone wishing to use drones, oh and the 2009 "balance" pass on missions that killed the reward system. Add in the inclusion of the mostly abused Faction Warfare LP giveaway that further drives certain popular mission corps LP value into the ground.
So excuse us highsec dwellers, we tend to look down on risk averse moon goo/OMFGForsaken Isk/RMT fueled windowlickers that think just because they are in null they are the pinnacle of the game. what did hiseccers do to earn and keep their ability to run incursions? absolutely nothing, get lost
They pay a sub, like (perhaps) you do.
While this does not entitle them to majestic and bright gameplay, CCP HAVE to deliver a minimum of fun / gameplay, a minimum amount of sand even to them.
Else, why pay?
If we had F2P like SWTor and others, then yes, those games really try to make those F2Pers uncomfortable enough to sub or at least buy the "a la carte" paid features (the so called "preferred F2P status").
But no, EvE indiscriminately charges everybody full fee and strongly "suggests" to have at least 2 subs to be somewhat competitive.
CCP can't have everything: AAA class subs, small new content patches (only 2 patches since 2003 could really be called "expansions"), 2+ subs per player AND also impose to a portion of those players an inferior experience, a "pariah" status, just because those players can't afford extensive game time or extensive networks of relations.
GREED IS GOOD is so 2011, remember that, before the playerbase fist-crushes CCP balls again.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Bubanni
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
679
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 08:38:00 -
[774] - Quote
Star Dragonsbane wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. I would like to respond back if I may. You have been telling us subscribers for a couple months now that you are making this change and that change benefiting null sec. No problem. You tell us your changing scanning, a huge game mechanic for some of us now useless not to mention obliterating the joy of working and then reaping from said challenge of probing for it in the first place. You just took a awesome part of mining and once again screwed it for us veteran miners that actually appreciated a little challenge in finding something worth while in high sec without going to null. Still no problem, stupid as it may be. Still think you guys did that because someone on your team was to lazy to probe but whatever. Then you release that video of the new change, where empires are crumbling and dying. Really and you want us to not think your planning to kill hi sec. What the hell, we aren't stupid and if this isn't your intention, fire that graphic designer you had come up with that video and issue a new one correcting the obvious condentation. Please stop being vague in coming soons, we don't need a carrot, what we want is straight forwardness and honest. Very simple things to ask yet never receive it seems. I like your work in the past and I hope for a promising future for eve, but if you want trust and admiration, please just tell us where you are planning to take eve so we don't waist each others time. Thanks Star
The crumbling eempires is because the capsulers are taking over... that implies us all... Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
Onslaughtor
True Slave Foundations Shaktipat Revelators
52
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 08:44:00 -
[775] - Quote
I would just like to ask. The dev blog didn't cover any of the lowsec ores, are there any plans to give them a buff too? |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 09:37:00 -
[776] - Quote
Hearing all the chatter form CCP about teamwork and ****: i just wonder how short-minded one can be to imagine that teamwork on protecting miners can be lucrative. Or to believe that someone will get big epic battles coming up to protect some Macks... Since cloak system is how it is. Since blop fleets go how those go. Where's the long term reward on mining ice in null? Another interesting question: a scanned belt is way smaller than a actual ice belt, would i say. How long do you guys think will pass since some smart hisec boyz will start to use smartbombs on miners, and make a second-jita-undock outta erry scanned belt? Do you guys think that the mining speed increase makes it up for this? Or is a decent reward for this? I think this is just the "because i say so" bullshit, i mean those changes. Nooen will go mine ice in lowsec. Noone will go mine ore in lowsec. You will not find more miners in null than they are now. Personally, for me the delice of the situation will reach the maximum when some bigmouth hisec players will find their market screwed. Because there will be tears. |
Garan Nardieu
Moira. Villore Accords
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 11:33:00 -
[777] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:I would just like to ask. The dev blog didn't cover any of the lowsec ores, are there any plans to give them a buff too?
You get Spodumain, Crokite, Dark Ochre and Gneiss in lowsec grav sites atm, so ye lowsec (grav) ores got a buff. However lowsec belt ores got no love, there is no word of potential spawns of other high ends (AB and, why not, Morph) and all of this combined with the fact that finding miners will be a trivial task means that even folks who used to venture into lowsec mining now and then will be dissuaded from it in future.
I would really like CCP to answer to following questions: - how in world they think that anyone will mine in lowsec now considering absolutely no area control mechanisms (sov/bubbles), new incentives to roaming (belt rats for tags) and general high activity of residents in terms of pvp combined with trivial scanning mechanism that's being implemented. Except for some very special cases (map geography which makes volume of traffic through certain systems very low) mining in lowsec is gonna become an Russian roulette exercise with very questionable profitability. - are there plans to change pos array refinement rates any time soon? |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
91
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 11:55:00 -
[778] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Could you please tell us whether you are going to address that rorq+ice compression issue mentioned here several times? If so, are you taking a look at it and fixing it?
|
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
116
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:09:00 -
[779] - Quote
Hey guys, I came up with this really awsome idea that should totally fix the ice problems. No need for blubbering and crying and screaming nerf or anything. I promise this will work. Grab your socks here it comes.....
Go and take the ice away from the other miners!
Holycrap mindblowing I know, but trust me, it will work! You can perform the following list of actions to secure your piece of the ice pie: Ganking. Bumping. Wardeccing. Awoxing. Corp theft. Scamming..you get my drift. Attempt to play this *multiplayer* game we call EVE.
I promise, it's really not hard. 8 hours to roll up a suicide gank catalyst. takes 2-3 to take down an all-gank-no-tank barge. There may even be a website dedicated to doing it, along with many people more than willing to share their know-how on proper techniques.
You might even form a group with others who are seeking the same ends...we'll call it a "corporation". This "corporation" could work with other "corporations" to organize optimal time zone coverages and logistics. We'll call it an "alliance". Maybe a few of the "alliances" could get together and work to a common goal...lets call it a "coalition". Now, if this "coalition" is able to corner the highsec ice market, we could call it a "cartel". I think it's been done before in EVE!
Seriously, miners, you've just been handed an opportunity on par with the Tech bottleneck. You know where the anoms will spawn, when they will spawn, and it's a depleting resource an organized group can hold. You might have to fight to pull it off, that's normal EVE gameplay.
Go for it. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:27:00 -
[780] - Quote
deleted see below |
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:28:00 -
[781] - Quote
OK I think I got it to actually show the post too now.
Skex Relbore wrote:
The difference if any between the attitude of null sec residents and high seccers is that most of us in null, rather than stamp our feet and cry in protest to said changes, we will find ways to operate and function in the new reality.
That doesn't change the fact that many of these changes are ill conceived and if history is any guide will be poorly executed nor does it prevent us from pointing out how they are flawed, we just won't be making empty threats about cancelling our subscriptions in protest.
Right up to this point.. You had a very good post.. However, this is where the prevalent false ego of null sec dwellers comes out. For some strange reason, a lot of Null seccers have this false belief that they are somehow better than those living in HS. If that was the case, then why is it, that even thousand man alliances get locked out of HS when decced with <10 man corps. Why does nullsec leadership loose their **** when a JF (or 4) gets lost to a war target in HS and instead of fighting, they give the direction to stay out? Simple, because the other side is playing on their terms, and when the engagement is not in their favour, they blue ball you. Just like null does to each other all the time. HS players will adapt and overcome any changes thrown their way, just as NullL does. Sure, SOME players in null are better than SOME players in HS. but the same can be said about every aspect of the game. There's just as many idiots and noobs playing in nullsec/HS/LS/WH this ego trip that we're better cause we're in nulll is just plain stupid.
So instead of trying to point out why YOUR space is better than the other guys, why don't we look at the changes and discuss how that AFFECTS the area you live, and what the repercussions of that to the rest of the game are. And leave all this BS crap about I'm better because I live in Null out of this thread. |
Deathwing Reborn
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:46:00 -
[782] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:OK I think I got it to actually show the post too now. Skex Relbore wrote:
The difference if any between the attitude of null sec residents and high seccers is that most of us in null, rather than stamp our feet and cry in protest to said changes, we will find ways to operate and function in the new reality.
That doesn't change the fact that many of these changes are ill conceived and if history is any guide will be poorly executed nor does it prevent us from pointing out how they are flawed, we just won't be making empty threats about cancelling our subscriptions in protest.
Right up to this point.. You had a very good post.. However, this is where the prevalent false ego of null sec dwellers comes out. For some strange reason, a lot of Null seccers have this false belief that they are somehow better than those living in HS. If that was the case, then why is it, that even thousand man alliances get locked out of HS when decced with <10 man corps. Why does nullsec leadership loose their **** when a JF (or 4) gets lost to a war target in HS and instead of fighting, they give the direction to stay out? Simple, because the other side is playing on their terms, and when the engagement is not in their favour, they blue ball you. Just like null does to each other all the time. HS players will adapt and overcome any changes thrown their way, just as NullL does. Sure, SOME players in null are better than SOME players in HS. but the same can be said about every aspect of the game. There's just as many idiots and noobs playing in nullsec/HS/LS/WH this ego trip that we're better cause we're in nulll is just plain stupid. So instead of trying to point out why YOUR space is better than the other guys, why don't we look at the changes and discuss how that AFFECTS the area you live, and what the repercussions of that to the rest of the game are. And leave all this BS crap about I'm better because I live in Null out of this thread.
Unless your in an alliance that has its Sov borders along low sec a Null sec convoy normally has to jump 2-5 jump freightor jumps away to get to a low sec staging system. That is capital jumps. To get a fleet to protect the convoy beyond carriers jumping along with the JF can take up to 50 stargate jumps to get to the same staging system or a jump clone to high sec. Many times these stargate jumps could be through hostile alliance Sov space with gate camps which slow down the progress to the staging system.
It is just easier to not give easy kills to people that prey solely on ships that you can not even put modules on. And besides if we did come up to low sec to fight you all you would do is Blueball us and drop the wardec until we went back into our Null Sov and you could attack defensless ships again. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
785
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:49:00 -
[783] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:If that was the case, then why is it, that even thousand man alliances get locked out of HS when decced with <10 man corps. Why does nullsec leadership loose their **** when a JF (or 4) gets lost to a war target in HS and instead of fighting, they give the direction to stay out?
because you just made that up
(or rzr have fallen far further than we thought(which was already pretty low))
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:51:00 -
[784] - Quote
Deathwing Reborn wrote:And I would respond to you with you really don't understand what it takes to live in Nullsec.
Unless your in an alliance that has its Sov borders along low sec a Null sec convoy normally has to jump 2-5 jump freightor jumps away to get to a low sec staging system. That is capital jumps. To get a fleet to protect the convoy beyond carriers jumping along with the JF can take up to 50 stargate jumps to get to the same staging system or a jump clone to high sec. Many times these stargate jumps could be through hostile alliance Sov space with gate camps which slow down the progress to the staging system.
It is just easier to not give easy kills to people that prey solely on ships that you can not even put modules on. And besides if we did come up to low sec to fight you all you would do is Blueball us and drop the wardec until we went back into our Null Sov and you could attack defensless ships again.
To which I say you're missing the whole point of the post. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 13:53:00 -
[785] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:If that was the case, then why is it, that even thousand man alliances get locked out of HS when decced with <10 man corps. Why does nullsec leadership loose their **** when a JF (or 4) gets lost to a war target in HS and instead of fighting, they give the direction to stay out? because you just made that up (or rzr have fallen far further than we thought(which was already pretty low))
Sure.. whatever makes you sleep at night. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9067
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:04:00 -
[786] - Quote
Oh look it's the old "we have to give the high sec solo ISK grinders whatever they want or CCP will instantly go bankrupt" argument.
Surely with all the countless nerfs hi-sec has suffered since 2007, all those people have left long ago?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4018
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:31:00 -
[787] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Oh look it's the old "we have to give the high sec solo ISK grinders whatever they want or CCP will instantly go bankrupt" argument.
Surely with all the countless nerfs hi-sec has suffered since 2007, all those people have left long ago?
Whatever they want? Since they keep getting slowly bleeded away features and / or ISK sources I wouls not call "getting whatever they want".
It's a battle to slow down the slow but sure reduction to zero of people that in the end pay AS GOOD as you do.
I don't give a sh!t if you feel entitled to the whole universe just because you can summon 500 other drones, everybody pays $15 and ARE entitled to a portion of the game.
You are acting like an elite "I can farm more than you so I am better than you" PvE raider like the other null puppets, never believed you could fall down so hard.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
640
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:40:00 -
[788] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: They pay a sub, like (perhaps) you do.
paying a subscription fee doesn't entitle you to success, it entitles you to the exact same thing it entitles anyone else: the ability to log in and create your own success |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
786
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:41:00 -
[789] - Quote
What features have casual players lost?
Casual players deserve equal gameplay, operating under the assumption that CCP wants to continue marketing Eve as a game which should appeal to casual players, but they don't deserve equal rewards. I don't see how hisec gameplay has been anything but boosted with things like crimewatch, the attempt (at least) at fixing wardecs, the anti-ganking buff, etc.
All you can cry about is raw income, not gameplay. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
640
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:42:00 -
[790] - Quote
beyond that they are entitled to absolutely nothing |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9068
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:43:00 -
[791] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Malcanis wrote:Oh look it's the old "we have to give the high sec solo ISK grinders whatever they want or CCP will instantly go bankrupt" argument.
Surely with all the countless nerfs hi-sec has suffered since 2007, all those people have left long ago? Whatever they want? Since they keep getting slowly bleeded away features and / or ISK sources I wouls not call "getting whatever they want"...
Ah yes, a contribution from the guy who claims that tripling the rate at which hi-sec belts spawn was a "nerf"
Now that nullsec is getting a few of these "nerfs" you're getting all bent out of shape.
No, please, do defend privilege some more. It amuses me. Can I hear the one about how making all agents +20 quality was "bleeding away features" again?
Oh sorry, I just had to pay some sov bills, what was it you were saying about bleeding, I missed it?
I promise to listen this time.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
787
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 14:48:00 -
[792] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:paying a subscription fee doesn't entitle you to success, it entitles you to the exact same thing it entitles anyone else: the ability to log in and create your own success
Exactly. If people want to complain about fun stuff to DO for casual players, then scream bloody murder. I'd actually tend to agree with respect to all areas of space, not just hisec. I think time spent developing quick, cooperative and competitive gameplay that doesn't feel too "instancey" would be a huge boon for all areas of space and the game as a whole.
However, crying about people who put in less time and less effort getting less raw in-game rewards, not the actual gameplay involved, is a dead-end. CCP are balancing risk-reward to keep the game healthy as a whole. If the entitlement crowd, who feel they should get as much as people who play more, risk more, play harder, play smarter, and so on, think they can turn back that development path now, they're in for a lot more ineffective foot-stamping and breath-holding over the next year or two.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9069
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:06:00 -
[793] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote: CCP are balancing risk-reward to keep the game healthy as a whole.
Exactly. This shameless nonsense about "bleeding away features" is frankly childish. Every single activity that you can do in hi-sec now, you'll be able to do in hi-sec on June 5th. Some of them will have an extended effort:reward spectrum, that's all.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7734
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:19:00 -
[794] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Andski wrote:what did hiseccers do to earn and keep their ability to run incursions?
absolutely nothing, get lost They pay a sub, like (perhaps) you do.
This is a dumb argument and you should feel bad. Such high income levels were previously not feasible outside of sanctums which spawned only in low truesec 0.0 systems, which have been targets for roaming gangs for years, at least until CCP decided that hisec should have that same opportunity, only without the need to defend it, without the need to hide from those looking to disrupt your income, without the need to settle in a system in the first place - all provided for free in the safety and comfort of hisec, taking on an "invading force" that somehow coexists with CONCORD responding just as fast as always.
Incursions were the dumbest thing CCP has introduced since T3s. Putting them in the safest space was even dumber - if they had been exclusive to lowsec, nobody would be complaining about lowsec being a ghost town. I mean goddamn, they're still more lucrative than most stuff you can do in nullsec short of blitzing forsaken hubs in a Vindicator - oh wait, CCP is also nerfing that because they want more people in highsec. mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7734
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:24:00 -
[795] - Quote
My question for Fozzie is when are you actually making small changes to hisec incursions to "help keep the risk involved with this activity where it should be?" Because well there's literally no "risk" to it whatsoever mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:24:00 -
[796] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:paying a subscription fee doesn't entitle you to success, it entitles you to the exact same thing it entitles anyone else: the ability to log in and create your own success Exactly. If people want to complain about fun stuff to DO for casual players, then scream bloody murder. I'd actually tend to agree with respect to all areas of space, not just hisec. I think time spent developing quick, cooperative and competitive gameplay that doesn't feel too "instancey" would be a huge boon for all areas of space and the game as a whole. However, crying about people who put in less time and less effort getting less raw in-game rewards, not the actual gameplay involved, is a dead-end. CCP are balancing risk-reward to keep the game healthy as a whole. If the entitlement crowd, who feel they should get as much as people who play more, risk more, play harder, play smarter, and so on, think they can turn back that development path now, they're in for a lot more ineffective foot-stamping and breath-holding over the next year or two.
Well Said |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 15:32:00 -
[797] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Varius Xeral wrote: CCP are balancing risk-reward to keep the game healthy as a whole.
Exactly. This shameless nonsense about "bleeding away features" is frankly childish. Every single activity that you can do in hi-sec now, you'll be able to do in hi-sec on June 5th. Some of them will have an extended effort:reward spectrum, that's all.
High Sec grav sites will be replaced with anomalies. You will no longer be able to use scanning skill and planning in this area to gain an edge on your industrial compatriots. The activity of scanning for ore has been completely removed.
Malcanis wrote:Can I hear the one about how making all agents +20 quality was "bleeding away features" again?
Feature - A prominent part or characteristic
All agents had their access quality set to -20 and their payout quality set to +20 in the Incursion "expansion (Nov 2010)." This removed a characteristic of the missioning system where you had to account for the quality of each specific agent. Payouts still depend on security status of the system. Incursion had a number of other changes to missioning and other activities.
I would take it that bleeding away features, means removing a characteristic. The characteristic of quality was removed as a factor thus bleeding away a feature.
Neither of these corrections requires a view that high sec is being unfairly treated, or that the reward to risk balance is inappropriate. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
587
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:07:00 -
[798] - Quote
I love almost all of these changes.
The adjusting of the ore compositions is almost identical to the idea I have been pushing for months. I am not arrogant enough to think that it was my idea that was implemented, but at least I can say, great minds think alike.
Changing ICE feilds so that they deplete was definitely a move in the right direction. I don't think they needed to be reduced quite so far, this may cause a major rise in ICE prices which although good for generating competion between miners, could reslut in the core activities in EVE revolving around POSes to be hurt. Many POS activities are only borderline profitable now, if ICE doubles or triples in price these activities will no longer be profitable.
As far as making ICE fields anomalies rather than static belts, I really don't see any benefit or harm from that change. A short click on the system scanner to get a warp point rather than just clicking on the static belt will really not deter anyone even the botters will have this solved before it even goes live. It is not hard to code the bot program to scan for the belt before warping to it. I would not be surprised if there are already null sec mining bot programs out there that already have this function. Not that I in anyway support botting, but making game mechanics to fight botters that end up affecting actual players more than the bots just seems a waste of time to me.
My only major concern is moving hidden belts/grav sites to anomalies. What were you thinking?? What made these hidden belts safe enough to mine in was the fact that the gankers had to scan you down before they could attack you. This required a probe launcher. Most null sec roamers do not equip a probe launcher. So you were safe from most null sec roamers. But with this change any ship can use on board scanners to find these hidden belts, i.e. They do not need any extra equipment to find you. Any ship in system, even a noob frigate, can find the belt in a couple seconds.
These belts are now not any safer that the static belts are. Not only can anyone looking for a kill jump you without any extra equipment needed to find you, they can do it without warning. The old mechanics not only reduced the number of threats to those with probe launchers, but if you watched D-scan you would see the probes alerting you to incoming threats in time to warp out giving you a chance even against those with a probe launcher. With these new mechanics not only will anyone be able to find you without need of a probe launcher, but you will not know they are coming until you see the ship on d-scan. Mining ships do not warp fast enough to get away once the ship appears on d-scan. This is a massive nerf to hidden belts.
The ore composition changes were a great buff to hidden belts, and null sec mining in general, but this change making hidden belts anomalies that can be found with the on board scanner not only cancel out that buff, but leaves null sec mining in a far worse place than before. Not only will this not help null sec industry, but it will break what little utility it already had.
In the CSM minute you say you want to bring more activity to null sec. most of these changes will help do that. But this scanning change nullifies all that work. Miners are already at significant risk of being ganked, especially in null sec where asteroid belts are little more than a shooting range for ratters. Making hidden belts so easy to find drastically increases the risk to characters mining in those belts. Regardless of how much more isk per hour a miner can make, if the risk is to high they will not bother. Who mines in low sec? Nobody, because it is to risky, Even when the low sec ores Hedbergite and Hemorphite were the most valuable ores, still nobody went to low sec to mine them, why? because the risk was to high.
The balance is very tight for miners. It is not just a risk vs reward. It is an issue where if the risk of getting ganked is to high the activity will not be done, regardless of how rewarding it may be. An ORE worth potentially 200 Million isk per hour to mine is not worth mining if you are guaranteed to get ganked before you can haul it home. Like wise being able to make even double the isk/hr in null sec that you make in high sec is not worth the risk if null sec mining is so risky you can expect to spend half your time hiding in a POS or Station.
The risk factor of null sec mining was about where it should be with the hidden belts needing to be scanned down, and the miners needing to be scanned down before they can be ganked. Mining in null sec is a high risk activity,even deep inside alliance controlled space. You are defenseless against other players. No other player is going to sit in a system doing nothing just in case somebody shows up to gank your mining fleet. It just will not happen. Nobody in null sec cares about miners, and PVP pilots want to PVP not babysit miners.The only protection they have is being hard to find, and this change will remove that protection. You expect the alliances to step up and protect their miners. That will not happen. it will just be one more reason for null sec alliances to not want miners in there systems. PVP players have zero respect for carebears or nullbears, they will not spend the game time they paid for protecting them. Forcing them to do so will hurt player retention. Leave the hidden belts hidden. If they are not a PITA to find, they are not safe enough to mine in. Even in high sec miners get ganked regularly. The ganker lose their ships, yet they still gank miners. In null sec the risk nothing, so they lose nothing from the gank. Making miners as easy to find as if they were in the static belts will deter many potential null sec miners for even trying it. If you make them easy to find the miners in them will be easy to gank. An easy to gank miner in null sec will not make enough isk to keep mining. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
587
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:28:00 -
[799] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: You have a better risk vs reward than a WH miner, they dont even get a warning in local.
I take it you have no clue what risk vs reward is.
WHers do have higher risk. no argument there. But the rewards are much higher. It is easy for a WHers to make 500M/hr.
If I was making 500M/hr like WHers do the added risk would be offset by the reward.
when talking about WH life you can not compare it to null sec mining. In a worm hole you do what ever sites are available, some times they are grav sites, but WH mining is not a career, just one of many activities you do to max your income.
A WHer does have higher risk than a null secer, but also has much higher rewards. Null sec miners do not have those high rewards to off set the higher risk.
Also I ask any WH miners out there. Will anyone continue to mine in W-space if the grav sites are changed to anomalies that do not need probes to scan down? Not that every invading ship in W-Space does not already have a probe launcher, but at least the probes showing on D-scan gives you some warning. With this change you will not know there is even anyone there until they show up on grid, then it is to late. Seems to me like this change will hit W-space miners even more than null sec miners.
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
587
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 16:55:00 -
[800] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Desert Ice78 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. CCP Foozie, could you answer the question I posed to you on page 31, post #614? I advise using https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24359, it makes answering these kinds of questions much easier. In all seriousness however, I do expect that the increase in rewards will motivate people to use creativity and teamwork and overcome the extra challenge. OK , Now I am really confused.
This change will require null sec alliances to actively protect their miners. I assume this is the team work you refer to.
The problem is most null sec alliances do not give a dam about nullbear miners. Many do not even allow null bears in there alliance. At best they allow industrial alliances to rent space from them, but they certainly do not protect them. Only PVP pilots that occasionally do industry are allowed in most PVP alliances, and they get zero support for their industrial nullbear activities. This will not change.
There is not a PVPer in this game that will spend the game time they paid for, sitting in a system doing nothing, just in case a gank fleet shows up to kill some nullbear miners. They could not care less what happens to those nullbears. If PVPers wanted game play that boring they would be mining themselves. PVPers do not have any respect for miners, and will not spend there time protecting them, unless they are guaranteed a good fight, which generally means not showing up until after the miners are attacked and are basically dead already.
This emergent game play of Alliance PVP players protecting their nullbear industrial players, game play that would be required for this game change to work, does not exist, and it never will. This is an example of trying to force players to change how they play. Players who play EVE for the combat or PVP will not spend their time doing an activity they do not enjoy. It is not enjoyable for a bunch of PVPers to sit in a system as a support fleet for a bunch of useless miners. This is how the majority of PVPers think. That will not change. This emergent game play of PVPers and miners working as a team to accomplish nullbear activities just will not happen. What you will end up with is a group of miners that can not do their thing without support from the PVPers. And a group of PVPers that will not want to give up there normal activities to go support a mining op.
The PVPers do not need the miners, at least not from the PVPers perspective. But the Miners will need the PVPers for this to work. If this results in a shortage of null sec minerals, and no ships for the PVPers to buy, then it will only hurt the game as a whole. Most PVPers will not go help the miners to prevent this, they will just look for another game where they can PVP without being forced to stop PVPing to spend there time helping the carebears they have come to hate so much. Just as you can not force a high sec carebear into null sec, you can not force a null sec PVPer to participate in Carebear activities. Most PVPers hate Carebears, this is a fact of MMO gaming, and will never change.
If this change goes live it will break what little null sec industry we have, not make it better. All the other changes are great, but this one seeming little thing could do more damage that any other new feature has done in a long long time. |
|
Frank Madox
Stammper Oil Swift Angels Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 17:37:00 -
[801] - Quote
What primarily worries be about these coming changes is the shift of grav sites to anomalies. Especially the effect that this will have on W-space miners that belong to small corps living in the lower class (c1-c4) wormholes.
While larger corps and alliances operating in their respective corners of w-space can field a larger number of scouts, sentries and defense ships, it's primarily the smaller groups that struggle to get more that 3-5 players online at one time will have trouble.
As previous posters have mentioned, lower class wormholes can only really support a limited number of players before groups run of thing to do. So most of the time any site that spawns in system (assuming that the wormhole you are in does not have another w-space to w-space static or otherwise) is a welcomed addition. Grav sites included.
While certainly there are higher rewards to to mining and other WH activities, keeping yourself and other safe in w-space is a slightly different kettle of fish. The lack of a Local channel to provide intel can be a problem, but this can usually be softened by having good communications and practicing constant vigilance. However, I feel that the shift from grav site to anom might tip the scales a bit more in the 'Risk' direction.
A good scanner that has breached a system can probe down a mining barge and only have the combat probes visible on scan for 30 seconds or less. Assuming that the miner(s) are watching Dscan like a hawk, this at least provides them with a small window to warp to safety and possibly prepare for combat. What these new changes do however, is to narrow the detection window down to a VERY small instance for the miners to catch a cloaky on scan as they break wh cloak and activate their own cloaks. Once the ship cloaks up, running the ship's scanner and getting a warp-in for others shouldn't be too hard.
Other posters have previously mentioned several ways of keeping yourself safe and getting out should things go pear shaped, but this is also influenced by how many pilots a group can field at one time.
And while I certainly believe that if you get blown up in w-space it's either a) your own fault, or b) it just wasn't your day. I feel that those (again I am really talking about small groups here) that are actually taking proper measures against being turned into space dust should at least be left with some means of defense, even if it is just having enough time to scoot away if someone catches a probe on scan.
And I think some of this could be a applied with concerns about mining in lowsec with the introduction of these new grav sites.
Frankly, I don't care if I get blown up while mining alone in w-space, I just want to go around feeling like I'm sitting on a silver platter.
End of rant. apologies for tldr.
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 17:41:00 -
[802] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: You have a better risk vs reward than a WH miner, they dont even get a warning in local.
I take it you have no clue what risk vs reward is. WHers do have higher risk. no argument there. But the rewards are much higher. It is easy for a WHers to make 500M/hr. If I was making 500M/hr like WHers do the added risk would be offset by the reward. when talking about WH life you can not compare it to null sec mining. In a worm hole you do what ever sites are available, some times they are grav sites, but WH mining is not a career, just one of many activities you do to max your income. A WHer does have higher risk than a null secer, but also has much higher rewards. Null sec miners do not have those high rewards to off set the higher risk. Also I ask any WH miners out there. Will anyone continue to mine in W-space if the grav sites are changed to anomalies that do not need probes to scan down? Not that every invading ship in W-Space does not already have a probe launcher, but at least the probes showing on D-scan gives you some warning. With this change you will not know there is even anyone there until they show up on grid, then it is to late. Seems to me like this change will hit W-space miners even more than null sec miners.
You are assuming that running sites in a WH is guaranteed income. Unlike the null sec sites WH sites do not respawn. In fact you can have days with no more than 1-2 combat sites to run. Which will not translate to your 500m/h unless you only count the time you ran the site. Signatures are the same as everywhere else a crap shoot so I did leave those out. But anoms are very random and are not a steady income. What bigger corps do is raid the neighboring whs which is open to anyone to do so you can't really count that into the reward risk ratio either. |
Dmitri Ronuken
ReStore of Reset
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 18:21:00 -
[803] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
The balance is very tight for miners. It is not just a risk vs reward. It is an issue where if the risk of getting ganked is to high the activity will not be done, regardless of how rewarding it may be. An ORE worth potentially 200 Million isk per hour to mine is not worth mining if you are guaranteed to get ganked before you can haul it home. Like wise being able to make even double the isk/hr in null sec that you make in high sec is not worth the risk if null sec mining is so risky you can expect to spend half your time hiding in a POS or Station.
Yes, for me it isn't about risk vs reward. It's about doing something enjoyable, with people rather than against them. In Highsec, gravimetric anomalies were an enjoyable catalyst to getting a mining op with others going. It's something special, hard to find, and if you found one first, kind of a race to mine as much as possible before someone else found it, too. Now, ore in highsec has been effectively limited to easily found regular belts where nothing is special unless you play right after downtime and mining is a literal chore one does for ISK or materials, and nothing else. And the only "fun" left in mining in low/null sec is playing PvP in a mining barge or venture. None of that is fun for me. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
588
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 18:52:00 -
[804] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:
You are assuming that running sites in a WH is guaranteed income. Unlike the null sec sites WH sites do not respawn. In fact you can have days with no more than 1-2 combat sites to run. Which will not translate to your 500m/h unless you only count the time you ran the site. Signatures are the same as everywhere else a crap shoot so I did leave those out. But anoms are very random and are not a steady income. What bigger corps do is raid the neighboring whs which is open to anyone to do so you can't really count that into the reward risk ratio either.
I assume nothing. if you choose to stay in a hole after it had dried up, that is your choice.
It is a well known fact that a WHer can make far more isk than any other profession in the game. And that is as it should be, considering W-space also has the highest risk. 500M/hr is an accepted baseline with the WHers I know. I know WHers that claim to make far more than 500m/hr, but that is irrelevant to my point.
My post was about the damage changing grav sites over to anomalies will do, not about how much isk a WHer makes.
Mining in W-space after this change will make grav sites the highest risk, lowest reward of all W-Space activities. If you are mining in an anomaly you will have zero warning of a coming attacker unless you managed to catch them at the hole on there way in. A cloaky ship in your hole will be able to find the belt you are in, using the basic ship scanner and warp right to the site, while cloaked, no probes on D-scan, no ship on D-scan, as they are cloaked. Zero warning. D-scan will be useless.
Any ship capable of using a cov-ops cloak will be able to land on grid and tackle your mining ship before that mining ship can even think about warping off. In fact any cloaky ship will land on grid cloaked and not decloak until they are within tackle range. You will have zero chance of escaping any cloaky ship. You will not know they are there until they decloak and tackle you. Cloaked ships do not show up on D-scan only there probes do. Since they will no longer need probes to find the site you are mining in you will have no security. If you mine in W-space you will be a sitting duck for anyone that can get into your hole undetected.
Considering the most common roaming ship in W-space is a cloaky T3, this will be the most common scenario. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 19:17:00 -
[805] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: Mining in W-space after this change will make grav sites the highest risk, lowest reward of all W-Space activities. If you are mining in an anomaly you will have zero warning of a coming attacker unless you managed to catch them at the hole on there way in. A cloaky ship in your hole will be able to find the belt you are in, using the basic ship scanner and warp right to the site, while cloaked, no probes on D-scan, no ship on D-scan, as they are cloaked. Zero warning. D-scan will be useless.
Any ship capable of using a cov-ops cloak will be able to land on grid and tackle your mining ship before that mining ship can even think about warping off. In fact any cloaky ship will land on grid cloaked and not decloak until they are within tackle range. You will have zero chance of escaping any cloaky ship. You will not know they are there until they decloak and tackle you. Cloaked ships do not show up on D-scan only there probes do. Since they will no longer need probes to find the site you are mining in you will have no security. If you mine in W-space you will be a sitting duck for anyone that can get into your hole undetected.
Considering the most common roaming ship in W-space is a cloaky T3, this will be the most common scenario.
You get no arguments from me on this account.. I said as much like 20 pages ago. Yet CCP has failed to reply to why they feel the need to change it in Wspace as well.
Your last point there.. The reason T3s are the most common, is because due to mass limits, it's the most bang for your hull size. A game mechanic CCP will address in the future I'm sure. (and probably in the form of nerfing them.. but that's a WHOLE different topic) |
Frank Madox
Stammper Oil Swift Angels Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 20:04:00 -
[806] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
My post was about the damage changing grav sites over to anomalies will do, not about how much isk a WHer makes.
Mining in W-space after this change will make grav sites the highest risk, lowest reward of all W-Space activities. If you are mining in an anomaly you will have zero warning of a coming attacker unless you managed to catch them at the hole on there way in. A cloaky ship in your hole will be able to find the belt you are in, using the basic ship scanner and warp right to the site, while cloaked, no probes on D-scan, no ship on D-scan, as they are cloaked. Zero warning. D-scan will be useless.
Any ship capable of using a cov-ops cloak will be able to land on grid and tackle your mining ship before that mining ship can even think about warping off. In fact any cloaky ship will land on grid cloaked and not decloak until they are within tackle range. You will have zero chance of escaping any cloaky ship. You will not know they are there until they decloak and tackle you. Cloaked ships do not show up on D-scan only there probes do. Since they will no longer need probes to find the site you are mining in you will have no security. If you mine in W-space you will be a sitting duck for anyone that can get into your hole undetected.
Considering the most common roaming ship in W-space is a cloaky T3, this will be the most common scenario.
This is precisely what worries me.
Call me old fashioned, but I believe that (and others will without a doubt disagree with me) if you as a small group or as a solo miner (with maybe an alt or two) are taking the proper precautions when mining in w-space, whoever wants your pod should at least put a little effort into it.
Also, where's the fun in ganking miners (we have hisec suiganks for that) when you can hunt them down the probes, creep up to their barges, uncloak right off their bow and scram the sucker while the gunboats warp in.
And they never knew you were there to begin with.
Now I am no PvP war machine -I mostly get blown up- so I really don't have any say in the matter, but personally, I would at least want to work for my kills and, if on the receiving end, know that I am hopefully giving my pursuer more trouble than my sorry ass is worth.
Anywho! mining and industry in HS/LS/NS/WH has its own little quirks and what might work for one security region might not be the best option for the others. So please CCP, see how these coming solutions/features affect the different parts of space before applying across-the-board changes.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 23:46:00 -
[807] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: They pay a sub, like (perhaps) you do.
paying a subscription fee doesn't entitle you to success, it entitles you to the exact same thing it entitles anyone else: the ability to log in and create your own success
Then, "your own success" should not be a "boxed edition" tied to where one lives.
It's a sandbox? Then it should be "flat" and give everyone as many chances as everyone else.
Example: I mostly trade. Does not matter what and how or how much SP I got, I can earn a lot both by trading with an old or a new character, both with a character in a 10k alliance or a one man corp.
That's "ability to create my own success", not a WoW-esque predictably canned sequence high => low (lol) => null sec / WH.
Look at most other MMOs, they already understand how playing "solo" or "casual" EQUALS to achieve gimped results, those games don't go further and impose additional artificial restrictions, because just the fact of being (forced by RL or whatever) a loner means you will never achieve as much as somebody with an organization.
EvE will never take off it's quite puny 40-50k people online (at prime time) until it'll apply those drastic cuts in perspective new players who don't stay because it's punitive not to be a dedicated player.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 23:50:00 -
[808] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Varius Xeral wrote: CCP are balancing risk-reward to keep the game healthy as a whole.
Exactly. This shameless nonsense about "bleeding away features" is frankly childish. Every single activity that you can do in hi-sec now, you'll be able to do in hi-sec on June 5th. Some of them will have an extended effort:reward spectrum, that's all.
No, it's different. It's not a nerf, it's about making some activities impossible at all, unless you are lucky to be able to log in into the small window before a belt is emptied. Or you have to move a number of slow (and low PG, requiring 2 jumps per system) for 6+ jumps *in hope* the new place is not emptied as well or not emptied by the time your ships arrive there. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 23:58:00 -
[809] - Quote
Andski wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Andski wrote:what did hiseccers do to earn and keep their ability to run incursions?
absolutely nothing, get lost They pay a sub, like (perhaps) you do. This is a dumb argument and you should feel bad. Such high income levels were previously not feasible outside of sanctums which spawned only in low truesec 0.0 systems, which have been targets for roaming gangs for years, at least until CCP decided that hisec should have that same opportunity, only without the need to defend it, without the need to hide from those looking to disrupt your income, without the need to settle in a system in the first place - all provided for free in the safety and comfort of hisec, taking on an "invading force" that somehow coexists with CONCORD responding just as fast as always. Incursions were the dumbest thing CCP has introduced since T3s. Putting them in the safest space was even dumber - if they had been exclusive to lowsec, nobody would be complaining about lowsec being a ghost town. I mean goddamn, they're still more lucrative than most stuff you can do in nullsec short of blitzing forsaken hubs in a Vindicator - oh wait, CCP is also nerfing that because they want more people in highsec.
"Earn" in my country means something you have given or given up something for.
People DO pay a class AAA sub for EvE, should they just pay for the honor of posting on (a subset of) the forums and everything else is to pay again separately?
You did NOT mention the amount of income of incursions but having incursions per se at all. Go look the threads back at the time and I was in first line in those demanding nerf of them, and nerf of L4 before that, figures! Just go check yourself and see.
So, ok to nerf incursion but your talk of "what did they earn" is wrong. They earned incursions because they pay for content, believe it or not. It's obvious (not to CCP at the time, of course, but they are not new to these screwups) that they'd have to have less income, but their very existance in hi sec was legit and DUE.
Otherwise, I am starting to thing the EvE playerbase are really a bunch of easily pleased muppets, who pay 2-3 subs for little content and some terribad "improvements" like pizza targeting or treeview inventory that took months just to be usable.
If you settle for getting a puny "instance" sold to you like the holy new Geezus that just an elite is entitled to ever see, then be it, I have a Trevi fountain for sale too, maybe you may want it. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
352
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 00:29:00 -
[810] - Quote
What about the ships that move these "shaken up" resources around?
I seem to recall that we were promised a long, long overdue rebalancing pass on the T1 industrials, but nary a word has been heard since. |
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
247
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 00:54:00 -
[811] - Quote
It's good to see that goonswarm is already getting a leg up on potential greifing, they're back attacking ice belts with high sec suicides. Gee, I wonder what they'll do when it's much easier to do?
That said, I find CCP declaring that they're not trying ot herd people out of high sec, they're just making high sec harder to make profitable so that people will go to low and null.
Doublespeak much?
I hate to point this out to those blindly worshiping mittens and/or accepting everything that CCP says as the truth, but as someone who's been around here long enough to know that CCP does not always think things through and tends to bend the truth just a tad when it suits them, I have to point out that, like everyone else who's done high sec scan sites will tell you, it's a god damn foot race when they appear and considering it talked on average 60-70 units of ice to power one small POS for one month, 2500 units is not a whole hell of a lot.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 00:59:00 -
[812] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:they're just making high sec harder to make profitable so that people will go to low and null.
They never said they're doing that.
|
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:05:00 -
[813] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) yea you probly dont sence you have local how about they take local from null thats a good idea
i think ever wh corp and members should put up a post to take local from null yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
247
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:10:00 -
[814] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:they're just making high sec harder to make profitable so that people will go to low and null. They never said they're doing that.
Funny, they've been saying it for years.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:12:00 -
[815] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Funny, they've been saying it for years.
Show us one time they've said they're adjusting income to move more people out of hisec.
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:19:00 -
[816] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Hey guys, I came up with this really awsome idea that should totally fix the ice problems. No need for blubbering and crying and screaming nerf or anything. I promise this will work. Grab your socks here it comes.....
Go and take the ice away from the other miners!
Holycrap mindblowing I know, but trust me, it will work! You can perform the following list of actions to secure your piece of the ice pie: Ganking. Bumping. Wardeccing. Awoxing. Corp theft. Scamming..you get my drift. Attempt to play this *multiplayer* game we call EVE.
I promise, it's really not hard. 8 hours to roll up a suicide gank catalyst. takes 2-3 to take down an all-gank-no-tank barge. There may even be a website dedicated to doing it, along with many people more than willing to share their know-how on proper techniques.
You might even form a group with others who are seeking the same ends...we'll call it a "corporation". This "corporation" could work with other "corporations" to organize optimal time zone coverages and logistics. We'll call it an "alliance". Maybe a few of the "alliances" could get together and work to a common goal...lets call it a "coalition". Now, if this "coalition" is able to corner the highsec ice market, we could call it a "cartel". I think it's been done before in EVE!
Seriously, miners, you've just been handed an opportunity on par with the Tech bottleneck. You know where the anoms will spawn, when they will spawn, and it's a depleting resource an organized group can hold. You might have to fight to pull it off, that's normal EVE gameplay.
Go for it.
Your really aren't an industrialist are you? While some like to destroy, others like to create. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
247
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:20:00 -
[817] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Funny, they've been saying it for years. Show us one time they've said they're adjusting income to move more people out of hisec.
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/1775
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:28:00 -
[818] - Quote
It doesn't say a single thing thing about wanting to move people out of hisec. Find an actual quote where they actually said what you claimed they said, and actually quote it so we don't have to read through every link you throw up for non-existent quotes.
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
247
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:37:00 -
[819] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:It doesn't say a single thing thing about wanting to move people out of hisec. Find an actual quote where they actually said what you claimed they said, and actually quote it so we don't have to read through every link you throw up for non-existent quotes.
Yes, we wouldn't want people to actually read. They might learn something. And, gee, I don't see them raising everyone else taxes.
I'm still digging around for a direct quote to suit your needs. I know they exist and will post one, so you needn't strain your microscopic cranial mass with having to come up with thoughts besides those spoon fed to you by your nullsec overlords.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:40:00 -
[820] - Quote
kk, thanks. let us know when you find that one single quote. should be pretty easy considering that, according to you, they've been repeating it for years |
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:47:00 -
[821] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:kk, thanks. let us know when you find that one single quote. should be pretty easy considering that, according to you, they've been repeating it for years
Not that I agree one way or the other. But sometimes you don't need words, Actions can speak louder.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 01:52:00 -
[822] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Not that I agree one way or the other. But sometimes you don't need words, Actions can speak louder.
And paranoid-delusional interpretations of otherwise benign actions can speak even louder than that, so let's stick with words for now. |
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:02:00 -
[823] - Quote
ok i have a quistion
on this 80% of ice from high for eve does that count wh space as well im thinking the post said 80 of k space if thats the case that leaves a lot of wh corps high and dry and as a small corp i will have to pull up my pos and go to high and i dont like high sec also i live in a c1 high sec static the changes to mineing graves will force me to look else where when there is nothing else to do in the c1 did you guys think this all they way thure i look forward to the ansers ccp fozzi has to the quistions i have read all tho i give up at about page 19 yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:02:00 -
[824] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:Not that I agree one way or the other. But sometimes you don't need words, Actions can speak louder. And paranoid-delusional interpretations of otherwise benign actions can speak even louder than that, so let's stick with words for now.
Tell that to the hundreds who attacked the monuments in Amarr and Jita during Monoclegate. While I am sure some of them were of the paranoid-delusional type. A lot were not. Don't discount an arguments basis just because it is couched in words you don't like or are phrased wrong. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:08:00 -
[825] - Quote
LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:ok i have a quistion
on this 80% of ice from high for eve does that count wh space as well im thinking the post said 80 of k space if thats the case that leaves a lot of wh corps high and dry and as a small corp i will have to pull up my pos and go to high and i dont like high sec also i live in a c1 high sec static the changes to mineing graves will force me to look else where when there is nothing else to do in the c1 did you guys think this all they way thure i look forward to the ansers ccp fozzi has to the quistions i have read all tho i give up at about page 19
It is all of EVE. It would have been a massive statistical blunder to miss wh space, ice usage. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:08:00 -
[826] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:Not that I agree one way or the other. But sometimes you don't need words, Actions can speak louder. And paranoid-delusional interpretations of otherwise benign actions can speak even louder than that, so let's stick with words for now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
248
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:31:00 -
[827] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:kk, thanks. let us know when you find that one single quote. should be pretty easy considering that, according to you, they've been repeating it for years
Ever try to find a dev quote in the old forums that wasn't something GSF objected to and quoted nine billion times? It ain't easy. particularly when searching for 'high sec' and 'force out of' brings up vast swarms of high sec players complaining about it and low sec prats and nullbears demanding that high sec be emptied immediately.
Now the latter mostly post on GSF approved blogs.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
622
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:34:00 -
[828] - Quote
Personally I would like to thank the shadow Goonswarm devs for this expansion, because not only will it kill the game people love so much, it also causes a whole bunch of whine threads on the forums. |
Totally Wicked'Sucks
Have I Got Moos For You
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:37:00 -
[829] - Quote
After reading through most of this thread, it would appear that the proposed changes to mining are causing some friction.
Whilst I can fully understand the desire to make life difficult for bot miners, the proposed changes also make things more difficult for 'kosher' ice miners. To my mind, the bot miners got a huge boost by adding large ore holds to mining barges/exhumers.
If the intention of the proposed changes is to curtail bot mining, wouldn't it just be simpler to reduce the capacity of ore holds than making sweeping changes that affect the 'genuine' miners as well as the botters?
Also, I seem to remember reading that the new expansion was intended to make POS ownership a more pleasant experience. How can placing limitations on the availability of resources needed to fuel these POS's be reconciled with the intended more pleasant experience?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding or not seeing the big picture but I think if the availability of ice is restricted too much (or even concentrated in the hands of too few people), the consequences could make POS ownership/maintenance a more difficult prospect.
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
248
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:41:00 -
[830] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Personally I would like to thank the shadow Goonswarm devs for this expansion, because not only will it kill the game people love so much, it also causes a whole bunch of whine threads on the forums.
Do I get to laugh at the nullsec players when they scream and whine about the rumored upcoming changes to combat? (the word 'joystick' came up several times at fan fest)
My question is who do you have to know at CCP to get them to just give you functionally unlimited trit like this for mining the ores you mine already. I mean, seriously, these are the same guys that screamed and cried about T20's BPOs and here they are absolutely thrilled with even more game breaking changes, just because they happen to be in their favor.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
|
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 02:55:00 -
[831] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. so does this mean that i no longer have to sit in a empty wh a month to get a grav ? yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
804
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 03:38:00 -
[832] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Tell that to the hundreds who attacked the monuments in Amarr and Jita during Monoclegate. While I am sure some of them were of the paranoid-delusional type. A lot were not. Don't discount an arguments basis just because it is couched in words you don't like or are phrased wrong.
Not really sure what you're trying to say here. I think you're saying that even if you can't articulate a valid and coherent position, you're still going to stamp your feet like a child about the imagined wrongs that have been done, are being done or will be done to you.
If so, my response is "I know".
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1803
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 04:13:00 -
[833] - Quote
Totally Wicked'Sucks wrote:After reading through most of this thread, it would appear that the proposed changes to mining are causing some friction.
Whilst I can fully understand the desire to make life difficult for bot miners, the proposed changes also make things more difficult for 'kosher' ice miners. To my mind, the bot miners got a huge boost by adding large ore holds to mining barges/exhumers.
If the intention of the proposed changes is to curtail bot mining, wouldn't it just be simpler to reduce the capacity of ore holds than making sweeping changes that affect the 'genuine' miners as well as the botters?
Also, I seem to remember reading that the new expansion was intended to make POS ownership a more pleasant experience. How can placing limitations on the availability of resources needed to fuel these POS's be reconciled with the intended more pleasant experience?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding or not seeing the big picture but I think if the availability of ice is restricted too much (or even concentrated in the hands of too few people), the consequences could make POS ownership/maintenance a more difficult prospect.
From another thread:
CCP Fozzie wrote:Thank you very much for your analysis Jita Bloodtear, I'm gonna spend some time considering you perspective and will continue watching this thread.
I'm on vacation today so I'll keep my post short, but I do want to make clear that no aspects of these changes are designed to combat botting. I leave that work to our excellent Team Security and I focus on game systems balance.
So, no. These changes have nothing to do with botting. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Totally Wicked'Sucks
Have I Got Moos For You
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 05:04:00 -
[834] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Totally Wicked'Sucks wrote:After reading through most of this thread, it would appear that the proposed changes to mining are causing some friction.
Whilst I can fully understand the desire to make life difficult for bot miners, the proposed changes also make things more difficult for 'kosher' ice miners. To my mind, the bot miners got a huge boost by adding large ore holds to mining barges/exhumers.
If the intention of the proposed changes is to curtail bot mining, wouldn't it just be simpler to reduce the capacity of ore holds than making sweeping changes that affect the 'genuine' miners as well as the botters?
Also, I seem to remember reading that the new expansion was intended to make POS ownership a more pleasant experience. How can placing limitations on the availability of resources needed to fuel these POS's be reconciled with the intended more pleasant experience?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding or not seeing the big picture but I think if the availability of ice is restricted too much (or even concentrated in the hands of too few people), the consequences could make POS ownership/maintenance a more difficult prospect.
From another thread: CCP Fozzie wrote:Thank you very much for your analysis Jita Bloodtear, I'm gonna spend some time considering you perspective and will continue watching this thread.
I'm on vacation today so I'll keep my post short, but I do want to make clear that no aspects of these changes are designed to combat botting. I leave that work to our excellent Team Security and I focus on game systems balance. So, no. These changes have nothing to do with botting.
Thank you for the clarification. Is there any particular reasoning for the changes to mining then or is it just changing things for the sake of it? Sorry if this is a dumb question.. I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the changes... if not to make life harder for the bots, then why?
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1014
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 05:57:00 -
[835] - Quote
Totally Wicked'Sucks wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Totally Wicked'Sucks wrote:After reading through most of this thread, it would appear that the proposed changes to mining are causing some friction.
Whilst I can fully understand the desire to make life difficult for bot miners, the proposed changes also make things more difficult for 'kosher' ice miners. To my mind, the bot miners got a huge boost by adding large ore holds to mining barges/exhumers.
If the intention of the proposed changes is to curtail bot mining, wouldn't it just be simpler to reduce the capacity of ore holds than making sweeping changes that affect the 'genuine' miners as well as the botters?
Also, I seem to remember reading that the new expansion was intended to make POS ownership a more pleasant experience. How can placing limitations on the availability of resources needed to fuel these POS's be reconciled with the intended more pleasant experience?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding or not seeing the big picture but I think if the availability of ice is restricted too much (or even concentrated in the hands of too few people), the consequences could make POS ownership/maintenance a more difficult prospect.
From another thread: CCP Fozzie wrote:Thank you very much for your analysis Jita Bloodtear, I'm gonna spend some time considering you perspective and will continue watching this thread.
I'm on vacation today so I'll keep my post short, but I do want to make clear that no aspects of these changes are designed to combat botting. I leave that work to our excellent Team Security and I focus on game systems balance. So, no. These changes have nothing to do with botting. Thank you for the clarification. Is there any particular reasoning for the changes to mining then or is it just changing things for the sake of it? Sorry if this is a dumb question.. I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the changes... if not to make life harder for the bots, then why?
To make ice mining somewhat competitive and engaging but valuable, instead of leaving it as something utterly uncompetitive and nearly worthless to do that only requires a few mouse clicks and button presses every twenty minutes. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
121
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 06:19:00 -
[836] - Quote
Crexa wrote:
Your really aren't an industrialist are you? While some like to destroy, others like to create.
Actually, I am. When I see another industrialist in EVE, I don't see another buddypal who's there to help "create" with me, I see competition. You remove competition to get the edge you need.
Ice mining will now have competition. You can cry about never getting your chunk of the frozen gold...or you can go take it away from the other people trying to get it. Welcome to EVE. Be Bold, Pilot. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Udonor
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
36
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 06:35:00 -
[837] - Quote
LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) yea you probly dont sence you have local how about they take local from null thats a good idea i think ever wh corp and members should put up a post to take local from null
Boo Yah. Wh return to original designed purpose and that is NOT mining. Mining and industrial POS in wh were a temporary aberration CCP is finally ready to discourage. Sleepers and gas for T3 is the only secondary aspect of WHs that was meant to be exploited long term.
The TRUE purpose of WH's?
By navigating a short maze of wh's you get an alternative route for null sec goods to get to hi sec trading centers. One fraught with danger and excitement of small scale fleet battles and solo pirate kills.
A lot better than the tedium and deadlock of permanent gate camps and slow expensive jump freighters.
Soon any WH POS you see will be primarily a toll booth or pirate base or a misguided attempt to keep part of a certain route open.
Unfortunately the long standing problem with raising null sec population and industry nullified most the need for this original purpose. But Odyssey should finally swing the big hammer that forces everyone but noobs out of hi sec. In a few more release we might see the long hinted turn of events where sovereign null sec player alliances are allowed to begin conquering Empire low sec star systems and eating away at the bloated Empire space. Player corps and alliances will eventually replace all but a few size and SP locked noob systems. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 06:50:00 -
[838] - Quote
mynnna wrote:To make ice mining somewhat competitive and engaging but valuable, instead of leaving it as something utterly uncompetitive and nearly worthless to do that only requires a few mouse clicks and button presses every twenty minutes.
So, why didn't CCP put ice in grav sites and make it more challenging than the proposed change? That'd made it even more of a "challenging" profession and would not screw up WH miners. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 06:52:00 -
[839] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote: Ice mining will now have competition. You can cry about never getting your chunk of the frozen gold...or you can go take it away from the other people trying to get it. Welcome to EVE. Be Bold, Pilot.
Be bold... 8 minutes every 4 hours, if you are lucky! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 06:56:00 -
[840] - Quote
Udonor wrote: Unfortunately the long standing problem with raising null sec population and industry nullified most the need for this original purpose. But Odyssey should finally swing the big hammer that forces everyone but noobs out of hi sec. In a few more release we might see the long hinted turn of events where sovereign null sec player alliances are allowed to begin conquering Empire low sec star systems and eating away at the bloated Empire space. Player corps and alliances will eventually replace all but a few size and SP locked noob systems.
... and then EvE will be another EvE.
For some it'll be the "paradise incarnate", for others it'll be a schizophrenic containment asylum where to keep special players away from spreading their methastases to other MMOs. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
121
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 07:55:00 -
[841] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote: Ice mining will now have competition. You can cry about never getting your chunk of the frozen gold...or you can go take it away from the other people trying to get it. Welcome to EVE. Be Bold, Pilot.
Be bold... 8 minutes every 4 hours, if you are lucky!
You may have missed the earlier post. In that situation, you enlist the help of others, perhaps in better oriented timezones, to gank, bump, and do other mean things till you can get your chunk of the ice. Should you find yourself working with this group of people often, CCP includes mechanics to enable you to work together towards a profitable goal.
Barring that, infiltrate the corps getting the ice, and take it from them via awox/corp thefting.
Barring THAT, get a suicide gank together and camp a gate to the tradehubs. nuke freighters holding ice products who are passing by.
All of the activities do require that you play with/against others in a massively multiplayer online game. Make no mistake, while you CAN play EVE solo, it is a very suboptimal way to play, and you will miss out on many, many things. Before you whip out "MY SUB ENTITLES ME TO..." your sub entitles you to log in, same as me.
I said it before, I'll say again. Ice miners are in the PERFECT position to exploit, and cartel ice products when the system changes come Odyssey. A little organization and *gasp* multiplayer, and ice miners could take and hold a bigger cartel than Tech ever was.
Realistically, will they do it...nope. More squabbles and "I wanna play by MYSELF!". I'll be looking forward to when another group organizes up, and takes ice away from all the squabbly "singleplayer" miners in EVE. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 08:38:00 -
[842] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:Tell that to the hundreds who attacked the monuments in Amarr and Jita during Monoclegate. While I am sure some of them were of the paranoid-delusional type. A lot were not. Don't discount an arguments basis just because it is couched in words you don't like or are phrased wrong. Not really sure what you're trying to say here. I think you're saying that even if you can't articulate a valid and coherent position, you're still going to stamp your feet like a child about the imagined wrongs that have been done, are being done or will be done to you. If so, my response is "I know".
n "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 08:50:00 -
[843] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Crexa wrote:
Your really aren't an industrialist are you? While some like to destroy, others like to create.
Actually, I am. When I see another industrialist in EVE, I don't see another buddypal who's there to help "create" with me, I see competition. You remove competition to get the edge you need. Ice mining will now have competition. You can cry about never getting your chunk of the frozen gold...or you can go take it away from the other people trying to get it. Welcome to EVE. Be Bold, Pilot.
There has always been competition. It happens every day that you sell ice on the markets of EVE.
And how would the scene look had they chose (and i'm just asking), instead of the change to icc to triple (or double, whatever), the consumption of ice products by pos, cyno, capitals. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 08:55:00 -
[844] - Quote
Udonor wrote:LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :) yea you probly dont sence you have local how about they take local from null thats a good idea i think ever wh corp and members should put up a post to take local from null Boo Yah. Wh return to original designed purpose and that is NOT mining. Mining and industrial POS in wh were a temporary aberration CCP is finally ready to discourage. Sleepers and gas for T3 is the only secondary aspect of WHs that was meant to be exploited long term. The TRUE purpose of WH's? By navigating a short maze of wh's you get an alternative route for null sec goods to get to hi sec trading centers. One fraught with danger and excitement of small scale fleet battles and solo pirate kills. A lot better than the tedium and deadlock of permanent gate camps and slow expensive jump freighters. Soon any WH POS you see will be primarily a toll booth or pirate base or a misguided attempt to keep part of a certain route open. Unfortunately the long standing problem with raising null sec population and industry nullified most the need for this original purpose. But Odyssey should finally swing the big hammer that forces everyone but noobs out of hi sec. In a few more release we might see the long hinted turn of events where sovereign null sec player alliances are allowed to begin conquering Empire low sec star systems and eating away at the bloated Empire space. Player corps and alliances will eventually replace all but a few size and SP locked noob systems. so why the ore there? to be mined. and to get you easy target seeking boys easy kills. |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
127
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 10:26:00 -
[845] - Quote
Crexa wrote:
There has always been competition. It happens every day that you sell ice on the markets of EVE.
And how would the scene look had they (and i'm just asking), instead of changing ice, chose to triple (or double, whatever), the consumption of ice products by pos, cyno, capitals. From a purely isk perspective the rise in cost of ice from scarcity, is much the same as increasing need and thus cost. One is supply side, the other is demand side.
Cool, lets talk economics of current ice, I can do that. My default attitude in EVE is snark, so I promise I'll do my best to keep it cut down. Forgive me what parts slip through.
The prime problem with current ice and the idea you are speculating is a combination of infinite resource, ease of access to gathering of said resource, and what you mentioned in your post, the slow burn-off of the commodity.
Doubling, tripling, quintupling, you name it to the burn-off side won't do much to change the actual scarcity of ice products themselves. The products themselvs are infinite, in easy to access areas, and have a minimal barrier to entry to collect. in simple example, with pretend numbers: It takes ten ice units to run POS. One harvester gathers 2 units an hour. In 5 hours, you have your pos fuel. Tomorrow, it takes 20 units. Add another harvester, and your numbers are back to the way before. 30, you add 3 harvesters, and so on.... You cannot increase the scarcity, as the entry barrier to collect is so low, and the items themselves are infinite. In the end, ice miners under the current system are basically being paid for time, as the items themselves are not relevant anymore.
For a real life example of what you are describing, look at solar energy collection. While solar energy is infinite and can be collected everywhere, the barrier to entry (in setting up collectors, tech, such like that), remains kind of high. You'd pull it off en EVE by making it take 12-18 months just to sit in a barge...and that idea is just as silly as it sounds.
So, we turn to the supply side, and make anoms depletable. Now it's something you can fight over, compete with others, which adds value to the products. You can't just compensate by "adding more". It's now a strategic asset, as by CCPs goal.
Also, it encourages more multiplayer interaction. See my many above posts on how to cartel highsec ice. We want multiplayer interaction in EVE.
Will it **** people off, sure. Will some quit, I bet they will. Will they refuse to adapt and get swallowed up, you know that's the truth. The folks who can adapt to the circumstances stand a chance of making a boatload off ice...if they work together. It's so EVElike, it's making my shriveled little black heart pulse with venom! Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 11:02:00 -
[846] - Quote
[quote=Lady Areola Fappington][quote=Crexa] Also, it encourages more multiplayer interaction. See my many above posts on how to cartel highsec ice. We want multiplayer interaction in EVE.
*** Ofc we want interaction. Beside large walls of text, who wants interaction and why? And exactly how to interact? There will be a miner cartel controling hisec ice? Can't wait to see it. Counterbalancing nullsec cartels? After this patch, nullsec might get his ice himself. Ice harvesting is actually too easy isk? Ofc it is. But beside hypocrite explainations, think a bit why it is how it is. Miners? Miners are how they are. Greedy and limited to their portion of ice/rock to chew, for the most part. They will stay there, and do it mostly because it's EASY. Ofc, the minority of them, wich are the real and addicted rock-chewers, dream of building cartels and empires of ice in hisec. Surprise, gentlemen. There's a lot of boyz just waiting for this attempt. Hiring mercs, like a boss, because easy isk is there? Lol. I will have one of my best moments reading how this will end. James 315, here comes your promised empire. |
Tootenh'amon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 11:16:00 -
[847] - Quote
Just a thought on the ice mining here. If changes in the fuel costs would be too much for POS operators, why not just split it in two, one type of fuel for poses and the other for caps. Independent prices, and more mining choices for the miners. |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
137
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 11:35:00 -
[848] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:*** Ofc we want interaction. Beside large walls of text, who wants interaction and why? And exactly how to interact? There will be a miner cartel controling hisec ice? Can't wait to see it. Counterbalancing nullsec cartels? After this patch, nullsec might get his ice himself. Ice harvesting is actually too easy isk? Ofc it is. But beside hypocrite explainations, think a bit why it is how it is. Miners? Miners are how they are. Greedy and limited to their portion of ice/rock to chew, for the most part. They will stay there, and do it mostly because it's EASY. Ofc, the minority of them, wich are the real and addicted rock-chewers, dream of building cartels and empires of ice in hisec. Surprise, gentlemen. There's a lot of boyz just waiting for this attempt. Hiring mercs, like a boss, because easy isk is there? Lol. I will have one of my best moments reading how this will end. James 315, here comes your promised empire.
When waiting on a doctors appointment you really don't want to attend, wall 'o text happens.
You're right though, 95% of the miners just want to singleplayer nibble at their own corner and sell to whoever. The thought of a highsec ice cartel just makes me giggle with glee, if it did happen. I'm sure the real economic cabals know better, but...the idea is just fun. One group owning 80% of the isotopes produced in eve, but holding it in an area easy to assault....
It's going to be awesome to see how this plays out. Will a new cabal arise from the changes? Will Goons/TEST/Nulli/PL/null group of the week sweep in and stake a claim? Will it all get screwed by bots? We don't know, and won't for awhile. It's like one of Jame's cliffhanger posts on the blog! Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Jason Xado
Xado Industries
102
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:23:00 -
[849] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products.
I wish this were true but it simply is not. I have tried, REALLY tried to sell the results of my ice mining in null sec and nobody is interested. Maybe it's just my neighborhood. I have an order of Liquid Ozone up right now below Jita prices and it simply won't move. I could put it on the Jita market and have it sold in minutes.
The simple fact is that I will continue to ship and sell to Jita as that is by far the best option. I really wish it wasn't.
So by not increasing the compression rates on ice you are just making me AFK compress twice as long as before. Not a big deal but a bit annoying.
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
655
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:33:00 -
[850] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Then, "your own success" should not be a "boxed edition" tied to where one lives.
It's a sandbox? Then it should be "flat" and give everyone as many chances as everyone else.
it is, hence the 4 hour timer so that people of all timezones will have a fair chance, and a fair chance is all you deserve |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:41:00 -
[851] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote: Ice mining will now have competition. You can cry about never getting your chunk of the frozen gold...or you can go take it away from the other people trying to get it. Welcome to EVE. Be Bold, Pilot.
Be bold... 8 minutes every 4 hours, if you are lucky! You may have missed the earlier post. In that situation, you enlist the help of others, perhaps in better oriented timezones, to gank, bump, and do other mean things till you can get your chunk of the ice. Should you find yourself working with this group of people often, CCP includes mechanics to enable you to work together towards a profitable goal. Barring that, infiltrate the corps getting the ice, and take it from them via awox/corp thefting. Barring THAT, get a suicide gank together and camp a gate to the tradehubs. nuke freighters holding ice products who are passing by. All of the activities do require that you play with/against others in a massively multiplayer online game. Make no mistake, while you CAN play EVE solo, it is a very suboptimal way to play, and you will miss out on many, many things. Before you whip out "MY SUB ENTITLES ME TO..." your sub entitles you to log in, same as me. I said it before, I'll say again. Ice miners are in the PERFECT position to exploit, and cartel ice products when the system changes come Odyssey. A little organization and *gasp* multiplayer, and ice miners could take and hold a bigger cartel than Tech ever was. Realistically, will they do it...nope. More squabbles and "I wanna play by MYSELF!". I'll be looking forward to when another group organizes up, and takes ice away from all the squabbly "singleplayer" miners in EVE.
I could have done all of this (and I did several of this) in 2010.
Now I still love EvE as before but I cannot play enough to have such kinds of relationships. This week I could play 1 hour. 1 hour a week. That's not enough to be kept in any corp or do anything that is not some stupid mining or missioning or anyway some ready to go "log in and do it now" feature.
For 1 hour a week I still pay 15 and I am glad to. But don't take away the "log in and do it now" features, because then it become pointless to log in even that 1 hour and thus it's pointless to keep subbing.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:51:00 -
[852] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Then, "your own success" should not be a "boxed edition" tied to where one lives.
It's a sandbox? Then it should be "flat" and give everyone as many chances as everyone else.
it is, hence the 4 hour timer so that people of all timezones will have a fair chance, and a fair chance is all you deserve
Not exactly.
Server comes up after DT, belts are reset.
In few minutes they are depleted, 4h timer is up on all the (relevant aka caldari) ice belts. Whoever logs in from 30 mins past DT till 4pm finds nothing, and that means that people with 3h and half (quite decent amount of game time) will still find nothing.
Of course they could move to say Amarr, re-grind the stations standings and then and dig ice nobody wants. In fact Amarr will have a massive surplus of ice, FAR FAR above 100% of what the server needs, while Caldari ice will sustain FAR FAR below the stated 80% because of the universal bias towards using Caldari POSes. This will iterally make Caldari ice skyrocket say to 2000 ISK pu while Amarr's will stay at 700, that is all those not lucky enough to live in a certain time zone and have enough game time, will have to settle for 1/3 of the income. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
655
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:51:00 -
[853] - Quote
you are still free to log in and spend one hour a week scribbling at dirt for rocks, you just are now required to scribble at the black dirt instead of the blue dirt
meanwhile people who scribble at the dirt, but more effectively, have more options |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 12:56:00 -
[854] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:you are still free to log in and spend one hour a week scribbling at dirt for rocks, you just are now required to scribble at the black dirt instead of the blue dirt
meanwhile people who scribble at the dirt, but more effectively, have more options
What do you think all the excluded players will do? They'll turn to mining worse ice and roids, further depressing the prices. When trit will drop to 3 ISK pu what will they do? Adapt. How do you adapt your 4+ mining accounts when you adapt to say missioning? You drop those 4 accounts (and buy 1 PvE pilot). Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
655
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:11:00 -
[855] - Quote
in other words, you feel entitled to success and are unhappy you may have to adapt to changing circumstances
the worlds tiniest violin is playing a funeral dirge for your accounts |
Flash Phoenix
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:16:00 -
[856] - Quote
OK maybe I missed something, but what is the PURPOSE of the grav sights no longer needing to be found with probes ? Regardless of location in hi sec, low sec or null or worm holes. No skills needed to access ores or the miners in them, No effort or time needed to access ores or the miners in them. Why the lowering of effort and time to access. What happened to more effort, more reward ? |
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
211
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:33:00 -
[857] - Quote
I will miss the limited security that scanned belts gave
it help play on the dynamic he who puts in the most effort will win. Buy spending the time to scan down a site, i put in the effort to provide my self some protection to mine in a potentially hostile system.
This will be an issue in low sec where the speed of travel from one system to another is not hampered by bubbles.
On the others side. The enemy would wait on my laziness with scanning down the belt previously and warping to that. With the new updated scanning options for launching 7 probes at once and the pre set probe arrangement option probing down these sites should be easier.
Can't make mining too risky for miners otherwise they will just mine deep in home territory.
There should be a mechanic where most of the Pvpers out on a roam will not visit the miner, unless they have a person willing to sacrafise the PEW PEW strength for a Prob Launcher.
For example I would recommend keeping the Scan required for Gravametric sites, but give the explore class frigates a 100%/auto find on finding Gravametric sites with their Over probes or even on ship scanner. This way a random PVP gang won't scare away the miners, and scouts will be on the look out for those Probe class of ships, as they provide a massive threat.
Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
590
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:39:00 -
[858] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:in other words, you feel entitled to success and are unhappy you may have to adapt to changing circumstances
the worlds tiniest violin is playing a funeral dirge for your accounts There is nothing wrong with adapting.
The problem is for many carebears "adapting" is going and finding a new game to play.
Screw with the carebears game they will not change the way they play, they will go play a different game.
It is like taking away a child's chocolate bar and handing them a piece of broccoli, it is better for them, It is an improvement improvement from almost every angle, but they still won't eat it.
High sec carebears will adapt to game changes, but if you try to force them to change their play style they will cry, kick, and scream. They will not give in, they will quit and go find a new game.
I am looking forward to The Elder Scrolls Online beta, it should be starting soon. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
590
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:50:00 -
[859] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:I will miss the limited security that scanned belts gave
it help play on the dynamic he who puts in the most effort will win. Buy spending the time to scan down a site, i put in the effort to provide my self some protection to mine in a potentially hostile system.
This will be an issue in low sec where the speed of travel from one system to another is not hampered by bubbles.
On the others side. The enemy would wait on my laziness with scanning down the belt previously and warping to that. With the new updated scanning options for launching 7 probes at once and the pre set probe arrangement option probing down these sites should be easier.
Can't make mining too risky for miners otherwise they will just mine deep in home territory.
There should be a mechanic where most of the Pvpers out on a roam will not visit the miner, unless they have a person willing to sacrafise the PEW PEW strength for a Prob Launcher.
For example I would recommend keeping the Scan required for Gravametric sites, but give the explore class frigates a 100%/auto find on finding Gravametric sites with their Over probes or even on ship scanner. This way a random PVP gang won't scare away the miners, and scouts will be on the look out for those Probe class of ships, as they provide a massive threat.
Or remove the on board scanner for non exploration ships. But I would much rather have grav sites remain as signatures than must be scanned down with probes.
If you must make them easier to find increase the signature size, so you do not need high scanning skills to find the better belts.
By removing the effort you have removed what little safety factor they had.
This is supposed to be a driver for conflict and team work. But if a null sec miner has to rely on PVP friends for protection, most will simply stop mining. Why? Because there is not a PVPer in this game that will enjoy sitting in a belt doing nothing just in case someone shows up to gank the miners. Not if they can be spending that time out roaming. It simply will not happen, at least not for anyone in a small corp/alliance.
You can not force PVPers to participate in carebear activities anymore than you can force carebears to participate in PVP. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
808
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:51:00 -
[860] - Quote
Crexa wrote:I'm saying even if you don't like what someone says, it doesn't mean there isn't any truths to be found in it.
It has nothing to do with liking or disliking the conclusion, and everything to do with the validity of, coherence of, and support for the argument.
In the vast majority of cases, people engaged in discourse disagree on some level, that doesn't mean that both sides are suddenly "right" because no one who disagrees with a conclusion can validly criticize the argument that is presented to support it. That would be an absurd arrangement.
|
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
808
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 13:57:00 -
[861] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: I am looking forward to The Elder Scrolls Online beta, it should be starting soon.
So don't do this change because people who will quit over a change will quit?
A weak argument.
Also, an increasingly hollow one as each supposedly mass-unsub inducing change fails to bring about said mass unsub. The hisec forum warriors have cried wolf enough times that it has lost any meaning and impact it might have once had. Your imaginary 822 ice-mining accounts will be missed. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1029
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:06:00 -
[862] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Then, "your own success" should not be a "boxed edition" tied to where one lives.
It's a sandbox? Then it should be "flat" and give everyone as many chances as everyone else.
it is, hence the 4 hour timer so that people of all timezones will have a fair chance, and a fair chance is all you deserve Not exactly. Server comes up after DT, belts are reset. In few minutes they are depleted, 4h timer is up on all the (relevant aka caldari) ice belts. Whoever logs in from 30 mins past DT till 4pm finds nothing, and that means that people with 3h and half (quite decent amount of game time) will still find nothing. Of course they could move to say Amarr, re-grind the stations standings and then and dig ice nobody wants. In fact Amarr will have a massive surplus of ice, FAR FAR above 100% of what the server needs, while Caldari ice will sustain FAR FAR below the stated 80% because of the universal bias towards using Caldari POSes. This will iterally make Caldari ice skyrocket say to 2000 ISK pu while Amarr's will stay at 700, that is all those not lucky enough to live in a certain time zone and have enough game time, will have to settle for 1/3 of the income.
Yes because POS are the only thing that uses ice products ever and it's totally not like capital ships exist at all and that Amarrian carriers are by and far the most popular carrier for "slowcat" fleets or anything.
And its not like the 2k/unit you claim caldari ice would skyrocket to would make ice mining in nullsec worth 100m/hr or anything. No wait actually it would. Believe me, you'd see more goons mining than you ever thought possible if ice were 100m/hr, and it would very quickly NOT be 100m/hr (and thus 2k/unit) anymore. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:19:00 -
[863] - Quote
mynnna wrote: Yes because POS are the only thing that uses ice products ever and it's totally not like capital ships exist at all and that Amarrian carriers are by and far the most popular carrier for "slowcat" fleets or anything.
And its not like the 2k/unit you claim caldari ice would skyrocket to would make ice mining in nullsec worth 100m/hr or anything. No wait actually it would. Believe me, you'd see more goons mining than you ever thought possible if ice were 100m/hr, and it would very quickly NOT be 100m/hr (and thus 2k/unit) anymore.
Don't you go bringing your "nullsec this" and "capital ships that" in dis thread. We're only talking about highsec ice that we plug into highsec research POSes, which are all Caldari because of bonuses.
Don't you force those poor highseccers to consider something outside of their own little bubble. New subs will quit! You can't force PVP it's a sandbox I do what I want!
*please ensure your sarcasm meter is properly calibrated on reading this post*
Also, thanks for that math. 30 belts.....I could see a reasonably sized alliance organize to hold and lock those down. Damnit, I'm actually thinking about somehow making a Highsec ice cabal a reality. Curse you emergent gameplay! Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1068
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:27:00 -
[864] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokhah wrote:Server comes up after DT, belts are reset.
In few minutes they are depleted, 4h timer is up on all the (relevant aka caldari) ice belts. Whoever logs in from 30 mins past DT till 4pm finds nothing, and that means that people with 3h and half (quite decent amount of game time) will still find nothing.
anom/site spawns aren't
the belt in the anom would be back to full but exploration spawns are not reset/spawned at downtime
if there were no ice anoms in system at downtime, there won't be a any ice anom spawn at the end of downtime
there has been no indication that ice anoms will function any differently from every other exploration site? am i missing something here? |
Tootenh'amon
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:32:00 -
[865] - Quote
Flash Phoenix wrote:OK maybe I missed something, but what is the PURPOSE of the grav sights no longer needing to be found with probes ? Regardless of location in hi sec, low sec or null or worm holes. No skills needed to access ores or the miners in them, No effort or time needed to access ores or the miners in them. Why the lowering of effort and time to access. What happened to more effort, more reward ?
Maybe it's an effort to help pvpers combat botters? Instead of having to scan the site they can just go directional-warp to the site-kill. Human miners will always have the advantage of intel channels as a warning. Bots-won't. |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:35:00 -
[866] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote: Maybe it's an effort to help pvpers combat botters? Instead of having to scan the site they can just go directional-warp to the site-kill. Human miners sitting at the computer, playing EVE, and not tabbed out will always have the advantage of intel channels as a warning. Bots-won't.
FTFY Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
Tootenh'amon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 14:49:00 -
[867] - Quote
Well, that'd be another version of adapting to the circumstances by afk miners I suppose? Mine afk while playing with your balls and risk dying, or play it safe and enjoy the company. |
Flash Phoenix
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 15:23:00 -
[868] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:Flash Phoenix wrote:OK maybe I missed something, but what is the PURPOSE of the grav sights no longer needing to be found with probes ? Regardless of location in hi sec, low sec or null or worm holes. No skills needed to access ores or the miners in them, No effort or time needed to access ores or the miners in them. Why the lowering of effort and time to access. What happened to more effort, more reward ? Maybe it's an effort to help pvpers combat botters? Instead of having to scan the site they can just go directional-warp to the site-kill. Human miners will always have the advantage of intel channels as a warning. Bots-won't.
So your saying the purpose is to enable PvP (to some extent) and gankers to not have to make any effort to enjoy their style of game play?
Seems unlikely
(but would help to ease the PvP and gankers whine and tears posted elsewhere on lack of PvP in game without having to travel X jumps or make any effort for that style of game play.)
CCP has already stated its not to combat botters, |
Tootenh'amon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 16:57:00 -
[869] - Quote
Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
590
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:03:00 -
[870] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: I am looking forward to The Elder Scrolls Online beta, it should be starting soon. So don't do this change because people who will quit over a change will quit? A weak argument. Also, an increasingly hollow one as each supposedly mass-unsub inducing change fails to bring about said mass unsub. The hisec forum warriors have cried wolf enough times that it has lost any meaning and impact it might have once had. Your imaginary 822 ice-mining accounts will be missed.
I don't mine ICE, haven't for over a year. I only have 4 accounts, not 75 like thast guy Mittens insulted at fanfest last year.
The Elder Scolls beta had nothing to do with my argument, it was just an additional point. L2read.
My main point in most of my posts is this.
CCP Fozzie has said miners will have to rely on team work to be safe. i.e. PVP players will have to drop what they are doing and come protect the miners. Do you think this will happen? It has to happen for this change to not break the game.
One of the basic natures of every MMO is PVPers hate carebears. This is one thing that does not change no matter what game you play.
Just because they have put out several successful expansions in a row does not mean they can not make a mistake.
For example everyone was upset at the A.I. change making level 4 missions almost impossible to run without using a shiny ship or a running them in a group.
What happened? They did it anyway. It did break the game. They refused to acknowledge it was a mistake, but the still fixed it. The A.I. was adjusted almost every week for a couple months until it was turned down to the point where it was almost equal to what it was before the change.
Most of what CCP has done with recent expansions I have been very excited about. But every point I argued about did end up being a issue after release. The current development team at CCP has a great grasp on the combat and ship balance of EVE, and have been making great improvements to that part of the game. But every time they have touched industry they have made mistakes. Even with the mining ships. For the most part it was a great chage. But one aspect of that showed how disconnected they are from what actually makes industry work in EVE.
The changes they made to the Skiff was supposed to be to make it the best choice for mining in dangerous space. that was a complete failure on the part of CCP developers. For mining in null sec no amount of tank will keep an industrial ship safe. This focus worked for high sec, because in high sec you only need to survive long enough for CONCORD to show up. In Null sec the extra tank means nothing, all it does s allow you to survive a couple more seconds before dieing. Once you are tackled you are dead. No amount of tank will change that.
The venture which was meant to be the new noob mining ship ended up making a far better null sec Jania miner that the skiff, but this was not intended, just an unforseen bonus for CCP.
CCP has had many recent successes with updates for thew last few expansions.
But we must not forget the failure of the incarna expansion. CCP thought this was going to be successful, or they would not have released it. It resulted in major refocusing and restructuring at CCP. Incarna was a "mass-unsub inducing change" It cost CCP a lot of money.
I fear the developers vision may have again been blurred by repeated successful expansions, If they are not careful they could have another Incarna. This is not me crying wolf or threatening to leave the game if the changes do not fit with my game play style. this is me pointing out a potential flaw in the current plan that could hurt the game.
One of the key focuses of Odyssey is to promote an expansion of null sec industry, most of the changes support that focus very well. But this one flaw could cause enough of an opposite effect to make it seem like the whole null sec industry focus was a failure. It is not, the changes are great, except for this one thing that may cause a huge shift in the wrong direction.
What I propose is to not completely take this off the table, but move the change of gravametric sites to anomalies maybe to Odyseey 1.1, let the other changes stand as a buff to null sec industry, then if the buff is to strong look at making further adjustments to bring it in line. I believe these other changes on there own will only be a small move in the right direction. They will not be enough to cause a mass exodus from high sec to low sec. Most carebears have no interest in this move regardless of how profitable it may be. There is no need to nerf a change that will have so small an impact. Making the null sec gravsites easy to find by any passing PVP roam will break null sec mining. no amount of ore changes or buffs can make up for that loss in security provided by the current hidden belts. |
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
813
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:11:00 -
[871] - Quote
Ok, so then don't spoil your otherwise reasonable, though ridiculously and unnecessarily long, arguments with empty hyperbolic threats and doomcalling |
Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight Red-Frog
266
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:23:00 -
[872] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.
Thank you, this is quite re-assuring! :D |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:28:00 -
[873] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect. buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to.
But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting.
Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died?
EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it.
Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:31:00 -
[874] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Ok, so then don't spoil your otherwise reasonable, though ridiculously and unnecessarily long, arguments with empty hyperbolic threats and doomcalling LOL, Yes I get your point,
And yes, my posts are often excessively long.
Sorry I try to keep them short but they almost always hit the character limit. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:33:00 -
[875] - Quote
Red Frog Rufen wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.
True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion. Thank you, this is quite re-assuring! :D Yes, I am glad to see neither red frog or black frog will be hurt by this expansion.
I may need their services when I move back to null sec. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
663
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:34:00 -
[876] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Tootenh'amon wrote:Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect. buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to. But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting. Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died? EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it. Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else. ganking now, ganking tomorrow, ganking forever
the carebears are prey and are supposed to hate it and the worthless carebears, not understanding the difficulties of ganking, are unqualified to comment on their risk/reward |
Tootenh'amon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:37:00 -
[877] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Tootenh'amon wrote:Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect. buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to. But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting. Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died? EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it. Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else.
Killing miners in 0.0 who take calculated risks for bigger rewards isn't really ganking, it's regular pvp. As for high sec nothing realy changes, warping to an anomaly isn't going to be easier than warping to a belt anyways. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:46:00 -
[878] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Tootenh'amon wrote:Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect. buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to. But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting. Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died? EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it. Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else. Killing miners in 0.0 who take calculated risks for bigger rewards isn't really ganking, it's regular pvp. As for high sec nothing realy changes, warping to an anomaly isn't going to be easier than warping to a belt anyways. NO SORRY,
Regular PVP is fighting other players who fight back.
Ganking is a form of PVP, but the lowest form, and not worthy of the PVP flag.
Attacking another that has zero chance of fighting back or defending themself is ganking. High sec, low sec, null sec, W-space, it does not matter. Ganking is ganking.
Not that ganking is a bad thing, but it is not a form of game play that needs any help.
I ask who is the braver pilot, The miner who goes out in null sec to mine ore at a great personal risk, Or the ganker that goes out hunting a type of ship that can not fight back?
There is no honor in ganking, it does not make you a better PVPer.
It is fun though, which is all that really matters. |
Tootenh'amon
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 17:52:00 -
[879] - Quote
So by your opinnion no miner should ever be killed in any way? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
663
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:02:00 -
[880] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: NO SORRY,
Regular PVP is fighting other players who fight back.
Ganking is a form of PVP, but the lowest form, and not worthy of the PVP flag.
wrong
predator vs. prey is not just a better form of pvp it is the highest form of pvp, eschewing honorbattles for vicious darwinian selection |
|
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
226
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:16:00 -
[881] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:Flash Phoenix wrote:OK maybe I missed something, but what is the PURPOSE of the grav sights no longer needing to be found with probes ? Regardless of location in hi sec, low sec or null or worm holes. No skills needed to access ores or the miners in them, No effort or time needed to access ores or the miners in them. Why the lowering of effort and time to access. What happened to more effort, more reward ? Maybe it's an effort to help pvpers combat botters? Instead of having to scan the site they can just go directional-warp to the site-kill. Human miners will always have the advantage of intel channels as a warning. Bots-won't.
Actually the problem is that bots have the advantage in that situation. The bot can constantly scan local and will always boogie out of dodge if a neut shows up, There is also no reason to think that a bot can't watch intel channels for key info either (that or the botter just puts their own scouts in adjacent systems.
A player on the other hand gets distracted or spaces out or has to run take a **** and will occasionally miss that neut in local (know that's how I tend to lose ratting ships that and forgetting to turn the tank on). So if it is an effort to cause grief to botters then it is an extremely misguided and ill conceived one.
Not saying it doesn't need changing, but Ice mining was the one resource harvesting activity that put humans and bots on a more or less even footing. The low level of manual interaction required was so minimal that the bot gained less advantage from it's ability to respond instantly to change. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:42:00 -
[882] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:So by your opinnion no miner should ever be killed in any way? I did not say that.
Ganking is a necessary and permanent part of every MMO, whether the developers support it or not. But Gankers do not need help ganking, there targets are generally far inferior to them, why should they need help.
I said ganking is the lowest form of PVP. it has no honor. In war who is the honorable solder, the one killing other solders? Or the one killing women and children?
Ganking can be fun. But why should CCP make it even easier to find targets to gank. There is loads of PVP available in EVE if you want it. But real PVP, unlike Ganking, puts you in a situation where you might die. Try it some time. Wining a fight that you had a chance of losing is much more rewarding than winning a fight you had no chance of losing. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
591
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:48:00 -
[883] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: NO SORRY,
Regular PVP is fighting other players who fight back.
Ganking is a form of PVP, but the lowest form, and not worthy of the PVP flag.
wrong predator vs. prey is not just a better form of pvp it is the highest form of pvp, eschewing honorbattles for vicious darwinian selection LOL, Nice analogy, So you as a ganker are dumb predator, not a hunter?
Who is the greater hunter? The one who hunts and kills Lions, Tigers, and Bears? Or the one who hunts and kills Rabbits, Deer, and ducks?
Both take skill, but the one who hunts predators will always be considered the greater hunter.
I am not saying ganking is not fun. Or that it should be stopped. Only that there is no more honor or challenge in it than killing rabbits and deer, or women and children.
If you ever manage to succeed in a challenging PVP situation you will understand. Until then , you are not a PVPer, but just a common ganker. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
667
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:57:00 -
[884] - Quote
i am a space lord, and i will slaughter whomever i wish to slaughter
he who has the most skulls mewling in outrage over being forcibly separated from their body wins |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 18:58:00 -
[885] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:in other words, you feel entitled to success and are unhappy you may have to adapt to changing circumstances
the worlds tiniest violin is playing a funeral dirge for your accounts
I am unhappy to adapt and give CCP $90 less a month, because I really want to see EvE get its 20 years mark. I know you don't care for them (like you don't care for me), but hey, world spins round like that. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
667
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:02:00 -
[886] - Quote
well, there's three responses to that
the first is that you are probably krixtaling and we will see you post post post long after you claim to have unsubbed all of your accounts
the second is that it turns out when you ban bots, some botters unsubscribe. the overall health of the game is improved by removing your bot-aspirant behavior even if there is a temporary revenue setback
the third is the factual basis of your ragequitting got knocked out of the park by mynnna mathing it up so we can just ignore your input because it's based on obvious factual errors |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:17:00 -
[887] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i am a space lord, and i will slaughter whomever i wish to slaughter
he who has the most skulls mewling in outrage over being forcibly separated from their body wins
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD MITTENS! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL EPEEN!
Now that we've established that Mittens screwed up when he lobotomized you and gave you crack instead of anesthetics, let's look at the actual reality of eve.
First of all, this change is exactly counter to the stated goal of making POS easier to manage. Second, it is going to do unkind things to the T2 market as the price of POS management is driven skyward. Third the proposed change undoes all the work of bring up the price of minerals, by flooding the primary market with 'free' trit.
So, devs, how is this a good thing for eve? The only thing that trying to force a play style gets is lost subs (see Incarna) but still I see this happening again. How hard is this? Forcing play styles = lost revenue. I know you want more pew pew, but you're trying to fight the in game culture that you helped create, and wondering why there is so much pushback on this. (Other than from nulltards who think they can get easy kills rather than the reality, where people just unsub).
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:23:00 -
[888] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:well, there's three responses to that
the first is that you are probably krixtaling and we will see you post post post long after you claim to have unsubbed all of your accounts
Considering this is not a mining character, why should I unsub it?
EvilweaselSA wrote: the second is that it turns out when you ban bots, some botters unsubscribe. the overall health of the game is improved by removing your bot-aspirant behavior even if there is a temporary revenue setback. some changes will make people ragequit but because they make a better game, they encourage more subs and it's a net plus
You don't seem to care so much about bots though, else you'd be with me asking for the anoms to be turned into proper grav sites, whose scanning is much harder to automate (and requires a less throwaway pilot) than the proposed idea.
EvilweaselSA wrote: the third is the factual basis of your ragequitting got knocked out of the park by mynnna mathing it up so we can just ignore your input because it's based on obvious factual errors
Don't think so much. He talks about the past and does not seem to know how many ice miners actually are around. A ton. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
623
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:25:00 -
[889] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Don't think so much. He talks about the past and does not seem to know how many ice miners actually are around. A ton.
The only people that know exactly how many ice miners are around are CCP. Look at the changes they're making. I don't think they're worried one bit. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:27:00 -
[890] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Don't think so much. He talks about the past and does not seem to know how many ice miners actually are around. A ton. The only people that know exactly how many ice miners are around are CCP. Look at the changes they're making. I don't think they're worried one bit.
They were not worried one bit when their manifesto was "GREED IS GOOD" either, nor were worried when they simply removed the whole storage system and replaced it with an incomplete and bugged one, for months.
They were not worried when they said freeware devs would have to pay them $99 for the honor of advertising and improving on their game either. Didn't end so well... most of the market sofware are still abandoned after the makers ragequit. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:29:00 -
[891] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Don't think so much. He talks about the past and does not seem to know how many ice miners actually are around. A ton.
you are (a) claiming that ice miners will unsub in droves and then (b) using the pre-patch figures and only managing to prove that he was absolutely correct and that even with pre-patch figures you were massively off about how long ice spawns will last
so you're contradicting yourself and wrong, which is impressive |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:30:00 -
[892] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: First of all, this change is exactly counter to the stated goal of making POS easier to manage.
ice costing more does not make pos harder to manage it makes them more expensive, which is completely different |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
668
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:33:00 -
[893] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Third the proposed change undoes all the work of bring up the price of minerals, by flooding the primary market with 'free' trit.
the work of whatnow |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:48:00 -
[894] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Third the proposed change undoes all the work of bring up the price of minerals, by flooding the primary market with 'free' trit.
the work of whatnow
CCP has, apparently until this, been trying to make mining viable again (in any sec) outside massive operations that strip entire systems of every last drop of every ore present. To do this, they've been releasing change after change that has slowly driven up the price of mins, particularly trit. The price of mins had dropped to a level so low that it made sniping high sec belt rats look profitable compared to mining.
This undoes that by flooding the major market for trit, in particular (nullsec), with 'free' trit that is being added to the mins that most nullbears mine anyway. This is bad, as it does away with the trade dynamic between high sec and nullsec, and concentrates ever more wealth in the hands of a few players.
While this is good for goonswarm et al in the short term, in the long run it leads to stagnation in the eve o economy which leads to unsubs, etc. When people talk about unsubs from these changes, they're not just talking about ice miners. There's a domino effect in play here that could, potentially, lead to massive inflation (bad for eve) and a corresponding drop in pvp. (Because you only fly what you can afford to lose). Once the major produces of goods stop subbing, the goods they previously produced rise in price due to demand as PvPers burn through ships and ammo, etc.
Do you see where this is going?
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1039
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:50:00 -
[895] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Care to expand on about how much ice do ships consumed, facing the behemoth of POSes consumption? Well really old diagoras stats tell us that something like 7.4b isotopes were harvested last march, and from a similar era, that there were 20.4k active POS. Assuming each and every one of those active POS was a large tower without any sort of fuel bonus, that's a maximum of 5.3 billion isotopes per month. If the entire difference is used up by capital ships, that means capital ships account for 28% of isotope consumption. Assuming, of course, that those respective ratios are still accurate a year later, but it's the best I've got.
Of course that maximum is actually rather too high, because some of those towers are medium, and a lot of them - the vast majority, in fact, if Fozzie's comment about how highsec only uses 15% of the ice is accurate - aren't actually in highsec. So if you start trying to account for that, the volume consumed by capital ships versus by towers slants even more towards caps.
If you need more clues, some of those same tweets give us a hint that POS and actual fuel mined don't quite line up. Compare the ratios from this one:
Quote:Online towers: 8,725 Caldari, 5,493 Amarr, 3,760 Minmatar, 2,387 Gallente.
To this one:
Quote:Isotopes harvested in March? 2.67bn Nitrogen, 1.73bn Helium, 1.70bn Oxygen, 1.18bn Hydrogen.
Caldari are rather wildly overrepresented in the POS use department, with 3.6 times more caldari POS than the least used (gallente), yet despite the popularity of Caldari ice (due to proximity to Jita) only 2.2x more of it is mined than the least mined ice. A reflection of the relative popularity of each race's capital ships? I think so.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:mynnna wrote: And as long as we're attacking your hyperbolic claims with facts and numbers, lets take on the idea that the caldari belts will be cleared in "a few minutes" shall we? Let's say a few minutes is four. Conveniently, I already know that it takes 62.5 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to clear an ice belt in 40 minutes, so I can reasonably conclude that it would take 625 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to do it in four.
There are from 90 to 150 ships in the systems I know, mining all the time. Reduce this "all the time" to a burst "log in" they have to do in order to catch the ice before is out. So imagine 200 ships per belt, trying to sgnatch the ice before's gone. It won't be 4 minutes but out of 4 hours, it's still a small window of opportunity. So you're agreeing that your claims of are rather hyperbolic and probably not at all unrealistic. Great! Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
671
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:50:00 -
[896] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: CCP has, apparently until this, been trying to make mining viable again (in any sec) outside massive operations that strip entire systems of every last drop of every ore present. To do this, they've been releasing change after change that has slowly driven up the price of mins, particularly trit. The price of mins had dropped to a level so low that it made sniping high sec belt rats look profitable compared to mining.
ccp has:
(1) tried to restore mining as a profession by eliminating gunmining and (2) tried to boost the value of mining in nullsec as it's badly out of whack thanks to highends being horrid
mining in highsec is disproportionately profitable and it should be lowered. ccp has never had some mineral price protection plan where all minerals must go up uP UP |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
674
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:56:00 -
[897] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: This undoes that by flooding the major market for trit, in particular (nullsec), with 'free' trit that is being added to the mins that most nullbears mine anyway. This is bad, as it does away with the trade dynamic between high sec and nullsec, and concentrates ever more wealth in the hands of a few players.
your space lords (who you shall refer to as "their lordships") do not mine in any real quantity in nullsec. that is the problem being fixed |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 19:58:00 -
[898] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote: CCP has, apparently until this, been trying to make mining viable again (in any sec) outside massive operations that strip entire systems of every last drop of every ore present. To do this, they've been releasing change after change that has slowly driven up the price of mins, particularly trit. The price of mins had dropped to a level so low that it made sniping high sec belt rats look profitable compared to mining.
ccp has: (1) tried to restore mining as a profession by eliminating gunmining and (2) tried to boost the value of mining in nullsec as it's badly out of whack thanks to highends being horrid mining in highsec is disproportionately profitable and it should be lowered. ccp has never had some mineral price protection plan where all minerals must go up uP UP
And where you're wrong is that highsec is barely profitable at all (normally, as right now Ice Speculation is driving the market) . Compared to every single other highsec activity, and mining in low and nullsec, highsec mining is not profitable. I make more money off highsec POS, missions, PI, and scan sites individually then I do off all ores combined.
Mind you, with goonswarms recent fix of the CSM, I'm not reupping once my sub runs out at the end of the month. If you all want to rule eve that badly, congrats, it's yours.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
674
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:00:00 -
[899] - Quote
as it should be, mining in highsec is basically legalized botting so it should pay much less than active forms of iskmaking |
Tootenh'amon
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:02:00 -
[900] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: But real PVP, unlike Ganking, puts you in a situation where you might die. Try it some time. Wining a fight that you had a chance of losing is much more rewarding than winning a fight you had no chance of losing.
PVP is pretty clearly defined. I've done a lot of it and the only difference is that you don't just shoot a respawnable useless piece of npc ass, instead you kill someone who loses something. It's not about honor, honor has been gone from eve years ago. PVP is shooting non-npcs, period. |
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:04:00 -
[901] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:as it should be, mining in highsec is basically legalized botting so it should pay much less than active forms of iskmaking
Says a man who is so utterly devoid of skill at PvP that he thinks ganking noobs is grounds for boasting.
And, frankly, every form of isk making in eve, high low or null has reached the point of legalized botting.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
387
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:06:00 -
[902] - Quote
^^^ shooting hapless people in EVE is 'small gang PVP' whats wrong with that
also,
The Great Ice Miner Bot Exodus will be amazing bring back images |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
623
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:06:00 -
[903] - Quote
How in the world can you run an unprofitable highsec mining operation? What kind of expenses does a highsec player have? Especially a miner who does not need to purchase ammo or new ships very often. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
674
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:07:00 -
[904] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Says a man who is so utterly devoid of skill at PvP that he thinks ganking noobs is grounds for boasting.
quantity has a quality all of its own
and frankly good pvpers aren't nearly as mad when you butcher them
it's like saying a real man would eat squirrel gristle instead of a delicious ribeye
sure, it may be harder to kill the squirrel instead of the cow but the cow is goddamned delicious and why the hell would you eat squirrels like you're on the Oregon trail when there are delicious pubbies mooing in the belts asking to be butchered |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1070
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:10:00 -
[905] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:How in the world can you run an unprofitable highsec mining operation? What kind of expenses does a highsec player have? Especially a miner who does not need to purchase ammo or new ships very often. cheetos, copy of stripes starring bill murray, automation software |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
387
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:12:00 -
[906] - Quote
Here lies Evilweasel If only squirrel gristle was tasty
All of the people in your party have died. Press SPACE BAR to continue. bring back images |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
250
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:12:00 -
[907] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:How in the world can you run an unprofitable highsec mining operation? What kind of expenses does a highsec player have? Especially a miner who does not need to purchase ammo or new ships very often.
Expenses: not so much, (mining crystals, drones, hulkageddon, corp member paychecks for showing up) but compare time and income in mining to time and income in mission whoring, ratting, COSMOS, scan sites, or just about anything else (including other passive forms of isk generation like PI). It's the least profitable thing you can be doing, grant total (and frankly, even mission whoring, who buys ammo? Make your own or use lasers)
Tootenh'amon wrote:You kill someone who loses something. It's not about honor, honor has been gone from eve years ago. PVP is shooting non-npcs, period.
Junior, if you think I lose something at my in game age and level of wealth if you manage to kill me (something goons have been failing at for.... five years or more now) you obviously are a noob. zomg, I lost a Bhaalgorn. There goes..... 0.012% of my total value. Woo.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Martis Gradivus
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:28:00 -
[908] - Quote
mynnna wrote:And as long as we're attacking your hyperbolic claims with facts and numbers, lets take on the idea that the caldari belts will be cleared in "a few minutes" shall we? Let's say a few minutes is four. Conveniently, I already know that it takes 62.5 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to clear an ice belt in 40 minutes, so I can reasonably conclude that it would take 625 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to do it in four. I also know that there will be 30 caldari ice belts, and so through the POWER OF MATH can reason out that you're claiming 18,750 miners will APPEAR OUT OF NOWHERE to strip the caldari belts dry in minutes, and yet somehow there will also be enough miners to mine so much of the other ice that they mine more ice than actually exists in highsec, thus somehow oversupplying that ice and keeping the price relatively low, because capital ships do not exist and do not consume isotopes.
Well, not quite sure if GoonMath(tm) is different than the one I learned in school, but the numbers I come up with are slightly different.
Currently, a fully boosted Mackinaw with a 3% Ice Mining Yield implant will yield a time of 103.3 seconds per cycle.
It therefore means that this same Mackinaw will generate about 34.8 cycles per hour, so round down to 34 cycles per hour.
34 cycles * 2 Ice Harvester IIs = 68 blocks of ice per Mackinaw.
Given that the new belts will generate 2,500 blocks of ice per spawn, it means that it will take 36.7 Mackinaws to clear out an ice belt in 1 hour, rounded to 37 Mackinaws.
To calculate this to a 40 minute cycle, you get 55 Mackinaws.
This is NOW. They plan on cutting the required cycle time to half, so you only need 27 - 28 Mackinaws (depending on how and when you round the numbers) to clear out that belt in 40 minutes.
Now, when I mine semi-afk, I use Mackinaws. When I mine full ATK, well, I break out the Hulks. If the smart cookies take out the big guns to mine, then it will be as follows:
1 Hulk fully Boosted will require 143.47 seconds per cycle.
This translates to about 25 cycles per hour (rounded down).
25 cycles * 3 Ice Harvester IIs = 75 blocks of ice per Hulk.
With that same 2,500 belt, you will get 34 Hulks to strip it in 1 hour. You therefore need 51 Hulks to strip it in 40 minutes.
Again, with the half cycle time, it will mean 25 hulks to rip that belt to nothingness in 40 minutes.
Now that we got that out of the way, I don't see how we can really make it so that the casual player and the hardcore miner can each get their piece of the pie without the botters reaping the full benefit. If we stay as is, the hardcore guy wins and if we say, quadruple the cycle time on ice lasers (this is just a thought exercise, mind you) then we get these belts stripped at a much slower pace, but the botter wins as the hard work of the hardcore atk miner is nullified.
Neither scenario works, and the current one, while more fair, also has it's flaws.
I have a few ideas on how *I* plan to *TRY* to adapt, but I am not sure I will be able to do it in a way that allows me to get my end result (which is different for me as for you as for any other person playing EVE). Now I *know* that Goons will not simply invite me into their space to mine ice just out of the generosity of their hearts, nor will any other Null Sec alliance where I could mine in *relative* safety.
So I am back to square one, and I just have no idea how I will adapt and if, ultimate, I will be able to. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
592
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:28:00 -
[909] - Quote
Tootenh'amon wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: But real PVP, unlike Ganking, puts you in a situation where you might die. Try it some time. Wining a fight that you had a chance of losing is much more rewarding than winning a fight you had no chance of losing.
PVP is pretty clearly defined. I've done a lot of it and the only difference is that you don't just shoot a respawnable useless piece of npc ass, instead you kill someone who loses something. It's not about honor, honor has been gone from eve years ago. PVP is shooting non-npcs, period. keep telling yourself that if it strokes your e-peen |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
624
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:30:00 -
[910] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Expenses: not so much, (mining crystals, drones, hulkageddon, corp member paychecks for showing up) but compare time and income in mining to time and income in mission whoring, ratting, COSMOS, scan sites, or just about anything else (including other passive forms of isk generation like PI). It's the least profitable thing you can be doing, grant total (and frankly, even mission whoring, who buys ammo? Make your own or use lasers)
If you're into mining because you like mining, your favourite constructive and relaxing style of gameplay is still there, it just might take a little bit longer to get there.
If you're into it for the isk, I suggest you go get a second job at McDonalds and sell PLEX. It will probably get you farther in life to boot. |
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1042
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:32:00 -
[911] - Quote
Martis Gradivus wrote:mynnna wrote:And as long as we're attacking your hyperbolic claims with facts and numbers, lets take on the idea that the caldari belts will be cleared in "a few minutes" shall we? Let's say a few minutes is four. Conveniently, I already know that it takes 62.5 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to clear an ice belt in 40 minutes, so I can reasonably conclude that it would take 625 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to do it in four. I also know that there will be 30 caldari ice belts, and so through the POWER OF MATH can reason out that you're claiming 18,750 miners will APPEAR OUT OF NOWHERE to strip the caldari belts dry in minutes, and yet somehow there will also be enough miners to mine so much of the other ice that they mine more ice than actually exists in highsec, thus somehow oversupplying that ice and keeping the price relatively low, because capital ships do not exist and do not consume isotopes. Well, not quite sure if GoonMath(tm) is different than the one I learned in school, but the numbers I come up with are slightly different. Currently, a fully boosted Mackinaw with a 3% Ice Mining Yield implant will yield a time of 103.3 seconds per cycle. It therefore means that this same Mackinaw will generate about 34.8 cycles per hour, so round down to 34 cycles per hour. 34 cycles * 2 Ice Harvester IIs = 68 blocks of ice per Mackinaw. Given that the new belts will generate 2,500 blocks of ice per spawn, it means that it will take 36.7 Mackinaws to clear out an ice belt in 1 hour, rounded to 37 Mackinaws. To calculate this to a 40 minute cycle, you get 55 Mackinaws. This is NOW. They plan on cutting the required cycle time to half, so you only need 27 - 28 Mackinaws (depending on how and when you round the numbers) to clear out that belt in 40 minutes. Now, when I mine semi-afk, I use Mackinaws. When I mine full ATK, well, I break out the Hulks. If the smart cookies take out the big guns to mine, then it will be as follows: 1 Hulk fully Boosted will require 143.47 seconds per cycle. This translates to about 25 cycles per hour (rounded down). 25 cycles * 3 Ice Harvester IIs = 75 blocks of ice per Hulk. With that same 2,500 belt, you will get 34 Hulks to strip it in 1 hour. You therefore need 51 Hulks to strip it in 40 minutes. Again, with the half cycle time, it will mean 25 hulks to rip that belt to nothingness in 40 minutes. Now that we got that out of the way, I don't see how we can really make it so that the casual player and the hardcore miner can each get their piece of the pie without the botters reaping the full benefit. If we stay as is, the hardcore guy wins and if we say, quadruple the cycle time on ice lasers (this is just a thought exercise, mind you) then we get these belts stripped at a much slower pace, but the botter wins as the hard work of the hardcore atk miner is nullified. Neither scenario works, and the current one, while more fair, also has it's flaws. I have a few ideas on how *I* plan to *TRY* to adapt, but I am not sure I will be able to do it in a way that allows me to get my end result (which is different for me as for you as for any other person playing EVE). Now I *know* that Goons will not simply invite me into their space to mine ice just out of the generosity of their hearts, nor will any other Null Sec alliance where I could mine in *relative* safety. So I am back to square one, and I just have no idea how I will adapt and if, ultimate, I will be able to.
I must tip my hat (or would if I had one) since I did actually forget about the doubled harvester speed.
Expecting each and every caldari ice belt to have over 300 miners apiece each and every time they're up is still a rather absurd expectation, however. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
389
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:34:00 -
[912] - Quote
On the bright side since ice belts will deplete in seconds and you'll be forced to fill that hollow 4 hour void in your life you can explore other parts of EVE or go work out bring back images |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
592
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:39:00 -
[913] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Says a man who is so utterly devoid of skill at PvP that he thinks ganking noobs is grounds for boasting.
quantity has a quality all of its own and frankly good pvpers aren't nearly as mad when you butcher them it's like saying a real man would eat squirrel gristle instead of a delicious ribeye sure, it may be harder to kill the squirrel instead of the cow but the cow is goddamned delicious and why the hell would you eat squirrels like you're on the Oregon trail when there are delicious pubbies mooing in the belts asking to be butchered No a real man eats grits and road kill.
Do you not even know what a redneck is??
I can agree that ganking is the far better way of collecting tears, but a real man does not need to make a child cry to feel better about himself.
I will say though, winning a fight you should have lost is far more rewarding then killing a noob in a mining ship.
Collecting tear is just the excuses bad PVPers use so they can stroke their e-peen through ganking.
A group of spider tanking drakes can be surprisingly hard to kill. A group of miners can be killed by a 1 week old noob, where is the challenge in that? I my book something that is so easy to do, is not worth doing, at least not in a game I pay to play. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:44:00 -
[914] - Quote
We shoot miners because even we get bored of beating up CCP bring back images |
Tootenh'amon
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:44:00 -
[915] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
Junior, if you think I lose something at my in game age and level of wealth if you manage to kill me (something goons have been failing at for.... five years or more now) you obviously are a noob. zomg, I lost a Bhaalgorn. There goes..... 0.012% of my total value. Woo.
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: keep telling yourself that if it strokes your e-peen
You two clearly belong together :) |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:45:00 -
[916] - Quote
And its not that we hate CCP, we really do love them bring back images |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9084
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:46:00 -
[917] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Martis Gradivus wrote:mynnna wrote:And as long as we're attacking your hyperbolic claims with facts and numbers, lets take on the idea that the caldari belts will be cleared in "a few minutes" shall we? Let's say a few minutes is four. Conveniently, I already know that it takes 62.5 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to clear an ice belt in 40 minutes, so I can reasonably conclude that it would take 625 fully boosted all V skills mackinaws to do it in four. I also know that there will be 30 caldari ice belts, and so through the POWER OF MATH can reason out that you're claiming 18,750 miners will APPEAR OUT OF NOWHERE to strip the caldari belts dry in minutes, and yet somehow there will also be enough miners to mine so much of the other ice that they mine more ice than actually exists in highsec, thus somehow oversupplying that ice and keeping the price relatively low, because capital ships do not exist and do not consume isotopes. Well, not quite sure if GoonMath(tm) is different than the one I learned in school, but the numbers I come up with are slightly different. Currently, a fully boosted Mackinaw with a 3% Ice Mining Yield implant will yield a time of 103.3 seconds per cycle. It therefore means that this same Mackinaw will generate about 34.8 cycles per hour, so round down to 34 cycles per hour. 34 cycles * 2 Ice Harvester IIs = 68 blocks of ice per Mackinaw. Given that the new belts will generate 2,500 blocks of ice per spawn, it means that it will take 36.7 Mackinaws to clear out an ice belt in 1 hour, rounded to 37 Mackinaws. To calculate this to a 40 minute cycle, you get 55 Mackinaws. This is NOW. They plan on cutting the required cycle time to half, so you only need 27 - 28 Mackinaws (depending on how and when you round the numbers) to clear out that belt in 40 minutes. Now, when I mine semi-afk, I use Mackinaws. When I mine full ATK, well, I break out the Hulks. If the smart cookies take out the big guns to mine, then it will be as follows: 1 Hulk fully Boosted will require 143.47 seconds per cycle. This translates to about 25 cycles per hour (rounded down). 25 cycles * 3 Ice Harvester IIs = 75 blocks of ice per Hulk. With that same 2,500 belt, you will get 34 Hulks to strip it in 1 hour. You therefore need 51 Hulks to strip it in 40 minutes. Again, with the half cycle time, it will mean 25 hulks to rip that belt to nothingness in 40 minutes. Now that we got that out of the way, I don't see how we can really make it so that the casual player and the hardcore miner can each get their piece of the pie without the botters reaping the full benefit. If we stay as is, the hardcore guy wins and if we say, quadruple the cycle time on ice lasers (this is just a thought exercise, mind you) then we get these belts stripped at a much slower pace, but the botter wins as the hard work of the hardcore atk miner is nullified. Neither scenario works, and the current one, while more fair, also has it's flaws. I have a few ideas on how *I* plan to *TRY* to adapt, but I am not sure I will be able to do it in a way that allows me to get my end result (which is different for me as for you as for any other person playing EVE). Now I *know* that Goons will not simply invite me into their space to mine ice just out of the generosity of their hearts, nor will any other Null Sec alliance where I could mine in *relative* safety. So I am back to square one, and I just have no idea how I will adapt and if, ultimate, I will be able to. I must tip my hat (or would if I had one) since I did actually forget about the doubled harvester speed. I think the other variations are just small variations though. I just used whatever blocks/hour eve IPH told me. Expecting each and every caldari ice belt to have over 300 miners apiece each and every time they're up is still a rather absurd expectation, however.
Obviously you haven't checked out Osmon this last week.
1 Kings 12:11
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
677
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:48:00 -
[918] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: No a real man eats grits and road kill.
Do you not even know what a redneck is??
I can agree that ganking is the far better way of collecting tears, but a real man does not need to make a child cry to feel better about himself.
I will say though, winning a fight you should have lost is far more rewarding then killing a noob in a mining ship.
Collecting tear is just the excuses bad PVPers use so they can stroke their e-peen through ganking.
A group of spider tanking drakes can be surprisingly hard to kill. A group of miners can be killed by a 1 week old noob, where is the challenge in that? I my book something that is so easy to do, is not worth doing, at least not in a game I pay to play.
a redneck is apparently a wretched poor who is eating roadkill i think we'll agree to disagree on if jimbob scraping the squirrel off the side of the road for dinner is who we want to emulate here
i do agree highseccers are as children but we're going to have to likewise agree to disagree on how delightful hearing them scream because you took their candy is. one does not need the finer things in life to survive, but for those who are not content merely surviving on roadkill... |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
677
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:49:00 -
[919] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: Obviously you haven't checked out Osmon this last week.
that reminds me i have to figure out how many typhoons to kill a mack these days |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
815
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:51:00 -
[920] - Quote
Confirming figuratively caving in the skulls of figurative helpless children is by far the best part of Eve. |
|
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
155
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:52:00 -
[921] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: No a real man eats grits and road kill.
Do you not even know what a redneck is??
I can agree that ganking is the far better way of collecting tears, but a real man does not need to make a child cry to feel better about himself.
I will say though, winning a fight you should have lost is far more rewarding then killing a noob in a mining ship.
Collecting tear is just the excuses bad PVPers use so they can stroke their e-peen through ganking.
A group of spider tanking drakes can be surprisingly hard to kill. A group of miners can be killed by a 1 week old noob, where is the challenge in that? I my book something that is so easy to do, is not worth doing, at least not in a game I pay to play.
That's pretty cool, and thanks to the sandbox, you can not-kill miners all day long! Glad you have fun!
On the flipside, limiting yourself via eBushido is pretty silly, when your opponent is under no obligation to do the same. In many ways, EVE mirrors the behaviour of RL military. Yeah, there's all kinds of noise about "honor" and all that, but any vet can tell you, the military fights dirty. Ganks, you bet. Ambushes, for sure. Equivalents of gatecamps (static ambushes on chokepoints) are taught to day one boots.
Why gank? A better question is, Why NOT gank? If you don't protect it, you don't deserve to have it. It's the EVE way. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
677
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:54:00 -
[922] - Quote
i was reading a book on the marines once and i loved a section where they were critiquing an attack plan
and the critique was basically "this is like going up to the guy, telling him the fight's on, and throwing a punch. don't do that. smile, and when he turns around thinking you're not a threat, cave in his skull with a chair." |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.03 20:56:00 -
[923] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i was reading a book on the marines once and i loved a section where they were critiquing an attack plan
and the critique was basically "this is like going up to the guy, telling him the fight's on, and throwing a punch. don't do that. smile, and when he turns around thinking you're not a threat, cave in his skull with a chair."
Thats also a good strategy for bar fights bring back images |
Bario Norte
Billionaire's Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 06:32:00 -
[924] - Quote
Loney wrote:COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just donGÇÖt call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.
If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.
Suggestions
1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression. a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%. b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100% c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.
If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.
2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION. a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS. or b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.
This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.
Thanks, Loney
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT
[ Something needs to be done with the Rorqual if they are doing all these changes to ICE and expect that 20% of the ICE is not going to be mined in highsec.
After the patch the HULK will roughly mine 200 blocks of ICE an hour with max skills and an implant... The rorqual can only compress roughly 320 blocks of ICE and hour... this is THE STUPIDEST THING EVER!
1.5 HULK TO ONE RORQUAL for compression of ICE... I CCP was trying to make this a group activity for mining in 0.0 but do you really expect a corporation of 32 Exhumer pilots to mine for 1 hour and then ALL 32 jump into a Rorqual and compress for 1 hour?
The Rorqual need a few things done... Make the Compression RATE of ICE EQUAL to the MINING rate of a HULK... then make the RORQUAL be able to support something more then 1.5 hulks... like each Rorqual should be able to support 10+ Hulks...
If you decrease the compression time by a little (by giving rorqual a compression bonus per level) and increase the number of slots to 10-11 for compression on the rorqual (either by flat number of slots or again a rorqual bonus per level) then it would make that much more sense.
Honestly the Tractor beam, scanner, and drone bonuses are total lame in my opionion and we could lose those to make up for the bonuses I suggested above.
Please do it.... so it can come out with this patch and not like 6 months later!!!!!
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 06:58:00 -
[925] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Don't think so much. He talks about the past and does not seem to know how many ice miners actually are around. A ton.
you are (a) claiming that ice miners will unsub in droves and then (b) using the pre-patch figures and only managing to prove that he was absolutely correct and that even with pre-patch figures you were massively off about how long ice spawns will last so you're contradicting yourself and wrong, which is impressive
No, I am claiming that (a) small operation ice miners will be the worst affected, a sad yet ever becoming common phenomenon in EvE (where now one is just a moron NOT joining a blob for everything, now industry too) and (b) I use the figures available not wannabe futuristic ones. The exact minutes the spawns will last are not relevant, because they are still a o(respawn time).
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 07:04:00 -
[926] - Quote
mynnna wrote:To this one: Quote:Isotopes harvested in March? 2.67bn Nitrogen, 1.73bn Helium, 1.70bn Oxygen, 1.18bn Hydrogen. Caldari are rather wildly overrepresented in the POS use department, with 3.6 times more caldari POS than the least used (gallente), yet despite the popularity of Caldari ice (due to proximity to Jita) only 2.2x more of it is mined than the least mined ice. A reflection of the relative popularity of each race's capital ships? I think so.
Look at the different volumes and prices. Price talks and discounts the POSes and the ships. The weight of Caldari POSes is very large and I don't recall Caldari capital ships being the super FOTM most used ships. That's all that matters (to me and others), because that means that a flat 80% rate horizontally applied to every ice is going to have amplified effects for Caldari ices vs the other races.
Feel free to add more (old) numbers, Jita prices are still there to look at, Jita volumes are still there to look at regardless how you interpret them. Because in the end, only price matters, and I go with price, not funnymentals.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 07:09:00 -
[927] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:as it should be, mining in highsec is basically legalized botting so it should pay much less than active forms of iskmaking
With the current game mechanics, mining in *every sec* and expecially yours, is legalized botting. In hi sec bots can't use the local chat screen reader, in null they can and auto-warp to safe. In hi sec, bots may be reported and ganked, in sov null they may be protected by the corporate brass.
Despite your own illusions, you don't become a better man just because you fly in null. The only ones who deserve respect are large WHs inhabitants, those give up on every safeguard and soon they will lose the only advantage (requiring to be probed) they got. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4021
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 07:22:00 -
[928] - Quote
mynnna wrote:I must tip my hat (or would if I had one) since I did actually forget about the doubled harvester speed. I think the other variations are just small variations though. I just used whatever blocks/hour eve IPH told me. Expecting each and every caldari ice belt to have over 300 miners apiece each and every time they're up is still a rather absurd expectation, however.
Odd how your precise and brown nosed (by the other guy) math is inflatable on demand.
I presented a *rough* estimate of 200, which is somewhat below the 300 you say.
What will happen in more detail, should be this: first days: massive reduction in ice mined due both to bots breaking and people simply not being informed and just not finding belts. Then the new and stupid mechanic will become known and people will know they MUST get there first and hoard as much as possible. Some might even try switching to full yield Hulks, with booom-tastic tears results. This will lead to a "sawtooth" usage, where more miners than now - also coming from surrounding empty ice systems will flow to the remaining belt, achieving higher numbers of ships than today. At this point, estimating 200 up from the current 120-150 is not an huge jump in theorycraft. After some weeks, miners will begin to understand that most just can't get enough of the stuff (Caldari ice) before it's gone and will give up. How exactly they'll "give up" will translate: migrate to Amarr ice, move to roids or unsub mining accounts is not predictable, but I do hope CCP gets a slap in the face for inventing such an asinine timer. Slaps in face are what drove CCP to do some of their best work, look at how good the mass unsub after the GREED IS GOOD + "let's release half assed, half made patches" period: after the slap, CCP started delivering more focused and practical and even fun patches again. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Bario Norte
Billionaire's Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 08:20:00 -
[929] - Quote
-- |
Bario Norte
Billionaire's Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 08:21:00 -
[930] - Quote
-- |
|
Bario Norte
Billionaire's Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 08:22:00 -
[931] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products. You say you are not "planning" changes... but ICE compression will be by far at a disadvantage... can you please take a look at just doing something about the ice compressions so its not like 1.5 HULKS for 1 Rorqual!!!
Also, the "local market" as you stated will not buy the volume of ice that is mined in o.o even if prices are WAY LESS then jita prices. Furthermore, it does not solve the problem about how to get the ICE to so-called (0.0 market hub) from the mining system!
Thanks. |
Bario Norte
Billionaire's Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 08:33:00 -
[932] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: What will happen in more detail, should be this: first days: massive reduction in ice mined due both to bots breaking and people simply not being informed and just not finding belts. Then the new and stupid mechanic will become known and people will know they MUST get there first and hoard as much as possible. Some might even try switching to full yield Hulks, with booom-tastic tears results. This will lead to a "sawtooth" usage, where more miners than now - also coming from surrounding empty ice systems will flow to the remaining belt, achieving higher numbers of ships than today. At this point, estimating 200 up from the current 120-150 is not an huge jump in theorycraft. After some weeks, miners will begin to understand that most just can't get enough of the stuff (Caldari ice) before it's gone and will give up. How exactly they'll "give up" will translate: migrate to Amarr ice, move to roids or unsub mining accounts is not predictable, but I do hope CCP gets a slap in the face for inventing such an asinine timer. Slaps in face are what drove CCP to do some of their best work, look at how good the mass unsub after the GREED IS GOOD + "let's release half assed, half made patches" period: after the slap, CCP started delivering more focused and practical and even fun patches again.
What I got form all this and the last 2 dozen post of your are that:... you are going to sell your botting accounts cause you don't want to move to LOWSEC or NULLSEC to mine. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 09:12:00 -
[933] - Quote
Bario Norte wrote: What I got form all this and the last 2 dozen post of your are that:... you are going to sell your botting accounts cause you don't want to move to LOWSEC or NULLSEC to mine.
The botter who:
1) Wanted to sponsor the next Hulkageddon (feel free to search the copious GD posts about that).
2) Posted in this thread he could play 1 hour this week (botters are known for being logged on 1 hour a week AMIRITE?
3) Posted in this thread he'd prefer ice belts to become gravimetric sites, that is, much harder to scan and bot than the proposed change.
Conclusion: please unstick your head from your butt, it went way too high inside. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 09:14:00 -
[934] - Quote
Still amazed both by CCP and the "pro players": always flaunting the PLAYER DRIVEN oh holy sandbox and then both ready to give up for the low hanging fruit solution and put in a...
... fake, unrealistic, cheap TIMER. A TIMER in a sandbox. Next week we read WoW became a sandbox too, they are full of timers too after all. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Mars Theran
Red Rogue Squadron Heart 0f Darkness
1637
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 09:24:00 -
[935] - Quote
Nice. Good to see some overhauls of current systems and shake up of the economy. zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
624
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:30:00 -
[936] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Just undo the barges buffs and let PLAYERS kill miners and define supply, demand and market price. THAT's an imperfect yet sandboxy and realistic solution, not this farce.
I agree, let's move all ice mining to lowsec and nullsec.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:35:00 -
[937] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Just undo the barges buffs and let PLAYERS kill miners and define supply, demand and market price. THAT's an imperfect yet sandboxy and realistic solution, not this farce. I agree, let's move all ice mining to lowsec and nullsec.
Deal. But ONLY in low sec and NPC null sec. Sov null sec is too easy to transform into an endless bot-land and there's nobody to report the bots and it's too easy for them to detect neuts in local and warp to POS / safe. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:38:00 -
[938] - Quote
Ice was being oversupplied because people enjoyed supplying it and were willing to work for very small return. That play style, where you can stay logged and just come and check your PC and fleet of mining ships once in a while, is being removed.
I know of lot of miners who are quitting and others that will just reduce their number of accounts and go and do missions instead. So what will happen?
At a simple global macro view the productivity of mining ships has been increased and so fewer miners will be required. On top that the price hike, already caused to ice will reduce demand further as POS's go offline further reducing the need for miners. There will also be some reallocation of resource extraction so that there is less need for freighter pilots. So in short there will be less of pretty much everything. All of this does nothing to address the big blue doughnut.
An uncontrolled loss of subs in a MMO is a very dangerous thing as it can create momentum for decline, especially in a game that is stagnating. This will also hit the confidence of investors. You really have to wonder whether CCP Fozzie and those involved in this have just got a huge stakes in Elite and are trying to sabotage EVE.
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:44:00 -
[939] - Quote
Perhaps some changes to the Rorqual my be relevant.
bigger ore bay - perhaps smaller normal bay Cans with ore goes directly to the orebay change the ice compression time if the boost has to be on grid please remove the need for it to be running the core. Nobody is going to have it deployed in a grav site.
when opening the corporate hanger array it always opens in the director tab, this must be a CCP trolls since 99% of ppl who uses them does not have access to this tab. Make it open the public by default instead. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
624
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:05:00 -
[940] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Deal. But ONLY in low sec and NPC null sec. Sov null sec is too easy to transform into an endless bot-land and there's nobody to report the bots and it's too easy for them to detect neuts in local and warp to POS / safe.
You can still run a bot empire in lowsec or NPC null. Empty regions like Stain and Outer Ring are full of them.
If limiting the amount of damage a group of botters could do was your main objective, making it easier for miners to get caught would be best because then you need to have an active defense fleet. You can't bot a defense fleet.
At the same time you can reward players for taking the additional risk, either by giving them more reward or by removing excess supply.
Odyssey is a baby step in both directions. If they took any larger steps in just one patch people would be shooting monuments in Jita because of their irrational hate of nullsec players. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 14:15:00 -
[941] - Quote
EI Digin wrote: If limiting the amount of damage a group of botters could do was your main objective, making it easier for miners to get caught would be best because then you need to have an active defense fleet. You can't bot a defense fleet.
At the same time you can reward players for taking the additional risk, either by giving them more reward or by removing excess supply.
Odyssey is a baby step in both directions. If they took any larger steps in just one patch people would be shooting monuments in Jita because of their irrational hate of nullsec players.
CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
Ice is not going to cost 70k a unit to justify mercs or something to perma-camp the field and defend from (potential) hostiles.
Even if EvE copied RL (troops / mercs protecting tankers from pirates), there's still the factor that EvE is a game so it's harder to "sell" - even paying ISK - to such troops the idea they are meant to sit there all day long twiddling their thumbs. People log in to have fun.
Even miners log in to have fun, their adaptation has been to go AFK / play another client and do something else, but PvPers can't go AFK to guard a fleet, I don't see this solution being viable. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9093
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 14:25:00 -
[942] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote:Ice was being oversupplied because people enjoyed supplying it and were willing to work for very small return. That play style, where you can stay logged and just come and check your PC and fleet of mining ships once in a while, is being removed.
I know of lot of miners who are quitting and others that will just reduce their number of accounts and go and do missions instead. So what will happen?
At a simple global macro view the productivity of mining ships has been increased and so fewer miners will be required. On top that the price hike, already caused to ice will reduce demand further as POS's go offline further reducing the need for miners. There will also be some reallocation of resource extraction so that there is less need for freighter pilots. So in short there will be less of pretty much everything. All of this does nothing to address the big blue doughnut.
An uncontrolled loss of subs in a MMO is a very dangerous thing as it can create momentum for decline, especially in a game that is stagnating. This will also hit the confidence of investors. You really have to wonder whether CCP Fozzie and those involved in this have just got a huge stakes in Elite and are trying to sabotage EVE.
8/10 you kept a straight face right through to the end.
1 Kings 12:11
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
680
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 14:52:00 -
[943] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does not soil themselves in fear of losing a ship |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:13:00 -
[944] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does not soil themselves in fear of losing a ship
Except most people will not mine if it becomes a risky profession. Since the return at current prices, is NOT high enough for the risk. With less miners, will mean less minerals on the market, means higher mineral prices, will mean HIGHER prices for EVERYTHING including mining ships. So then the question will come down to.. How high will mineral prices rise in order to make it worth while for miners to actually mine it in null/low/WH space. Not a guarantee that it will result in more mining, what is guaranteed is that prices will rise on EVERYTHING.
Mining is a boring ass job. People do it because they can semi-afk it. (and whether you like to admit or not, it is a NECESSITY in a game where items are supplied by players). The proposed changes, will make it so that people will NOT be able to mine in the "dangerous" areas of space without actually CONSTANTLY paying attention to their client. Which is a VERY VERY BORING endeavor considering all you do is watch your lazers cycle. (and maybe empty your hold). Before you say that so they should NOT be reaping the benefits for being AFK, mining is not nearly as lucrative a business as running anoms, sites etc. So do you really think that all those guys mining in null/low/WH will continue to do so with the GREATLY increased risk to their safety and LITTLE increase in reward vice moving on to the more lucrative activities. (which in turn will increase the competition amongst THOSE activities as well causing even more people to be annoyed since they won't be making their 3-6bil per couple days of scanning anymore) |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:15:00 -
[945] - Quote
^ this. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
820
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:28:00 -
[946] - Quote
Ahhh the sweet waterfall of AFK multiboxing tears.
Prices will rise until players who distinguish little between shooting space rocks and shooting red crosses switch between them.
Eve will continue to reward activity over inactivity, so might as well get used to it. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
680
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:31:00 -
[947] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Before you say that so they should NOT be reaping the benefits for being AFK, mining is not nearly as lucrative a business as running anoms, sites etc. So do you really think that all those guys mining in null/low/WH will continue to do so with the GREATLY increased risk to their safety and LITTLE increase in reward vice moving on to the more lucrative activities the profit is being greatly increased, so yes, they will deal |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:35:00 -
[948] - Quote
This is a wasted opprtunity as well as being destructive. What CCP should be doing is improving the PVE and the sense of realism.
Isn't it stupid the way the belt rats just keep spawning and throwing themselves st ships they have zero chance of damaging?
How much better would it be if the PVE made some sense? Lets say a Gurista hideout spawns in the system. Rats from that hideout warp out and travel to belts - scouting. The longer the hideout is left undetected the more chance it has of increasing in size.
Eventually a reasonable fleet spawns at the enlarged base and warps to the belt to attack a number of targets selected by the scouts - a serious attack with a real chance of success. Faction police may spawn to defend the belt.. This would make it all more realistic, and fun.
Mining ships would be forced to tank or leave the belt both reducing their productivity. Belt defense could be fun. Gankers would want to co-ordinate any attack as the ships and belts would be better defended.
People scanning sites and destroying sites at source would be also be having a direct impact on their fellow citizens |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:36:00 -
[949] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Ahhh the sweet waterfall of AFK multiboxing tears.
Prices will rise until players who distinguish little between shooting space rocks and shooting red crosses switch between them.
Eve will continue to reward activity over inactivity, so might as well get used to it.
I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships. |
EI Digin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
627
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:39:00 -
[950] - Quote
You mean killing someone's ship is actually going to matter now? Sign me up! |
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
820
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:43:00 -
[951] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships.
Sounds great.
Everything is too cheap, especially ice.
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:46:00 -
[952] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Ahhh the sweet waterfall of AFK multiboxing tears.
Prices will rise until players who distinguish little between shooting space rocks and shooting red crosses switch between them.
Eve will continue to reward activity over inactivity, so might as well get used to it. I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships.
I do not see any facts, for the price of ships doubling.
Sadly this thread has been derailed by a few ppl who are afraid that their AFK highsec ice mining fleets would actually require them to interact with the game. They have played the usually cards like unsubbing, eve is dying, this will break the game etc. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:48:00 -
[953] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Ahhh the sweet waterfall of AFK multiboxing tears.
Prices will rise until players who distinguish little between shooting space rocks and shooting red crosses switch between them.
Eve will continue to reward activity over inactivity, so might as well get used to it. I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships. I do not see any facts for the price of ships doubling. Sadly this thread has been derailed by a few ppl who are afraid that their AFK highsec ice mining fleets would actually require them to interact with the game. They have played the usually cards like unsubbing, eve is dying, this will break the game etc.
I am not talking about ice mining.. I'm talking about changing current grav sites, into anomalies. \
As for prices, I'm merely guestimating, Considering that with a profit of say 20 mil an HOUR for mining Bistot, (if the prices I saw for the new changes are accurate) it will take 10-15 hours of constant mining to make up for the price of your ship, (not counting crystal use) and the chances in a WH that without the early warning probes gave miners, they'll be loosing their ships much more often than before. At a certain point, they'll get bored of being blown up for the pennies when they can just get into their combat ships and run anoms instead and make 3-4 times that with much less risk. |
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:51:00 -
[954] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Lurifax wrote:Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Ahhh the sweet waterfall of AFK multiboxing tears.
Prices will rise until players who distinguish little between shooting space rocks and shooting red crosses switch between them.
Eve will continue to reward activity over inactivity, so might as well get used to it. I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships. I do not see any facts for the price of ships doubling. Sadly this thread has been derailed by a few ppl who are afraid that their AFK highsec ice mining fleets would actually require them to interact with the game. They have played the usually cards like unsubbing, eve is dying, this will break the game etc. I am not talking about ice mining.. I'm talking about changing current grav sites, into anomalies.
I do not see the anomily change as a thread. Unless your afk, you should have enough time to get away. If your close to the gate bubble it use sling bubbles. If your afk you deserver to die. The grav site is only a false safety since you can be probed there.
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:53:00 -
[955] - Quote
Lurifax wrote: I do not see the anomily change as a thread. Unless your afk, you should have enough time to get away. If your close to the gate bubble it use sling bubbles. If your afk you deserver to die. The grav site is only a false safety since you can be probed there.
In a WH you don't have local, and that's my point.. The PROBES gave you a headsup to GTFO.. In Odyssey, a fast tackle can jump into a system, scan down the grav site and warp there BEFORE whoever is in that belt will be able to align to warp out. (and that's in a regular system where the miner has the warning of local) in WHs,,. your only warning will be the guy decloaking and scramming you. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
820
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:57:00 -
[956] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:In a WH you don't have local, and that's my point.. The PROBES gave you a headsup to GTFO.. In Odyssey, a fast tackle can jump into a system, scan down the grav site and warp there BEFORE whoever is in that belt will be able to align to warp out. (and that's in a regular system where the miner has the warning of local) in WHs,,. your only warning will be the guy decloaking and scramming you.
waitwaitwait, a drop in WH mining is going to double prices across the board?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9095
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:59:00 -
[957] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote:This is a wasted opprtunity as well as being destructive. What CCP should be doing is improving the PVE and the sense of realism.
Isn't it stupid the way the belt rats just keep spawning and throwing themselves st ships they have zero chance of damaging?
How much better would it be if the PVE made some sense? Lets say a Gurista hideout spawns in the system. Rats from that hideout warp out and travel to belts - scouting. The longer the hideout is left undetected the more chance it has of increasing in size.
Eventually a reasonable fleet spawns at the enlarged base and warps to the belt to attack a number of targets selected by the scouts - a serious attack with a real chance of success. Faction police may spawn to defend the belt.. This would make it all more realistic, and fun.
Mining ships would be forced to tank or leave the belt both reducing their productivity. Belt defense could be fun. Gankers would want to co-ordinate any attack as the ships and belts would be better defended.
People scanning sites and destroying sites at source would be also be having a direct impact on their fellow citizens
That's a gameplay proposal (and quite a good one, I like it).
This change is about game balance, which is a different thing.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:02:00 -
[958] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:In a WH you don't have local, and that's my point.. The PROBES gave you a headsup to GTFO.. In Odyssey, a fast tackle can jump into a system, scan down the grav site and warp there BEFORE whoever is in that belt will be able to align to warp out. (and that's in a regular system where the miner has the warning of local) in WHs,,. your only warning will be the guy decloaking and scramming you. waitwaitwait, a drop in WH mining is going to double prices across the board?
No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
821
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:07:00 -
[959] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices.
And with that you've crossed from the terrible to the ridiculous.
Good day. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:13:00 -
[960] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices. And with that you've crossed from the terrible to the ridiculous. Good day.
So you seriously don't think that turning grav sites in low/null/WH will cause people to stop mining in them? Considering, that when someone jumps into a system, they still needed to SCAN you down with probes before they could warp to you. Which gave you enough time to align your ships and bounce to a pos/safe/etc. All for a HUGE profit boost of an extra 10 mil an hour? |
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:13:00 -
[961] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:In a WH you don't have local, and that's my point.. The PROBES gave you a headsup to GTFO.. In Odyssey, a fast tackle can jump into a system, scan down the grav site and warp there BEFORE whoever is in that belt will be able to align to warp out. (and that's in a regular system where the miner has the warning of local) in WHs,,. your only warning will be the guy decloaking and scramming you. waitwaitwait, a drop in WH mining is going to double prices across the board? No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices.
So are you talking about 0.0 mining again? Which really wont be impacted in regards to safety or are just trolling ? |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:15:00 -
[962] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:In a WH you don't have local, and that's my point.. The PROBES gave you a headsup to GTFO.. In Odyssey, a fast tackle can jump into a system, scan down the grav site and warp there BEFORE whoever is in that belt will be able to align to warp out. (and that's in a regular system where the miner has the warning of local) in WHs,,. your only warning will be the guy decloaking and scramming you. waitwaitwait, a drop in WH mining is going to double prices across the board? No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices. So are you talking about 0.0 mining again? Which really wont be impacted in regards to safety or are just trolling ?
I am talking about ALL mining.. but not ICE mining. since the issue I'm discussing is the changing of sites to anoms.
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:27:00 -
[963] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices. And with that you've crossed from the terrible to the ridiculous. Good day. So you seriously don't think that turning grav sites in low/null/WH will cause people to stop mining in them? Considering, that when someone jumps into a system, they still needed to SCAN you down with probes before they could warp to you. Which gave you enough time to align your ships and bounce to a pos/safe/etc. All for a HUGE profit boost of an extra 10 mil an hour?
The changes means that ppl mining are now found the same way as you find ppl in forsaken hubs. Ppl are still running does. I do not see ppl stop mining in 0.0 becuase of this. In regards to WH I will not comment on that since I do not know anything about the WH mechanics or how much of the total ore they supply. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:31:00 -
[964] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:
The changes means that ppl mining are now found the same way as you find ppl in forsaken hubs. Ppl are still running does. I do not see ppl stop mining in 0.0 becuase of this. In regards to WH I will not comment on that since I do not know anything about the WH mechanics or how much of the total ore they supply.
Yeah.. but you're not sitting in the same forsaken hub for a full day, also, at least with a ship that can run combat anoms you stand a bit of a chance in fighting back versus your attacker. (small chance since the pve vs pvp fitting is very different, but you still stand more of a chance than you do with a mining ship) Not to mention, most ships running sites, are WAY faster at aligning than mining ships. |
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:38:00 -
[965] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Lurifax wrote:
The changes means that ppl mining are now found the same way as you find ppl in forsaken hubs. Ppl are still running does. I do not see ppl stop mining in 0.0 becuase of this. In regards to WH I will not comment on that since I do not know anything about the WH mechanics or how much of the total ore they supply.
Yeah.. but you're not sitting in the same forsaken hub for a full day, also, at least with a ship that can run combat anoms you stand a bit of a chance in fighting back versus your attacker. (small chance since the pve vs pvp fitting is very different, but you still stand more of a chance than you do with a mining ship) Not to mention, most ships running sites, are WAY faster at aligning than mining ships.
So here we are talking about 0.0 mining. I alredy talked about the use of bubbles. You could align your mining ship? With these changes mining will become a bit like ratting. If they caught you it is because you were bad/afk.
edit:spelling |
Flash Phoenix
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:51:00 -
[966] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Deal. But ONLY in low sec and NPC null sec. Sov null sec is too easy to transform into an endless bot-land and there's nobody to report the bots and it's too easy for them to detect neuts in local and warp to POS / safe. You can still run a bot empire in lowsec or NPC null. Empty regions like Stain and Outer Ring are full of them. If limiting the amount of damage a group of botters could do was your main objective, making it easier for miners to get caught would be best because then you need to have an active defense fleet. You can't bot a defense fleet. At the same time you can reward players for taking the additional risk, either by giving them more reward or by removing excess supply. Odyssey is a baby step in both directions. If they took any larger steps in just one patch people would be shooting monuments in Jita because of their irrational hate of nullsec players.
how about CCP take care of the botters and and PvP look for some interactive kills instead of ganks. CCP has stated nothing in this upgrade is about botting |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
251
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:08:00 -
[967] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:[
So here we are talking about 0.0 mining. I alredy talked about the use of bubbles. You could align your mining ship? With these changes mining will become a bit like ratting. If they caught you it is because you were bad/afk.
The problem is that nullbears are getting a big freebie for near zero additional risk. It's funny, nullsec players are quick to claim that additional risk should yield additional profit, but I don't see how giving nullbears free mins for the same ore increases their risk. Do the roids explode now? Or will we be taking away local in nullsec?
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:09:00 -
[968] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Soko99 wrote:Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:No.. but makign mining in the dangerous areas of space, become even more of a turkey shoot. will cause a drop in those spaces being used for mining.. Which in turn will reduce supply, and thus drive prices. And with that you've crossed from the terrible to the ridiculous. Good day. So you seriously don't think that turning grav sites in low/null/WH will cause people to stop mining in them? Considering, that when someone jumps into a system, they still needed to SCAN you down with probes before they could warp to you. Which gave you enough time to align your ships and bounce to a pos/safe/etc. All for a HUGE profit boost of an extra 10 mil an hour? The changes means that ppl mining are now found the same way as you find ppl in forsaken hubs. Ppl are still running does. I do not see ppl stop mining in 0.0 becuase of this. In regards to WH I will not comment on that since I do not know anything about the WH mechanics or how much of the total ore they supply. Null will handle this. It's about the hisec rock chewers. It's about the fact hisec looses a really big portion of the resource market. It's about the fact ganking could get more profitable then mission running in hisec. And way quicker isk. Tbh, i doubt that the guy implementing this had even the smallest ideea of the implications. Seeing this happen will bring a lot of good time and joy to some What i bet on is the fact that all this fun and joy won't be for some expecting to get it, after a time.
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:32:00 -
[969] - Quote
@Oldwolf69
could you explain why these changes would suddenly make ganking so profitable? It is my impression that ganking has always been profitable, if you did a cost benefit before you ganked.
The highsec rockchewers might take a loss on the mining, but how big this will be we can only guess. |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:41:00 -
[970] - Quote
Let's do a cloaky alt in your ice anom. And gank the haulers, orcas and whatever. Loot with neutral alts, rinse and repeat. Then extorcate.After a time, go back to ganking. Rinse and repeat. Miners will sing best gospel and bluegrass ever heard in this world, after a time. And i'm affraid there will be no Abe Lincoln for them. Just a James. *** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bquVRnGaFHQ " When Israel was in EgyptGÇÖs land, Let My people go! Oppressed so hard they could not stand, Let My people go! Refrain: Go down, Moses, Way down in EgyptGÇÖs land; Tell old Pharaoh To let My people go! No more shall they in bondage toil, Let My people go! Let them come out with EgyptGÇÖs spoil, Let My people go! Oh, let us all from bondage flee, Let My people go! And let us all in Christ be free, Let My people go! You need not always weep and mourn, Let My people go! And wear these slavGÇÖry chains forlorn, Let My people go! Your foes shall not before you stand, Let My people go! And youGÇÖll possess fair CanaanGÇÖs land, Let My people go!"
|
|
Lurifax
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:53:00 -
[971] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Lurifax wrote:[
So here we are talking about 0.0 mining. I alredy talked about the use of bubbles. You could align your mining ship? With these changes mining will become a bit like ratting. If they caught you it is because you were bad/afk. The problem is that nullbears are getting a big freebie for near zero additional risk. It's funny, nullsec players are quick to claim that additional risk should yield additional profit, but I don't see how giving nullbears free mins for the same ore increases their risk. Do the roids explode now? Or will we be taking away local in nullsec?
The Astoride composition was changed becasuse CCP wished to reduce the 0.0 dependency on highsec. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:54:00 -
[972] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Soko99 wrote:Lurifax wrote:
The changes means that ppl mining are now found the same way as you find ppl in forsaken hubs. Ppl are still running does. I do not see ppl stop mining in 0.0 becuase of this. In regards to WH I will not comment on that since I do not know anything about the WH mechanics or how much of the total ore they supply.
Yeah.. but you're not sitting in the same forsaken hub for a full day, also, at least with a ship that can run combat anoms you stand a bit of a chance in fighting back versus your attacker. (small chance since the pve vs pvp fitting is very different, but you still stand more of a chance than you do with a mining ship) Not to mention, most ships running sites, are WAY faster at aligning than mining ships. So here we are talking about 0.0 mining. I alredy talked about the use of bubbles. You could align your mining ship? With these changes mining will become a bit like ratting. If they caught you it is because you were bad/afk. edit:spelling
have you tried mining while aligned? it's a real PITA. Aside from making constant BMS to make sure that the roid you're mining is actually in range of the 2 BMs so you can go back and forth, AND assuming you don't get stuck on rocks along your path. You still have to deal with the issue of dumping your cans which will VERY quickly be out of range for you to actual put your minerals in. (unless you suggest an ORCA or rorqual follows you into the belt and sits with you there just chugging along with your miners picking up their cans as they go) |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:57:00 -
[973] - Quote
Flash Phoenix wrote:
how about CCP take care of the botters and and PvP look for some interactive kills instead of ganks. CCP has stated nothing in this upgrade is about botting
that's the problem.. This change will do nothing for the botters since their responses are automatic and do not suffer from human delay. But it will mess up the humans a LOT since they're now having even less reaction time to be safe. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:00:00 -
[974] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Let's do a cloaky alt in your ice anom. And gank the haulers, orcas and whatever. Loot with neutral alts, rinse and repeat. Then extorcate.After a time, go back to ganking. Rinse and repeat. Miners will sing best gospel and bluegrass ever heard in this world, after a time. And i'm affraid there will be no Abe Lincoln for them. Just a James.
oh and don't forget that gankers will now be able to get rid of their flashyness by just spending isk on tags.
I'm starting to worry here.. I'm agreeing with spacemonkeys.. :D guess the end is nigh.. :) |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:02:00 -
[975] - Quote
Bots are bots. And afk'ers are in no way different. They all bots to me. No matter if they mine, pve or pvp. But i'm really open about my opinion, not like CCP wich's all "they bots if they are not mine". |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:08:00 -
[976] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does not soil themselves in fear of losing a ship
That's why almost nobody mined endless ice in sov null sec when in 2012 it was worth 1500 ISK pu, right? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:11:00 -
[977] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:I wonder if you'll be saying this in 4-5 months when prices double for your precious ships and modules. You guys can put down carebearing all you want, but it's the only thing keeping ships in your hangar bay and modules in your inventory to fly those ships. Sounds great. Everything is too cheap, especially ice.
My 140B invested in ice have already turned into 200B, but hey it can't hurt if they become 250 Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:14:00 -
[978] - Quote
People won't be ever confortable with getting popped just as easy, no matter the reward. Trying to force them to feel confortable is really stupid. Baiting them won't work either. But you can't explain that to a nerd. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4022
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:26:00 -
[979] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:mynnna wrote:I must tip my hat (or would if I had one) since I did actually forget about the doubled harvester speed. I think the other variations are just small variations though. I just used whatever blocks/hour eve IPH told me. Expecting each and every caldari ice belt to have over 300 miners apiece each and every time they're up is still a rather absurd expectation, however. Odd how your precise and brown nosed (by the other guy) math is inflatable on demand. I presented a *rough* estimate of 200, which is somewhat below the 300 you say.
Quoting myself and Mynna again, about this irrealistic "200 in local" number of mine.
Here's a screenshot taken some ago, that is it's not even prime time.
So, 170 in local, today, not in prime time yet.
I am certainly SO FAR from "possible 200 in local to reap all ice fast" post patch as I stated, eh? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
680
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 19:58:00 -
[980] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does nonajthemselves in fear of losing a ship That's why almost nobody mined endless ice in sov null sec when in 2012 it was worth 1500 ISK pu, right? When we interdicted gallente ice people did mine much more in null, despite our best efforts to stop them. That's confirmed by the devblog on it.
Facts are troublesome things. |
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
825
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 19:59:00 -
[981] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Facts are troublesome things.
Best ignored.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:09:00 -
[982] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does nonajthemselves in fear of losing a ship That's why almost nobody mined endless ice in sov null sec when in 2012 it was worth 1500 ISK pu, right? When we interdicted gallente ice people did mine much more in null, despite our best efforts to stop them. That's confirmed by the devblog on it. Facts are troublesome things.
So, a relatively short event clearly dictates years of nothingness, eh? That is many years of almost nothing are clearly contradicted by your lol short event?
"Facts" is a BOLD word in your mouth. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:09:00 -
[983] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Facts are troublesome things. Best ignored.
What's all that brown material around your nose? No, it's not Nutella! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cyprus Black
No Flux Given
757
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:41:00 -
[984] - Quote
Rather disappointed with this expansion, if it can even be called an expansion.
Lots of background changes and cosmetic changes. Nothing more. No new content. The last expansion that actually had real content was Incarna and that was a ******* disaster.
Crucible, Inferno, Retribution and Odyssey are not legitimate expansions. They're background changes, cosmetic changes and number rebalances. Trolling is like art. Anyone can finger paint, but it takes true talent to create a masterpiece. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1048
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:51:00 -
[985] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:mynnna wrote:I must tip my hat (or would if I had one) since I did actually forget about the doubled harvester speed. I think the other variations are just small variations though. I just used whatever blocks/hour eve IPH told me. Expecting each and every caldari ice belt to have over 300 miners apiece each and every time they're up is still a rather absurd expectation, however. Odd how your precise and brown nosed (by the other guy) math is inflatable on demand. I presented a *rough* estimate of 200, which is somewhat below the 300 you say. Quoting myself and Mynna again, about this irrealistic "200 in local" number of mine. Here's a screenshot taken some ago, that is it's not even prime time. So, 170 in local, today, not in prime time yet. I am certainly SO FAR from "possible 200 in local to reap all ice fast" post patch as I stated, eh?
I did not say 300 miners in a belt was unrealistic. I fully expect some of the caldari belts closest to Jita will have 300 miners in them, at least during prime time respawns.
What I said was unrealistic was your idea that there would be nine thousand miners on hand - 300 for every single one of the thirty caldari ice belts - at every single one of the five (six, really, if we're seeing them mined that quickly) respawns throughout the day. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 22:16:00 -
[986] - Quote
mynnna wrote: What I said was unrealistic was your idea that there would be nine thousand miners on hand - 300 for every single one of the thirty caldari ice belts - at every single one of the five (six, really, if we're seeing them mined that quickly) respawns throughout the day.
It's not important whether they are 300 all day long or not, what matters is if they are consistently 300 during some prime time for an important time zone, say i.e. USA.
Would you care if the belts are left untouched all day long, but are farmed empty from 1 hour before you log in to 3 hours after, all days, every days?
That's the injustice I don't like to see. And you know (unlike most EvE players) I don't even talk about my own interest, as I play when I am sure I'll always find belts up and I already have large stockpiles anyway.
But the fact this quite fake-smelling timer does not affect me does not mean it's fair for the other players. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1050
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 22:35:00 -
[987] - Quote
I'm sorry that you feel that a timer on how often an exhausted resource reappears for no discernible reason out of thin air (well, out of the vacuum of space, anyway) feels "fake". Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Frezinviper
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 22:48:00 -
[988] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Would you care if the belts are left untouched all day long, but are farmed empty from 1 hour before you log in to 3 hours after, all days, every days?
That's the injustice I don't like to see. And you know (unlike most EvE players) I don't even talk about my own interest, as I play when I am sure I'll always find belts up and I already have large stockpiles anyway.
OMG, you been crying about your AFK mining bot tears for 20+ pages now. Enough is enough!
There is NO INJUSTICE as you like to think. If you are unfortunate to log in and find no ice in your favorite HIGHSEC bot mining system then I guess you will have to find a new place to mine!
CCP Fozzie wrote:For the people asking about supply in other areas of space, there are approximately 8 lowsec/0.0 ice belts for every highsec belt, and those belts are a bit larger.
If you don't get it then I guess you never will... take you measly 200b ISK and go buy some friends that want to listen to you cry about your how your AFK bot mining will no longer be easy! |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:08:00 -
[989] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:For the people asking about supply in other areas of space, there are approximately 8 lowsec/0.0 ice belts for every highsec belt, and those belts are a bit larger.
ice won't be mined in low sec - the price hike required to make it worthwhile will reduce demand to a level where it could be met by high sec. If you are going to low sec it would make more sense to go ratting or run a few exploration sites.
When they moved level 5's out of high sec people just stopped running them.
This will end badly.
|
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:12:00 -
[990] - Quote
im still trying to figure out where this increased reward in wh space is going to come from for the triple amount of danger added to mining in whs from removing the ore out of graves and makeing them found by just scanning yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
|
Cyprus Black
No Flux Given
757
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:19:00 -
[991] - Quote
I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3. Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33
|
Cynthia Nezmor
Nezmor's Golden Griffins
203
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:24:00 -
[992] - Quote
Dilbert HighSeed wrote:Regolis wrote:Prolly escaped you guys, but plenty of the highsec players will NEVER go to low sec or null. CCP will nerf high to a certain point where the time isn't worth to the highsec players and they will quit. At which point, if you look at the numbers, Eve goes bye bye. Lots of the people in high sec are casual players. They pay a monthly fee and play for an hour or 2. They aren't interested in you 0.0 politics or moon mining. They come on, blast a few NPC ships, and log off. Yes by all means nerf high sec. Yes push these casual solo players out of the game. I mean it's not like CCP needs money or anything to maintain their corporation. Not only was high sec ice-mining nerfed in many ways for the casual player, but high sec mining was just hit hard, and by extension, mission loot as the refined value of that loot just took a hammering. But is all good, since null sec now has more moons to fight over. Bottom line, this was another large net transfer of wealth from high sec to null sec. And who knows what more things are planned for tomorrow. And more food for thought. Can you imagine what high sec will look like when the new null sec cartel CSM is done with it over the winter 2013 and summer 2014 iterations? It will be an utter wasteland.
Good. Nullsec is also an utter wasteland. Maybe people will come to lowsec and we can have fun fights for a change. |
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 01:28:00 -
[993] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3.
i don't disagree about the content part but i also don't totally agree they are adding new BC to the game but eh small steps as far as i am concerned that could have been done with last expansion and all in all should have been done when they added BC in the first place
ps the content part i got from the link in the post sig just fyi befor i get blasted lol yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
681
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 03:21:00 -
[994] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=EvilweaselSA][quote=Vaerah Vahrokha]
So, a relatively short event clearly dictates years of nothingness, eh? That is many years of almost nothing are clearly contradicted by your lol short event?
"Facts" is a BOLD word in your mouth. Ahh, my poor fact-challenged friend. You see, our little controlled experiment was the 1500 isk time you referenced. Once we shifted the reward/risk balance, well, we proved that mining will happen (in static belts!) if there's that much profit in it.
Facts, your ancient enemy, strike again. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
681
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 03:46:00 -
[995] - Quote
nerf facts plz |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 04:30:00 -
[996] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Perhaps some changes to the Rorqual my be relevant.
bigger ore bay - perhaps smaller normal bay Cans with ore goes directly to the orebay change the ice compression time if the boost has to be on grid please remove the need for it to be running the core. Nobody is going to have it deployed in a grav site.
when opening the corporate hanger array it always opens in the director tab, this must be a CCP trolls since 99% of ppl who uses them does not have access to this tab. Make it open the public by default instead.
Yes / No Yes Yes Who said anything about being on grid to boost with mining ships? If it were the case it would be the death nell of the rorqual and probably the orca for anywhere but highsec.
and Yes good idea. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 04:44:00 -
[997] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does nonajthemselves in fear of losing a ship That's why almost nobody mined endless ice in sov null sec when in 2012 it was worth 1500 ISK pu, right? When we interdicted gallente ice people did mine much more in null, despite our best efforts to stop them. That's confirmed by the devblog on it. Facts are troublesome things.
A. You have provided no facts. B. You are a Goon, not exactly the most trusted. C. Provide link or GTFO.
just sayin. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 04:46:00 -
[998] - Quote
LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3. i don't disagree about the content part but i also don't totally agree they are adding new BC to the game but eh small steps as far as i am concerned that could have been done with last expansion and all in all should have been done when they added BC in the first place ps the content part i got from the link in the post sig just fyi befor i get blasted lol
What!!? The new BC are just the current BC minus a nerf and paint job.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 04:51:00 -
[999] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:For the people asking about supply in other areas of space, there are approximately 8 lowsec/0.0 ice belts for every highsec belt, and those belts are a bit larger. ice won't be mined in low sec - the price hike required to make it worthwhile will reduce demand to a level where it could be met by high sec. If you are going to low sec it would make more sense to go ratting or run a few exploration sites. When they moved level 5's out of high sec people just stopped running them. This will end badly.
I don't know how many times it needs to be said. No one mines in lowsec. No one but idiots, noobs, and the insane. This patch changes that in no known way.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
828
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 05:20:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Crexa wrote:A. You have provided no facts.
He did provide a "fact". He did not provide a "citation" for his "fact". This is common when such citations can easily be looked up for oneself. Now, if you couldn't find the suggested source after an honest effort, then it would be reasonable to return and request a citation.
In this case, the citation for his fact was easily found by looking for the source which he clearly described.
"Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel."
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295
This lesson in not being a total fuckwit brought to you by the letter "H". |
|
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 05:53:00 -
[1001] - Quote
After a lot of written pages, can we agree at least on one thing? There's no real improvements in this patch? |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
828
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 05:58:00 -
[1002] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:After a lot of written pages, can we agree at least on one thing? There's no real improvements in this patch?
The moon change will likely be a huge improvement.
The other topics I don't know well enough to comment on their respective likelihoods of being 'real improvements".
So, no, I don't agree.
|
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 06:02:00 -
[1003] - Quote
The moon change will improve what? |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
828
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 06:10:00 -
[1004] - Quote
The general incentive for conflicts, as well as providing a shake-up to the current political balances. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
828
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 06:12:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Also, generally anything that causes AFK scrublords to hamfist out thread after thread and post after post of incoherent rage arguments, empty threats, and raw crying is probably an overall improvement to the game. |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 06:13:00 -
[1006] - Quote
This not a improvement. This is a change. |
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 06:40:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Crexa wrote:LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3. i don't disagree about the content part but i also don't totally agree they are adding new BC to the game but eh small steps as far as i am concerned that could have been done with last expansion and all in all should have been done when they added BC in the first place ps the content part i got from the link in the post sig just fyi befor i get blasted lol What!!? The new BC are just the current? BC minus a nerf and paint job. CCP could have at least tried to get us to believe were were now paying more isk for the same firepower.
i only been here 11 monthos so i guess i missed the time that drakes had 8 launcher hard points and allmost 3k more base ehp thanks for pointing out to me that all the BC was so boss before
edited to add that thats all beside the point of what i had to say in the first place is still valid yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 09:27:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3.
Odyssey looks amayzing. The 3 previous expansions brought EvE Online it to another level, the game is in better shape than ever.
What sandbox games needs is constant iteration on existing system, and the last expansions delivered that. Players are the content. R Tape loading error |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 09:32:00 -
[1009] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=EvilweaselSA][quote=Vaerah Vahrokha]
So, a relatively short event clearly dictates years of nothingness, eh? That is many years of almost nothing are clearly contradicted by your lol short event?
"Facts" is a BOLD word in your mouth. Ahh, my poor fact-challenged friend. You see, our little controlled experiment was the 1500 isk time you referenced. Once we shifted the reward/risk balance, well, we proved that mining will happen (in static belts!) if there's that much profit in it. Facts, your ancient enemy, strike again.
No, it was the last (so called "perma") Hulkageddon, not your Gallente interdiction.
Facts are YOUR enemy, just check prices of all ices, if you were saying the truth, you'd see only a Gallente ice spike, whereas all four ices spiked.
As I said, facts is a bold word in your mouth. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 09:38:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:He did provide a "fact". He did not provide a "citation" for his "fact". This is common when such citations can easily be looked up for oneself. Now, if you couldn't find the suggested source after an honest effort, then it would be reasonable to return and request a citation. In this case, the citation for his fact was easily found by looking for the source described. "Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel." http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295Now, there may even be other sources, but this clearly supports his stated fact, and I found it with the most basic of effort. This lesson in not being a total fuckwit brought to you by the letter "H".
He and you (and others) stick to a 2011 blog and 2011 Diagoras numbers. I presented easily checked (all you have to do is to open the prices history at about May+ of last year) newer 2012 numbers and 2012 (Hulkageddon) events.
Which one is more current, 2011 or 2012? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7768
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 10:35:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Crexa wrote:A. You have provided no facts. B. You are a Goon, not exactly the most trusted. C. Provide link or GTFO.
just sayin.
he's still right and you're still wrong mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 11:08:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3. Odyssey looks amayzing. The 3 previous expansions brought EvE Online to another level, the game is in better shape than ever. What sandbox games needs is constant iteration on existing system, and the last expansions delivered that. Players are the content. You, sir, need a CCP to point out what should be cool for you. And if you call that "sandbox", means you let it act like a sandbox. Or it's all "sandbox" when it does what you like, or what is induced to you that should be cool.
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
252
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 12:26:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:
"Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel."
...
This lesson in not being a total fuckwit brought to you by the letter "H".
Let me point something out: 'outside high security space' does happen to include those nullbears (including those in goonswarm) who cashed in by bringing in compressed ice from nullsec=, and if you bother to read the second half of the devquote.... they could not meet demand for a reasonable price, and the result was not 'more people go to lowsec to mine ice' it was 'more people shut their towers down and either stopped using POS or got cheaper alternatives'.
A 40% drop in starbase operations would be cataclysmic for T2 production and lead to skyrocketing prices. Which, I might point out, again goes directly opposite 'lowering the bar for new player entry' as most noobs are not going to have the financial wherewithal to afford it. But then again, CP also thinks that noobs will all start with a billion isk from plex sales.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1059
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 14:26:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:lead to skyrocketing prices.
Which would then make people go "man it's suddenly worth doing even if my POS costs more to run" and prompt them to put it back up, bringing prices back down to a more reasonable level.
If, you know, POS got shut down in the first place at all. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
253
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 14:49:00 -
[1015] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:lead to skyrocketing prices. Which would then make people go "man it's suddenly worth doing even if my POS costs more to run" and prompt them to put it back up, bringing prices back down to a more reasonable level. If, you know, POS got shut down in the first place at all.
mynnna, the fact that goonswarm was able to open enough noob accounts to shove you into the CSM makes me despair for the state of eve online.
Yes, a small number would reopen. However, the reality is that higher prices in this game lead to reduced demand. Outside very wealthy individuals and high end alliances with their slave nullbears, T2 would rise to the point that it would be inaccessible to new players or non-alliance PvP corps as a practical tool before POS operators would see enough of a return on them to consider operating POS again.
Prices would likely stabilize at 60-80% higher than is current, possibly as high as 100% for certain goods such as drones and ammunition (and PvP and ratters are already protesting just how much T2 ammo costs). This does not take into account the changes in moon goo, which will fluctuate dramatically due to proposed changes there, this is just based off the changes to mining.
While this would likely have little impact on nullsec, the impact on high and low sec and would be heavy, and WH space, apocalyptic (most T2 in WH is imported from high sec rather than risk BPOs in WH space).
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
683
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:07:00 -
[1016] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:After a lot of written pages, can we agree at least on one thing? There's no real improvements in this patch? moon changes are an improvement, ice changes are an improvement, i will need to poke around on sisi to see about exploration but I expect that to be an improvement, the pos changes (assuming they make it in) are an improvement |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
829
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:08:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: they could not meet demand for a reasonable price
lol "reasonable price"
the issue was whether people outside hisec will mine ice if the price rises high enough. that proves they will
the rest of your pathetic doomcalling is irrelevant
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
829
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:13:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Which one is more current, 2011 or 2012?
The example which is more relevant easily trumps the example which is slightly, and insignificantly, more recent.
Of course you will continue to side-step and squirm with terrible arguments because you have serious personality defects, so this is really a waste of time, and I'm going to, accordingly, stop responding to you. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
683
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:13:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: No, it was the last (so called "perma") Hulkageddon, not your Gallente interdiction.
Facts are YOUR enemy, just check prices of all ices, if you were saying the truth, you'd see only a Gallente ice spike, whereas all four ices spiked.
As I said, facts is a bold word in your mouth.
ahh right that, you see, that too does not help you. I cited the one where I know what it's effect on ice mining itself was (you see, because CCP told us in the devblogs about it). so I know for an absolute fact that jacking ice prices into the 1500s increases ice mining in null
but you, thinking you were secure in the relative lack of specific data during infinite hulkageddon, want to ignore the specific example directly on point.
you've made a critical error, now face the awesome power of this fully operational factstar
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63999/1/Mined_Volume_2.png
as you can see as mining in empire decreased during infinite hulkageddon, mining in 0.0 went significantly up from it's march doldrums. we do not know what percentage of this was ice mining, but given we have the gallente interdiction data it is safe to say your argument has been blown right out of the water
but i mean feel free to wildly flail about concerning facts easily checked i can do this all day |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1059
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:16:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:23:00 -
[1021] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:ahh right that, you see, that too does not help you. I cited the one where I know what it's effect on ice mining itself was (you see, because CCP told us in the devblogs about it). so I know for an absolute fact that jacking ice prices into the 1500s increases ice mining in null but you, thinking you were secure in the relative lack of specific data during infinite hulkageddon, want to ignore the specific example directly on point. you've made a critical error, now face the awesome power of this fully operational factstar http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63999/1/Mined_Volume_2.pngas you can see as mining in empire decreased during infinite hulkageddon, mining in 0.0 went significantly up from it's march doldrums. we do not know what percentage of this was ice mining, but given we have the gallente interdiction data it is safe to say your argument has been blown right out of the water but i mean feel free to wildly flail about concerning facts easily checked i can do this all day
Nope.
The null sec swing high went up for some 10% compared to the previous swing high (beginning of March 2012), if you call that relevant.... the increase is *less* than a swing height. Basically hi sec miners greatly reduced their volume (I was there and I saw the 130 in local become 24 in the system I know best), while null sec mining increased some 10%. In fact, due to the failure at really increase null sec mining, prices went up by 400%. Had null sec done anything relevant prices would not have quadrupled. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:24:00 -
[1022] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist.
Be quiet! I am trying to get richer here! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
253
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:28:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote: they could not meet demand for a reasonable price lol "reasonable price" the issue was whether people outside hisec will mine ice if the price rises high enough. that proves they will the rest of your pathetic doomcalling is irrelevant
However, not in sufficient amounts to meet demand. Demand fell by 40% remember? That means that almost half the POS operators involved decided it was in their best interests to give up and go elsewhere than to continue to produce T2.
That's the real issue. Your pathetic claims that 'Well, a handful of people did go out and mine ice outside high sec' are what is irrelevant. Demand could not be met, prices rose, demand fell. Prices remained high, demand remained low as players either gave up or found alternatives. This is how markets work on non essential things like POS. The problem is the ripple effect this will have on other markets, which will impact the much beloved PvP.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:30:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:A. You have provided no facts. He did provide a "fact". He did not provide a "citation" for his "fact". This is common when such citations can easily be looked up for oneself. Now, if you couldn't find the suggested source after an honest effort, then it would be reasonable to return and request a citation. In this case, the citation for his fact was easily found by looking for the source described. "Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel." http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295Now, there may even be other sources, but this clearly supports his stated fact, and I found it with the most basic of effort. This lesson in not being a total fuckwit brought to you by the letter "H".
He indicated that much more ice was being mined. And yet the quote you so graciously found for us gives no indication that production volumes for null increased. It merely states that Oxygen isotopes were continuing to be supplied as they always had been, from outside high sec space. If anything the follow on statement within the quote indicates that overall production fell, and one must assume since it is not stated directly, that that production includes all of EvE.
So no my dear misguided friend that does not as a source support what he has been saying and based on your "oh so logical", and his for that matter, way of dealing with others you do not agree. I must say because this statement is INVALID, you are wrong and have been caught and thus must be ignored.
Fuckwit indeed.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:35:00 -
[1025] - Quote
LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Crexa wrote:LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:Cyprus Black wrote:I'm considering sitting this "expansion" out, canceling, and just waiting for the winter expansion.
This one is pretty much a dud as were the previous 3. i don't disagree about the content part but i also don't totally agree they are adding new BC to the game but eh small steps as far as i am concerned that could have been done with last expansion and all in all should have been done when they added BC in the first place ps the content part i got from the link in the post sig just fyi befor i get blasted lol What!!? The new BC are just the current? BC minus a nerf and paint job. CCP could have at least tried to get us to believe were were now paying more isk for the same firepower. i only been here 11 monthos so i guess i missed the time that drakes had 8 launcher hard points and allmost 3k more base ehp thanks for pointing out to me that all the BC was so boss before edited to add that thats all beside the point of what i had to say in the first place is still valid
True enough.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:36:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:However, not in sufficient amounts to meet demand. Demand fell by 40% remember? That means that almost half the POS operators involved decided it was in their best interests to give up and go elsewhere than to continue to produce T2.
Or to shut down operations during a known temporary price shift.
Or to switch tower types.
So again, your doomcalling, while remaining as irrelevant as before, is also unjustified by the facts you are referencing.
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:38:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Crexa wrote:He indicated that much more ice was being mined. And yet the quote you so graciously found for us gives no indication that production volumes for null increased.
It says right in there that production outside of hisec increased, which was his claim. Demand was met until demand itself changed.
You can twist and turn all you want, but you'll remain wrong. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:39:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Andski wrote:Crexa wrote:A. You have provided no facts. B. You are a Goon, not exactly the most trusted. C. Provide link or GTFO.
just sayin. he's still right and you're still wrong
Unfortunately, based on what pitiful data, I won't call it fact as it did not support his claim of higher null ice production during Goons sorry arse attempt to blockade Gallente Ice.
So unless supportive data can be forthcoming, I am truly sorry, I really am. Believe me.
I am afraid it is you and they who are in the wrong. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:40:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:However, not in sufficient amounts to meet demand. Demand fell by 40% remember? That means that almost half the POS operators involved decided it was in their best interests to give up and go elsewhere than to continue to produce T2. Or to shut down operations during a known temporary price shift. Or to switch tower types.
Why do people pose switching tower types as a solution? All that will do is create greater demand on the other isotopes and drive those prices up. Which in turn will still affect the rest of the production chain. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:44:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Why do people pose switching tower types as a solution? All that will do is create greater demand on the other isotopes and drive those prices up. Which in turn will still affect the rest of the production chain.
Follow the conversation if you're going to attempt to partake.
He suggested that the events of the ice interdiction were a precursor for odyssey change in terms of t2 manufacturing, when a few key factors are different. One of those being that the drop in demand could indicate people switching towers instead of dropping t2 manufacturing altogether. |
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:48:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:Why do people pose switching tower types as a solution? All that will do is create greater demand on the other isotopes and drive those prices up. Which in turn will still affect the rest of the production chain. Follow the conversation if you're going to attempt to partake. He suggested that the events of the ice interdiction were a precursor for odyssey change in terms of t2 manufacturing, when a few key factors are different. One of those being that the drop in demand could indicate people switching towers instead of dropping t2 manufacturing altogether.
I'm merely pointing out something that has been said often as a reply to the doomsayers. Not a specific reply to his thread. In reality, it doesn't matter if the reduction in ice is a player driven or CCP driven process. The point being is that switching from A type to B type, when ALL types are limited will not solve the issue of high prices. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:51:00 -
[1032] - Quote
No, you were replying directly to me because you misunderstood what was being said.
Nobody cares about your response to an argument that you invented yourself from your own misunderstanding. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:53:00 -
[1033] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: No, it was the last (so called "perma") Hulkageddon, not your Gallente interdiction.
Facts are YOUR enemy, just check prices of all ices, if you were saying the truth, you'd see only a Gallente ice spike, whereas all four ices spiked.
As I said, facts is a bold word in your mouth.
ahh right that, you see, that too does not help you. I cited the one where I know what it's effect on ice mining itself was (you see, because CCP told us in the devblogs about it). so I know for an absolute fact that jacking ice prices into the 1500s increases ice mining in null but you, thinking you were secure in the relative lack of specific data during infinite hulkageddon, want to ignore the specific example directly on point. you've made a critical error, now face the awesome power of this fully operational factstar http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63999/1/Mined_Volume_2.pngas you can see as mining in empire decreased during infinite hulkageddon, mining in 0.0 went significantly up from it's march doldrums. we do not know what percentage of this was ice mining, but given we have the gallente interdiction data it is safe to say your argument has been blown right out of the water but i mean feel free to wildly flail about concerning facts easily checked i can do this all day
LOL, you talk ice mining and then pull out that chart? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. A two year old with a crayon could draw a better chart.
But lets say for arguements sake the chart which provides no supplimentary numbers is accurate. If we are to believe hulkageedon in infinite, then the chart needs to be read in full and that little "blip" you see is just that, a blip on what is essentially a straight line for null mining efforts. And as the chart, as you for once rightly have indicated, does not distinguish between ice and ore, there is no possible way to derive any valuable data from it to indicate ice production. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:54:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:No, you were replying directly to me because you misunderstood what was being said.
Nobody cares about your response to an argument that you invented yourself from your own misunderstanding.
I was using YOUR quote.. but notice how the message started with. "Why do people" as opposed to "why do YOU"
in the last 50 pages of this thread, switching tower types has been said quite a few times as a way to adapt to the higher prices. So sorry to dissapoint, but it is not an invented argument.. Nor is it an argument. merely a question. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:08:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:He indicated that much more ice was being mined. And yet the quote you so graciously found for us gives no indication that production volumes for null increased. It says right in there that production outside of hisec increased, which was his claim. Demand was met until demand itself changed. You can twist and turn all you want, but you'll remain wrong.
No sir, I disagree. I shall deposit for others to consider the exact quote used to support his claim;
"Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel."
Contained within the provided quote, his quote, not mine. No unequivocal statement of increased null ice production exists. And again I point out to you that traded volumes decreased while not indicating directly, a reduction in Gal. ice mining. Certainly supportive of. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:09:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Crexa wrote: LOL, you talk ice mining and then pull out that chart? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. A two year old with a crayon could draw a better chart.
But lets say for arguements sake the chart which provides no supplimentary numbers is accurate. If we are to believe hulkageedon in infinite, then the chart needs to be read in full and that little "blip" you see is just that, a blip on what is essentially a straight line for null mining efforts. And as the chart, as you for once have rightly indicated, does not distinguish between ice and ore, there is no possible way to derive any valuable data from it to indicate ice production.
And as you can do this all day long, I suggest posting to at least one other forum perhaps Goons private forums? At least there you will find other delusionals whom will believe your claims.
the chart is straight from ccp, i don't know why you think insulting it would bother me, so uh yeah good luck claiming it's fake
and vv was the one who chose to focus on infinite hulkageddon instead of the ice interdiction hoping vainly there would be no data to refute him
infinite hulkageddon did not really increase the value of nullsec ore mining, but it did increase the value of nullsec ice mining. we know, for a fact, ice prices being jacked up causes increased null ice mining. it is, therefore, a very strong case that all of that blip (from the straight line, which is exactly what it should be for my argument: a base level of mining, and the increase caused by infinite hulkageddon increasing the reward)
i post here because here is where the delusionals are who can be batted down all day. being a goon on eveo is amazing because morons figure if a goon says the sky is blue, then the sky is red and make posts like, well, yours |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:11:00 -
[1037] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist.
I await your triumphal return. I guess?
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:14:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Crexa wrote:
No sir, I disagree. I shall deposit for others to consider the exact quote used to support his claim;
"Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel."
Contained within the provided quote, his quote, not mine. No unequivocal statement of increased null ice production exists. And again I point out to you that traded volumes decreased while not indicating directly, a reduction in Gal. ice mining. Certainly supportive of.
so i assume you're gonna try and claim it was all mined in lowsec
go take a look at just how much mining occurs in lowsec (it's that red line you might have mistaken for the x axis on the mining chart on the chart from ccp i provided)
now, contemplate what someone seeing all the data we're providing, and the ... reasoned arguments ... and lack of data you're providing, and contemplate who they will think is in the right |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:14:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Crexa wrote:Contained within the provided quote, his quote, not mine. No unequivocal statement of increased null ice production exists. And again I point out to you that traded volumes decreased while not indicating directly, a reduction in Gal. ice mining. Certainly supportive of.
An unequivocal statement of increased ice production from outside hisec exists, which was the claim.
That you have trouble with comprehension is only your own problem, not mine.
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:15:00 -
[1040] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote: LOL, you talk ice mining and then pull out that chart? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. A two year old with a crayon could draw a better chart.
But lets say for arguements sake the chart which provides no supplimentary numbers is accurate. If we are to believe hulkageedon in infinite, then the chart needs to be read in full and that little "blip" you see is just that, a blip on what is essentially a straight line for null mining efforts. And as the chart, as you for once have rightly indicated, does not distinguish between ice and ore, there is no possible way to derive any valuable data from it to indicate ice production.
And as you can do this all day long, I suggest posting to at least one other forum perhaps Goons private forums? At least there you will find other delusionals whom will believe your claims.
the chart is straight from ccp, i don't know why you think insulting it would bother me, so uh yeah good luck claiming it's fake and vv was the one who chose to focus on infinite hulkageddon instead of the ice interdiction hoping vainly there would be no data to refute him infinite hulkageddon did not really increase the value of nullsec ore mining, but it did increase the value of nullsec ice mining. we know, for a fact, ice prices being jacked up causes increased null ice mining. it is, therefore, a very strong case that all of that blip (from the straight line, which is exactly what it should be for my argument: a base level of mining, and the increase caused by infinite hulkageddon increasing the reward) i post here because here is where the delusionals are who can be batted down all day. being a goon on eveo is amazing because morons figure if a goon says the sky is blue, then the sky is red and make posts like, well, yours
I don't give a crap if it bothers you at all. It provides no data to support your claim of higher ice production from null sec. Thus, at best it is a weak crutch for you with those who do not pay attention. At worst it completely invalidates your claims as it does not help your case.
"...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
|
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:22:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Crexa wrote:Contained within the provided quote, his quote, not mine. No unequivocal statement of increased null ice production exists. And again I point out to you that traded volumes decreased while not indicating directly, a reduction in Gal. ice mining. Certainly supportive of. An unequivocal statement of increased ice production from outside hisec exists, which was the claim. That you have trouble with comprehension is only your own problem, not mine.
Are you being obtuse? Your fellow poster is claiming an increase in Gallente ice production. He is even pulling out charts, albit charts without any supportive data, but charts none the less, to support his claim.
Provide said statement to support your claim as you have now taken on the mantle of this ice production cause. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:28:00 -
[1042] - Quote
What he has done since my own line of argument proceeded has nothing to do with me. I am not his friend, compatriot, ally, or anything of the sort.
You were continuing a long hisec forum warrior tradition of being a loudmouth and clueless, pronouncing on subjects you had no knowledge or understanding of, and I have taken you to task for it.
What has transpired since in a tangential discussion means nothing to me or your initial position of both not understanding the difference between a fact and a citation, as well as not being able to then understand the content said of cited fact.
That you cannot carry on two separate courses of discussion at once is not my problem. |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:29:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:What he has done since my own line of argument proceeded has nothing to do with me. I am not his friend, compatriot, ally, or anything of the sort.
You were continuing a long hisec forum warrior tradition of being a loudmouth clueless fuckwit pronouncing on subjects you had no knowledge or understanding of, and I have taken you to task for it.
What has transpired since in a tangential discussion means nothing to me or your initial position of both not understanding the difference between a fact and a citation, as well as not being able to then understand the content said of cited fact.
That you cannot carry on two separate courses of discussion at once is not my problem.
Bye Bye. ISD he is ^^ that way. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:30:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Crexa wrote: I don't give a crap if it bothers you at all. It provides no data to support your claim of higher ice production from null sec. Thus, at best it is a weak crutch for you with those who do not pay attention. At worst it completely invalidates your claims as it does not help your case.
Who is w? Speak plainly. If you mean the other poster you have been going back and forth with, I cannot substantiate anything she choses to say. Only refute what you say if you do not provide supportive data. You and your cohorts blasted me aplenty for it. Here is the ROI.
I believe its more; If a Goon says it, take it with a grain of salt. As the old proverb says.
i see, i will be more explicit and explain the logical jumps i generally assume a reader of standard intelligence can make
it is known that increases in ice costs cause increases in ice mining outside highsec (see: devblog regarding ice interdiction). it is known that even during the middle of infinite hulkageddon mining as a profession does not exist in lowsec (see: graph regarding 2012 mining). it is therefore known that the increases in ice costs have the increase in production in nullsec, as it cannot be in lowsec (or in wormholes which don't have ice).
so, it is known that massive increases in ice cost increase ice production in null. this is the claim that VV (verha whatever) specifically denied. now, after getting factslammed into the ground VV claimed that actually we should look at infinite hulkageddon instead. VV, doubtless, wished to use the lack of specific data on infinite hulkageddon's effect on ice mining in perticular in null to claim that it does not specifically refute her claim (despite, as the one making a dumb claim that is contradicted by the evidence it is VV's duty to supply any reason to listen to her incoherent ramblings)
however, as a fact lord, I can show it still had an effect. as mining in highsec dropped precipitously, mining in nullsec increased. now, why would that be? you can't really mine lowends in null. infinite hulkageddon caused no increase in highend prices (actually lowered them a bit, thanks to the bottleneck effect). so what are they mining? why, the only thing that makes sense: ice. infinite hulkageddon hit ice belts (as target-rich enviroments) harder than anywhere else. we know that null responds by increasing ice production (as ice mining is not generally a profitable activity, but becomes one when isotope prices are in the stratosphere)
consequently, we can reason the only explanation for the increase in nullsec mining is an increase in nullsec ice production. we have refuted VV's argument. we have refuted your incoherent ramblings that data straight from ccp is probably a lie.
i hope this has been educational |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:38:00 -
[1045] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Crexa wrote: I don't give a crap if it bothers you at all. It provides no data to support your claim of higher ice production from null sec. Thus, at best it is a weak crutch for you with those who do not pay attention. At worst it completely invalidates your claims as it does not help your case.
Who is w? Speak plainly. If you mean the other poster you have been going back and forth with, I cannot substantiate anything she choses to say. Only refute what you say if you do not provide supportive data. You and your cohorts blasted me aplenty for it. Here is the ROI.
I believe its more; If a Goon says it, take it with a grain of salt. As the old proverb says.
i see, i will be more explicit and explain the logical jumps i generally assume a reader of standard intelligence can make it is known that increases in ice costs cause increases in ice mining outside highsec (see: devblog regarding ice interdiction). it is known that even during the middle of infinite hulkageddon mining as a profession does not exist in lowsec (see: graph regarding 2012 mining). it is therefore known that the increases in ice costs have the increase in production in nullsec, as it cannot be in lowsec (or in wormholes which don't have ice). so, it is known that massive increases in ice cost increase ice production in null. this is the claim that VV (verha whatever) specifically denied. now, after getting factslammed into the ground VV claimed that actually we should look at infinite hulkageddon instead. VV, doubtless, wished to use the lack of specific data on infinite hulkageddon's effect on ice mining in perticular in null to claim that it does not specifically refute her claim (despite, as the one making a dumb claim that is contradicted by the evidence it is VV's duty to supply any reason to listen to her incoherent ramblings) however, as a fact lord, I can show it still had an effect. as mining in highsec dropped precipitously, mining in nullsec increased. now, why would that be? you can't really mine lowends in null. infinite hulkageddon caused no increase in highend prices (actually lowered them a bit, thanks to the bottleneck effect). so what are they mining? why, the only thing that makes sense: ice. infinite hulkageddon hit ice belts (as target-rich enviroments) harder than anywhere else. we know that null responds by increasing ice production (as ice mining is not generally a profitable activity, but becomes one when isotope prices are in the stratosphere) consequently, we can reason the only explanation for the increase in nullsec mining is an increase in nullsec ice production. we have refuted VV's argument. we have refuted your incoherent ramblings that data straight from ccp is probably a lie. i hope this has been educational
I thought this would be a better retort, as it looked longer and from a visual perusal more thought out. But, alas no. Your first sentence starts with an assumption. Tisk tisk. You know one must never assume anything.
As to the rest. I will assume nothing and believe that if you wanted your case to be more than, it says so here in this devblog, truely it does, honest. Without actually providing a link to said devblogs. You would have. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:41:00 -
[1046] - Quote
a link to the devblog has already been provided, on the last page of the thread, in a post you read and replied to. there is a limit to the amount that even i, someone of supreme patience with the space peasants of eve, will do to assist you |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:51:00 -
[1047] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:a link to the devblog has already been provided, on the last page of the thread, in a post you read and replied to. there is a limit to the amount that even i, someone of supreme patience with the space peasants of eve, will do to assist you
A link preceded by a quote from the linked devblog in which you claimed an increase in nullsec Gallente ice production. And a quote by which no increase in ice production was mentioned. Since you singled out this quote, it is reasonable to believe that you felt it is the most supportive of your claim. You also attempt to support this claim with a chart that does not separate out ice production from ore production and no matter how you slice it, (as if it were a pie chart), you cannot derive any ice mining data from it.
I do not have all day to both search for devblogs which may or may not support your claims which you call facts. And read them. As I have now read this particular devblog. I again state it does not indicate a direct increase in Gallente ice production from null security space. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 16:53:00 -
[1048] - Quote
my unfortunately but hopefully redeemably ignorant friend, you will see i addressed that specific brand of bad argument in my post |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:04:00 -
[1049] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:my unfortunately but hopefully redeemably ignorant friend, you will see i addressed that specific brand of bad argument in my post
Its good to see you looking out for my welfare. Bless you.
But if you would be so kind as to provide a link to this post. Or if it exists in this thread, a page number so I might go re-read it. My eye sight is not what it once was. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4023
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:05:00 -
[1050] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: so, it is known that massive increases in ice cost increase ice production in null. this is the claim that VV (verha whatever) specifically denied.
You presented it like the beegezus landed on null sec and created volcanoes of mined ice. Nope, the Gallente iterdiction was a limited and in the long term irrelevant blip on the EvE economy at large.
So irrelevant that YOU keep bringing in the Gallente thing, while I directly talk about Hulkageddon 2012, the ONE Hulkageddon that altered mine volumes by more than 3-4%. The ONE event that lasted several months and impacted volume and price a lot.
So keep the faceslam for yourself, you talk about your so proud Gallente interdiction that nobody (including EvE's economy) cares about, while ignoring the one event that really did something lasting and tangible.
EvilweaselSA wrote: VV, doubtless, wished to use the lack of specific data on infinite hulkageddon's effect on ice mining in perticular in null to claim that it does not specifically refute her claim (despite, as the one making a dumb claim that is contradicted by the evidence it is VV's duty to supply any reason to listen to her incoherent ramblings)
There's no shortage of HK data, only shortage of people willing to read it.
EvilweaselSA wrote: consequently, we can reason the only explanation for the increase in nullsec mining is an increase in nullsec ice production. we have refuted VV's argument. we have refuted your incoherent ramblings that data straight from ccp is probably a lie.
i hope this has been educational
The volume increase in null sec was < 10% while prices quadrupled at Jita.
Explain, oh dear economist, how potent impulse null sec gave to industry, if total volume still hugely tanked, prices still hugely rose.
The simple reality is that ice mining in null sec is rightly seen as a bot's job, there are so many better alternatives bringing in 10 times as much per hour that those ice mining in null sec are playing for the giggles, not for efficiency.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:20:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: So irrelevant that YOU keep bringing in the Gallente thing, while I directly talk about Hulkageddon 2012, the ONE Hulkageddon that altered mine volumes by more than 3-4%. The ONE event that lasted several months and impacted volume and price a lot.
sorry mate
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295
Quote: The initial effect on traded volume was quite different, as Blue Ice quantity dropped by a whopping 80% from September to October while Oxygen Isotopes only fell by 22%. Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being,
we cut the supply of blue ice by 80% and highsec suppliers were "largely driven out" per ccp itself
do you ever get tired of being wrong |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
684
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:23:00 -
[1052] - Quote
you see when we're discussing ice the time we strangled one particular type of ice is the most directly relevant not just when we terrorized all of highsec indiscriminately |
Crexa
Ion Industrials
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:31:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: so, it is known that massive increases in ice cost increase ice production in null. this is the claim that VV (verha whatever) specifically denied.
You presented it like the beegezus landed on null sec and created volcanoes of mined ice. Nope, the Gallente iterdiction was a limited and in the long term irrelevant blip on the EvE economy at large. So irrelevant that YOU keep bringing in the Gallente thing, while I directly talk about Hulkageddon 2012, the ONE Hulkageddon that altered mine volumes by more than 3-4%. The ONE event that lasted several months and impacted volume and price a lot. So keep the faceslam for yourself, you talk about your so proud Gallente interdiction that nobody (including EvE's economy) cares about, while ignoring the one event that really did something lasting and tangible. EvilweaselSA wrote: VV, doubtless, wished to use the lack of specific data on infinite hulkageddon's effect on ice mining in perticular in null to claim that it does not specifically refute her claim (despite, as the one making a dumb claim that is contradicted by the evidence it is VV's duty to supply any reason to listen to her incoherent ramblings)
There's no shortage of HK data, only shortage of people willing to read it. EvilweaselSA wrote: consequently, we can reason the only explanation for the increase in nullsec mining is an increase in nullsec ice production. we have refuted VV's argument. we have refuted your incoherent ramblings that data straight from ccp is probably a lie.
i hope this has been educational
The volume increase in null sec was < 10% while prices quadrupled at Jita. Explain, oh dear economist, how potent impulse null sec gave to industry, if total volume still hugely tanked, prices still hugely rose. The simple reality is that ice mining in null sec is rightly seen as a bot's job, there are so many better alternatives bringing in 10 times as much per hour that those ice mining in null sec are playing for the giggles, not for efficiency.
This volume increase in null sec, <10% are you speaking of ore or ice? Or both? Either way provide links to said data. I will provide no favoritism to this particular point. "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?" |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4024
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 17:32:00 -
[1054] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: So irrelevant that YOU keep bringing in the Gallente thing, while I directly talk about Hulkageddon 2012, the ONE Hulkageddon that altered mine volumes by more than 3-4%. The ONE event that lasted several months and impacted volume and price a lot.
sorry mate http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295Quote: The initial effect on traded volume was quite different, as Blue Ice quantity dropped by a whopping 80% from September to October while Oxygen Isotopes only fell by 22%. Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, we cut the supply of blue ice by 80% and highsec suppliers were "largely driven out" per ccp itself do you ever get tired of being wrong
A whopping 22% (the result that plays on the markets) or even a 80% (your e-peen appetizer) for *1 whole month*, *1 ice only!. Wow, that's game changing, I mean, 1 whole month over 10 years I am surprised you hadn't a sudden peen-jaculation over it! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
254
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:10:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote: Or to shut down operations during a known temporary price shift.
Or to switch tower types.
That fact that they could do these things led to a much gentler spike in T2 than there otherwise would have been. Neither will be a viable solution with the currant proposed changes. All T2 WILL rise. Some will rise more dramatically than most, effectively denying them to new players.
Older, established players and player organizations stand to make out like bandits (small wonder goons are in favor of it). The problem is that it raises the bar on new players, who no longer have any big money making option than to sell plex.
The fact is demand WAS NOT met, otherwise prices would not have risen so dramatically. Demand then DID fall as players 'gave up and went home'.
These are fact. You even site them yourself. The problem is that this proposal is going to drive a massive increase in production costs across the board, while at the same time devaluing the minerals that new industrial players depend on to get started.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
689
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:10:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: A whopping 22% (the result that plays on the markets) or even a 80% (your e-peen appetizer) for *1 whole month*, *1 ice only!. Wow, that's game changing, I mean, 1 whole month over 10 years I am surprised you hadn't a sudden peen-jaculation over it!
the 22% was the net change in supply, once you factor in nullsec replacing a large amount of the missing volume when highsec production cratered
while it was a momentous and magnificant achievement by goonswarm and myself personally (and lasting over a month, it's just that month was what the good dr. e mentioned in the devblog), I do not discuss it to earn more much-deserved accolades. I discuss it because it offers a "natural experiment", where events in the past happened in a perticular way that lets us test hypotheses and reject ones that are falsified
here, we have a nearly perfect example of what happens when highsec ice production declines. the result? nullsec increases dramatically. your claim was nothing of the sort would happen, but we can point to this and the hard data that came straight from ccp to determine your claim was utterly false. it is an ex-claim. it has gone to the afterlife of claims, the burning hells of "well that was dumb why did anyone make that claim" and no longer roams the world as a claim that might be true
highsec ice production will fall. contrary to your baseless claims, people will be willing to mine it in nullsec, as the economic data from the ice interdiction proves. this has been basic eve economics, with your good friend spacelord weaselior |
Sissy Fuzz
Sissy Fuzz Communications
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:16:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:OkaskiKali wrote:
CCP, guys, please STOP thinking with reactive heads. What i mean by this is stop nerfing things and thinking that the only way to solve a situation is by doing something negatively.
Now this is irony.
By all means explain, Malcanis. Or did you just feel like posting something? Anything.
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:27:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:That fact that they could do these things led to a much...
So you've gone from " the entire economy will implode" to "t2 prices will rise". Good, I'm glad we agree.
And you've retreated to the perennial hisec forum warrior position of "looking out for newbies". Changes in t2 prices and manufacturing has no special effect on new people. It is a complete fabrication that gets pulled out every time some hisec forum warrior has nothing left to stand on. |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
256
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:29:00 -
[1059] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: the 22% was the net change in supply, once you factor in nullsec replacing a large amount of the missing volume when highsec production cratered
...
highsec ice production will fall. contrary to your baseless claims, people will be willing to mine it in nullsec, as the economic data from the ice interdiction proves. this has been basic eve economics, with your good friend spacelord weaselior
At a 22% reduction, price quadrupled. This cost was passed on to buyers of T2 goods. T2 prices rose, T2 demand dropped among PvPers and ratters forcing POS operators to either shut down or find an alternate solutions as players were not willing to spend enough money on their goods to operate profitably.
This has been your eve economy 101 Lesson from Professor Cygnet.
Varius Xeral wrote: So you've gone from " the entire economy will implode" to "t2 prices will rise". Good, I'm glad we agree.
And you've retreated to the perennial hisec forum warrior position of "looking out for newbies". Changes in t2 prices and manufacturing has no special effect on new people. It is a complete fabrication that gets pulled out every time some hisec forum warrior has nothing left to stand on.
The economy will implode. That was just addressing the changes in Ice. The changes in mins are going to take a sledge hammer to the eve o economy by flooding the market with free goods. Let me ask you a question, genius, what happens when you take the basic material that a given economy is based on, and devalue it?
I'll tell you, if you're too dense to figure it out: it collapses.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:33:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote: Changes in t2 prices and manufacturing has no special effect on new people.
I guess that really depends on what you consider new.. 1 week, 1 month, 3 months? In a complex game, you can play for 6 months and still be fairly new at it. So to generalize that higher t2 prices won't affect new players IMHO is quite wrong. |
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:45:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:I guess that really depends on what you consider new.. 1 week, 1 month, 3 months? In a complex game, you can play for 6 months and still be fairly new at it. So to generalize that higher t2 prices won't affect new players IMHO is quite wrong.
No, to generalize that it will is wrong based on that reasoning. All you've done is further refute the initial argument by adding another point of failure.
Thanks for playing, again.
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:46:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
The economy will implode. That was just addressing the changes in Ice. The changes in mins are going to take a sledge hammer to the eve o economy by flooding the market with free goods. Let me ask you a question, genius, what happens when you take the basic material that a given economy is based on, and devalue it?
I'll tell you, if you're too dense to figure it out: it collapses.
Wait wait wait, is everything getting too expensive now or too cheap?
Gotta keep your chickenlittlist doomcalling straight here.
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:51:00 -
[1063] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:I guess that really depends on what you consider new.. 1 week, 1 month, 3 months? In a complex game, you can play for 6 months and still be fairly new at it. So to generalize that higher t2 prices won't affect new players IMHO is quite wrong. No, to generalize that it will is wrong based on that reasoning. All you've done is further refute the initial argument by adding another point of failure. Thanks for playing, again.
how could it not affect them? if I have to pay higher prices, so does a 2 week old toon.. Now my earning potential is way higher than a new players. So in all honesty, T2 prices will have a greater effect to new pilots as opposed to the older pilots who are not as hard up for isk to make their monthly plex payments etc. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
690
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:51:00 -
[1064] - Quote
t2 prices going up would be good for the game, burn a little more of that bittervet money |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
690
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:54:00 -
[1065] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: the 22% was the net change in supply, once you factor in nullsec replacing a large amount of the missing volume when highsec production cratered
...
highsec ice production will fall. contrary to your baseless claims, people will be willing to mine it in nullsec, as the economic data from the ice interdiction proves. this has been basic eve economics, with your good friend spacelord weaselior
At a 22% reduction, price quadrupled. This cost was passed on to buyers of T2 goods. T2 prices rose, T2 demand dropped among PvPers and ratters forcing POS operators to either shut down or find an alternate solutions as players were not willing to spend enough money on their goods to operate profitably. This has been your eve economy 101 Lesson from Professor Cygnet. i didn't think we'd pulled off this much economic damage since we had to end it before **** really went south but if you've got anything to show we did i would genuinely love to see it |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:54:00 -
[1066] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:t2 prices going up would be good for the game, burn a little more of that bittervet money
but only those that have money can afford to burn those.. ie. the older vets. the trillionaires. newer players will feel the bite a lot more. Making them even more risk averse since now instead of saving X.. they'll have to save X + Y to be able to afford to fit that ship they want to fly. The thing with eve, is that to make isk takes isk. so the bittervets won't have any trouble recouping their added costs. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
690
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:56:00 -
[1067] - Quote
newer players don't really fly t2 ships and t2 mods are so cheap i don't think anyone notices they cost money |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 18:57:00 -
[1068] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:how could it not affect them? if I have to pay higher prices, so does a 2 week old toon.. Now my earning potential is way higher than a new players. So in all honesty, T2 prices will have a greater effect to new pilots as opposed to the older pilots who are not as hard up for isk to make their monthly plex payments etc.
Who said it doesn't affect them? I said there is no added effect that harms new players because they're new.
Explain how t2 is in any way integral to the new player experience? It's not. All you have is "newbies buy stuff, and t2 is stuff". By that line of reasoning, we should never enact any change that might raise the price of something a new player might buy.
"Weak" would be too generous an adjective to describe such an argument; "pathetic" would be more appropriate.
You guys keep grasping at straws though. Maybe if you fling enough garbage at the wall, something might stick. It works in the music industry.
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:06:00 -
[1069] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:how could it not affect them? if I have to pay higher prices, so does a 2 week old toon.. Now my earning potential is way higher than a new players. So in all honesty, T2 prices will have a greater effect to new pilots as opposed to the older pilots who are not as hard up for isk to make their monthly plex payments etc. Who said it doesn't affect them? I said there is no added effect that harms new players because they're new. Explain how t2 is in any way integral to the new player experience? It's not. All you have is "newbies buy stuff, and t2 is stuff". By that line of reasoning, we should never enact any change that might raise the price of something a new player might buy. "Weak" would be too generous an adjective to describe such an argument; "pathetic" would be more appropriate. You guys keep grasping at straws though. Maybe if you fling enough garbage at the wall, something might stick. It works in the music industry.
nice troll.. you win. I guess in your world. new players aren't allowed to fly anything than t1 fitted rifters and play tackle for ya. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:10:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Keep whacking those strawmen, champ. They put up much less of a fight than real arguments. |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4024
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:15:00 -
[1071] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: here, we have a nearly perfect example of what happens when highsec ice production declines. the result? nullsec increases dramatically.
As I stated above, "dramatically" is only in the local point of view. A 200% or even 300% of almost nothing is still minuscule.
EvilweaselSA wrote: your claim was nothing of the sort would happen, but we can point to this and the hard data that came straight from ccp to determine your claim was utterly false.
My "claims" are about Hulkageddon, you sing the solo Gallente interdiction to pretend and create an opposite example. I am not going to touch the interdiction as I consider it a blip not worth of long term analysis.
EvilweaselSA wrote: highsec ice production will fall.
That's quite a given.
EvilweaselSA wrote: contrary to your baseless claims, people will be willing to mine it in nullsec, as the economic data from the ice interdiction proves. this has been basic eve economics, with your good friend spacelord weaselior
Sure they will mine in null sec and bring in a volume strictly related to how much that ice will be priced at.
How much that ice will impact on hi sec is to be seen. If null sec did not have those juicy anoms and other substantial ISK incomes then the phenomenon would take off. But null sec HAS those substantial ISK income sources, why many would switch from their current ISK farming habits to:
- buy an industrial pilot or waste millions SP in worthless (PvP speaking) and pilot ISK value reducing industry skills?
- become the new sitting ducks, switch from PvPers to preys.
- still get less ISK than doing anything else. I mean, maybe you have many newbies to put in mining ships but they'd be much better being put in Drakes or Rifters and do something real.
Remember, "how much" does not mean "null sec before vs after" (that is from almost nothing to something, showing a big percentage increase over... nothing) but "null sec production vs global production".
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:22:00 -
[1072] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Keep whacking those strawmen, champ. They put up much less of a fight than real arguments.
FYI..
YOUR quote. "Changes in t2 prices and manufacturing has no special effect on new people"
my reply. " So to generalize that higher t2 prices won't affect new players IMHO is quite wrong."
yours. "No, to generalize that it will is wrong based on that reasoning."
my reply elaborating on said reasoning "how could it not affect them? if I have to pay higher prices, so does a 2 week old toon.. Now my earning potential is way higher than a new players. So in all honesty, T2 prices will have a greater effect to new pilots as opposed to the older pilots who are not as hard up for isk to make their monthly plex payments etc."
Your reply " Who said it doesn't affect them? I said there is no added effect that harms new players because they're new... Explain how t2 is in any way integral to the new player experience? "
and I'm grasping at straws?
In your world, a guy that can afford 50mil spending cash has no added affect now having to pay extra for his mods. (an amount we don't know yet since prices are still in speculating stage)
So in your world. If your mortgage rates/rent goes up another 10-15%. it won't have any added effect on your life either right?
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:27:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Nope, reduced access to t2 in no way further hampers new players than it does anyone else. You can keep repeating your empty point about relative incomes, but it is irrelevant because the ownership of t2 itself is irrelevant.
And, yes, you are grasping at straws. Crying crocodile tears over imagined harm to new players after all the blatantly selfish arguments have been trounced repeatedly is most definitely grasping at straws.
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
258
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:29:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:
Wait wait wait, is everything getting too expensive now or too cheap?
Gotta keep your chickenlittlist doomcalling straight here.
*sigh*
I shouldn't have to explain this to anyone who has a level of education better than grade school, but here goes:
Like Goldilocks, EvE O is dependent on minerals maintaining a certain balance of value (not too much, not too little, but just right) and PvP keeping the market moving by creating demand. (Thus the old rule, don't fly what you cannot afford to lose.)
This also creates the movement of trade between the empires, lowsec, nullsec, and WH, as minerals are distributed differently across all those areas, with nullsec being the major consumer of ice products and trit, and the major supplier of zy, meg, and morph. This cycle keeps funds and goods moving from null to high and back again and gives noobs, non-aligned corps, and some alliances their daily bread in low and high sec.
Now, what this expansion does is nerf ice and devalue trit, meaning that nullsec imports decrease. This decreases PvP as T2 becomes more expensive, and more null dwellers are forced to sit around and protect nullbears mining ops.
Thus, bad for PvP and leads to reduced demand as fewer ships are going boom.
This also leads to financial stagnation in the low and high sec commodities markets, as nullplayers find they have less and less demand for their major exports. This is called a 'trade deficit' and leads to inflation.
Inflation is bad for EvE.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:31:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Nope, reduced access to t2 in no way further hampers new players than it does anyone else. You can keep repeating your empty point about relative incomes, but it is irrelevant because the ownership of t2 itself is irrelevant.
And, yes, you are grasping at straws. Crying crocodile tears over imagined harm to new players after all the blatantly selfish arguments have been trounced repeatedly is most definitely grasping at straws.
How the **** are my arguments selfish?
If anything, it's your emphasis that newbies reduced access to t2 is irrelevant. I'm sorry.. but a t2 fitted ship has a better survival, better dps etc than a t1 fitted one. means more isk/hr. means easier access to ships, means more disposable income, means more willingness to part with said iskies in activities that might loose said isk. But of course.. none of that is INTEGRAL to a newbie..
so then in your wisdom.. WHAT is integral to a newbie? Or better yet.. Please define what you consider a newbie.. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:35:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:so then in your wisdom.. WHAT is integral to a newbie? Or better yet.. Please define what you consider a newbie..
Hey, it's your argument that new players will be particularly "harmed" here, so you define your terms and what the actual impact will be.
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:37:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:*sigh*
I shouldn't have to explain this to anyone who has a level of education better than grade school, but here goes:
Like Goldilocks, EvE O is dependent on minerals maintaining a certain balance of value (not too much, not too little, but just right) and PvP keeping the market moving by creating demand. (Thus the old rule, don't fly what you cannot afford to lose.)
This also creates the movement of trade between the empires, lowsec, nullsec, and WH, as minerals are distributed differently across all those areas, with nullsec being the major consumer of ice products and trit, and the major supplier of zy, meg, and morph. This cycle keeps funds and goods moving from null to high and back again and gives noobs, non-aligned corps, and some alliances their daily bread in low and high sec.
Now, what this expansion does is nerf ice and devalue trit, meaning that nullsec imports decrease. This decreases PvP as T2 becomes more expensive, and more null dwellers are forced to sit around and protect nullbears mining ops.
Thus, bad for PvP and leads to reduced demand as fewer ships are going boom.
This also leads to financial stagnation in the low and high sec commodities markets, as nullplayers find they have less and less demand for their major exports. This is called a 'trade deficit' and leads to inflation.
Inflation is bad for EvE.
Congratulations on inventing so much convoluted bs that I don't even have the fortitude to engage it.
You can claim victory through incoherent wall of text. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:41:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:so then in your wisdom.. WHAT is integral to a newbie? Or better yet.. Please define what you consider a newbie.. Hey, it's your argument that new players will be particularly "harmed" here, so you define your terms and what the actual impact will be.
I thought I made it pretty clear that having less disposable income (ie. more isk you now have to pay for modules and ships) will harm the new player experience. I can't really put a time limit on the new player because it is also effected by whether or not said player is plexing or paying a monthly fee. But let's say a character moving from a BC to a BS will feel the hit of raised t2 prices quite a bit, especially if said character is trying to PLEX his account as well. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
830
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:43:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:[I thought I made it pretty clear that having less disposable income (ie. more isk you now have to pay for modules and ships) will harm the new player experience. I can't really put a time limit on the new player because it is also effected by whether or not said player is plexing or paying a monthly fee. But let's say a character moving from a BC to a BS will feel the hit of raised t2 prices quite a bit, especially if said character is trying to PLEX his account as well.
A very compelling argument, especially the need for new players to afford PLEX.
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:49:00 -
[1080] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Soko99 wrote:[I thought I made it pretty clear that having less disposable income (ie. more isk you now have to pay for modules and ships) will harm the new player experience. I can't really put a time limit on the new player because it is also effected by whether or not said player is plexing or paying a monthly fee. But let's say a character moving from a BC to a BS will feel the hit of raised t2 prices quite a bit, especially if said character is trying to PLEX his account as well. A very compelling argument, especially the need for new players to afford PLEX.
It's not.. but it is something a lot of people that are new to the game want to do. Personally, I paid for both my accounts for the first year and a half because I found the grinding for the plex to be too boring and take away from the enjoyment. But there are a lot of questions on Reddit and e-uni forums about what it takes for noobs to plex the game. After all.. a big draw for new players is the ability to be able to pay for game time with in game currency. Out of the 2-3 players I've managed to recruit into the game through different means their major questions once they learned that PLEX exists was what it takes for them to get it.
EDIT: As for your time based highlighting.. Since expertise at the game is not only based on game skills. (Ie. are you actually able to fly said ship/module with your skills.. which are based on time) but also on how much time you spent in game learning the ropes of the game. One can't really set a time limit on what a new player is. I have a character from 03 that has less than 1 mil SP. under a time definition said toon would be a vet, yet the guy can't even fly a decent fitted frigate. |
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
259
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 20:14:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:
Congratulations on inventing so much convoluted bs that I don't even have the fortitude to engage it.
You can claim victory through incoherent wall of text.
It's hardly incoherent and is a fairly accurate description of the trade dynamics of eve, in general.
Or are you saying that more nullbear operations will not require more PvP protection? Or that devaluing trit won't negatively impact the same highsec trade hubs that buy nullsec exports? Or that rising T2 costs will have no impact on PvP players?
I don';t think that it's you lack the fortitude to engage all that, I think it's that you don't have a leg to stand on.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 21:20:00 -
[1082] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: As I stated above, "dramatically" is only in the local point of view. A 200% or even 300% of almost nothing is still minuscule. ... My "claims" are about Hulkageddon, you sing the solo Gallente interdiction to pretend and create an opposite example. I am not going to touch the interdiction as I consider it a blip not worth of long term analysis. ... That's quite a given.
it is regrettable that what could be a productive discussion is stymied by your difficulty with the basic facts we are discussing here. i will quickly address them and then move on.
in short: dramatically is "managing to replace most of highsec supply with little warning"
your claims are all wrong, dumb, and shift wildly based on which facts you've been forced to recall, but the gallente ice interdiction data is directly on point and "not worth of long term analysis" is a transparent dodge at avoiding dealing with data that blows your point to smithereens
and we know for an absolute fact highsec ice mining will go down because it is being reduced in supply to below current mining levels
i believe this inability to grasp the basic facts is largely because you do not actually know anything about this subject and are merely obstanately defending the incredibly dumb position you articulated earlier, terrified of being forced to admit that you do not even understand the economics of eve mechanics so basic as ice mining:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: CCP are neither changing the absolutely craptastic AFK-bot-friendly game mechanic nor introducing any incentive for PvPers to waste hours and hours playing watch on something that will never come or - if it'll come - it'll have scanned them and will bring in enough to crush them anyway.
The "static caravans / sitting ducks staying pinned down there" whole concept is wrong. Who's so stupid to accept sitting in a defensless ship if there's consistent risk being popped?
anyone who can do math and figure out the expected rate of return is quite high, who does not soil themselves in fear of losing a ship That's why almost nobody mined endless ice in sov null sec when in 2012 it was worth 1500 ISK pu, right?
you are trying (poorly) to make a specific claim: that ice being worth 1500 isk pu would not affect null ice mining. you are wrong. we know you're wrong because we have a specific test case, with specific data that proves you are wrong. infinite hulkageddon likely caused the same effect, but we are regrettably limited in the data we have to prove it (but the data we do have, the graph, makes a strong case that you are hilariously wrong because the only mining in null that would go up in response is ice mining). so we can only conclude that all avalible evidence shows you are wrong and that no intelligent person would point to it to support your point, but cannot actually disprove it with infinite hulkageddon data alone. there, the gallente ice interdiction data does completely disprove your point. facts are facts, and they have shredded what little point you had
when you synthesize all of the posts you've made on this subject they don't actually have a coherent point, long term, short term, or otherwise. the data shows that nullsec will mine when the reward is increased. this even occurs when their ships can be shot because nullseccers, unlike the bedwetting contingent of highsec, can deal with risk and simply factor in the occasional shipkill as a cost of doing business. there have been no "long term" trends you could point to on the subject because the only long term trend has been mining is worthless in null for ages. i, on the other hand, point repeatedly to actual data to support my clear, concise, and coherent point: "nullsec is perfectly able to mine, and will do so when the rewards are worth it" |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 21:23:00 -
[1083] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Remember, "how much" does not mean "null sec before vs after" (that is from almost nothing to something, showing a big percentage increase over... nothing) but "null sec production vs global production".
we know precisely what null sec production will be vs global production
it'll be about 20% |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4025
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 22:08:00 -
[1084] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:
in short: dramatically is "managing to replace most of highsec supply with little warning"
If prices shot up, it's because you did not replace most of hi sec supply, else price'd stay the same. That's really basic stuff my friend. You produced *some* of the former hi sec supply but did not replace it.
EvilweaselSA wrote: your claims are all wrong, dumb, and shift wildly based on which facts you've been forced to recall, but the gallente ice interdiction data is directly on point and "not worth of long term analysis" is a transparent dodge at avoiding dealing with data that blows your point to smithereens
It's not a dodge, you can't take a dev blog seriously when they - the ones with the data - can't even explain basic demand and supply facts and go wild guessing with sentences like:
""Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched (LOL!!!!) to starbase types that require different fuel."
EvilweaselSA wrote: i believe this inability to grasp the basic facts is largely because you do not actually know anything about this subject and are merely obstanately defending the incredibly dumb position you articulated earlier, terrified of being forced to admit that you do not even understand the economics of eve mechanics so basic as ice mining:
I earn a living in RL by trading. I earned the majority of my quite sensible EvE wealth by dealing with ice, ice products, ice related ships and BPs. There are past ice trades and screenshots of mine transcribed around including on my website, since years ago.
Everyone but you knows this.
EvilweaselSA wrote: when you synthesize all of the posts you've made on this subject they don't actually have a coherent point, long term, short term, or otherwise. the data shows that nullsec will mine when the reward is increased. this even occurs when their ships can be shot because nullseccers, unlike the bedwetting contingent of highsec, can deal with risk and simply factor in the occasional shipkill as a cost of doing business.
Delusional much? High sec ice tychoons did not get rich during the no risk days. They became rich (including me) by mining and speculating during Hulkageddons, interdictions and all the other market movers.
You are not better, you are not smarter, you are just an organization that takes their calculated risks... like many others.
EvilweaselSA wrote: there have been no "long term" trends you could point to on the subject because the only long term trend has been mining is worthless in null for ages. i, on the other hand, point repeatedly to actual data to support my clear, concise, and coherent point: "nullsec is perfectly able to mine, and will do so when the rewards are worth it"
Null sec will have to mine but it won't be a major activity because it' won't be worth doing it. I am all but sure that the change will make ice price rise enough to compete with the copious ISK fountain alternatives you got down there.
Why do 25M per hour in a sitting duck (also requiring millions of quite PvP useless industry SP) when you can do a multiple of that in other ways?
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
334
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 22:09:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Good that you're re-balancing high-end ores, to make them worth more, but why not do a little for mid-end ores as well? Ones like Jaspet, Hedbergite and Hemorphite? Ores typically found in low-sec but also in high-sec gravimetric sites?
Currently their value per m3 is the same as the low-end ores, or only a very few percent (as in single digits) higher.
Of course, if that changes after the expansion, so that we have a clearer value-per-m3 hierarchy, with low-end < mid-end < high-end then that's fine, but if such a hierarchy does not emerge clearly, could you consider giving a slight boost to mid-end ores? Just somehing like +15% mineral content.
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1063
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 22:28:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Salpad wrote:Good that you're re-balancing high-end ores, to make them worth more, but why not do a little for mid-end ores as well? Ones like Jaspet, Hedbergite and Hemorphite? Ores typically found in low-sec but also in high-sec gravimetric sites?
Currently their value per m3 is the same as the low-end ores, or only a very few percent (as in single digits) higher.
Of course, if that changes after the expansion, so that we have a clearer value-per-m3 hierarchy, with low-end < mid-end < high-end then that's fine, but if such a hierarchy does not emerge clearly, could you consider giving a slight boost to mid-end ores? Just somehing like +15% mineral content.
You mean the ones that eve isk per hour is telling me are, given the current mineral prices, occupying the 2nd, 3rd and 4th place spots (behind arkonor) for "best isk/hr"?
Those ones? Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
259
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 23:06:00 -
[1087] - Quote
mynnna wrote:
You mean the ones that eve isk per hour is telling me are, given the current mineral prices, occupying the 2nd, 3rd and 4th place spots (behind arkonor) for "best isk/hr"?
Those ones?
While I am opposed most of this 're-balancing' I have to admit he has a point. If your justification is higher risk should yield higher reward, it's low sec, not null, that should have the most profitable ores, as mining there has the highest risk for miners.
Null and WH are risky, but low sec is downright suicidal in a barge.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4025
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 23:18:00 -
[1088] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:mynnna wrote:
You mean the ones that eve isk per hour is telling me are, given the current mineral prices, occupying the 2nd, 3rd and 4th place spots (behind arkonor) for "best isk/hr"?
Those ones?
While I am opposed most of this 're-balancing' I have to admit he has a point. If your justification is higher risk should yield higher reward, it's low sec, not null, that should have the most profitable ores, as mining there has the highest risk for miners. Null and WH are risky, but low sec is downright suicidal in a barge.
Past patch WHs won't have local (so no neuts warning) and the grav sites will be easily found with no probes. I think WH mining will become even riskier than non FW low sec. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
259
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 23:34:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Past patch WHs won't have local (so no neuts warning) and the grav sites will be easily found with no probes. I think WH mining will become even riskier than non FW low sec.
Mine two jumps from Amamake or out in Molden Heath some time. If you finish a cycle without random prats jumping in, you're having a good day.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4025
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 23:49:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Past patch WHs won't have local (so no neuts warning) and the grav sites will be easily found with no probes. I think WH mining will become even riskier than non FW low sec.
Mine two jumps from Amamake or out in Molden Heath some time. If you finish a cycle without random prats jumping in, you're having a good day.
I actually have a mining bookmark in Amamake (from who knows when) Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 01:43:00 -
[1091] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Past patch WHs won't have local (so no neuts warning) and the grav sites will be easily found with no probes. I think WH mining will become even riskier than non FW low sec.
Mine two jumps from Amamake or out in Molden Heath some time. If you finish a cycle without random prats jumping in, you're having a good day.
Waiting to finish a cycle before bouncing when someone jumps into the system is FAR different than not knowing if anyone is in your system. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 02:30:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: If prices shot up, it's because you did not replace most of hi sec supply, else price'd stay the same. That's really basic stuff my friend. You produced *some* of the former hi sec supply but did not replace it.
aahahahahahahahaha aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaha
what do you think happens when you restrict the supply of a product with highly inelastic demand that only has an alternative source that has a much higher marginal cost of production
a ninth grader in econ 101 could have figured this one out
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I earn a living in RL by trading. I earned the majority of my quite sensible EvE wealth by dealing with ice, ice products, ice related ships and BPs. There are past ice trades and screenshots of mine transcribed around including on my website, since years ago.
Everyone but you knows this.
i am well aware you believe that having hit a lucky streak while reading entrails and proudly discussing how you don't know a single thing about the things you trade is actually skilled trading and not god playing a very hilarious joke. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 02:40:00 -
[1093] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: when you synthesize all of the posts you've made on this subject they don't actually have a coherent point, long term, short term, or otherwise. the data shows that nullsec will mine when the reward is increased. this even occurs when their ships can be shot because nullseccers, unlike the bedwetting contingent of highsec, can deal with risk and simply factor in the occasional shipkill as a cost of doing business.
Delusional much? High sec ice tychoons did not get rich during the no risk days. They became rich (including me) by mining and speculating during Hulkageddons, interdictions and all the other market movers. You are not better, you are not smarter, you are just an organization that takes their calculated risks... like many others.
while i am infinitely better and smarter than you and other ice miners, i am unsure what the relevance is and what part of my post you thought implied a "high sec ice tychoon" was anything other than an especially industrious space peasant with odd delusions of grandeur who takes scraping pennies out of dirt to a disturbingly intense level
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: there have been no "long term" trends you could point to on the subject because the only long term trend has been mining is worthless in null for ages. i, on the other hand, point repeatedly to actual data to support my clear, concise, and coherent point: "nullsec is perfectly able to mine, and will do so when the rewards are worth it"
Null sec will have to mine but it won't be a major activity because it' won't be worth doing it. I am all but sure that the change will make ice price rise enough to compete with the copious ISK fountain alternatives you got down there. Why do 25M per hour in a sitting duck (also requiring millions of quite PvP useless industry SP) when you can do a multiple of that in other ways?
ice will rise to a proper level where it is worth mining in nullsec obviously. that is the point. i suppose the hour has rolled around to make your broken clock correct for a little while. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
691
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 02:55:00 -
[1094] - Quote
the basic problem is that the sum total of the evidence you've posted is...well, zilch. you've posted hilariously incorrect things that could be easily refuted, and some things that are just blanket assertions too vauge to be wrong. but you've failed to grapple with the data in any way: we have two solid points and you studiously ignore them |
Frying Doom
2464
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 08:04:00 -
[1095] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:the basic problem is that the sum total of the evidence you've posted is...well, zilch. you've posted hilariously incorrect things that could be easily refuted, and some things that are just blanket assertions too vauge to be wrong. but you've failed to grapple with the data in any way: we have two solid points and you studiously ignore them Sorry I have missed part of this conversation.
Could you update me with your 2 solid points and the proof behind them? Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 10:17:00 -
[1096] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist.
It will indeed . I am sure questions will be asked why the outcome was not foreseen by CCP when it was so obvious in hindsight. Questions will be asked of CCP's process - why was the internal economist not consulted? Where was CCP's risk management in this - ans they don't have a risk management function. What role the CSM played?
By then CCP will be in damage limitation mode trying to work out how the hell they get the economy going again and recover the lost subs.
This will prove to be far worse than Incarna where at the end of the day it created some useful publicity about a committed player base. There is not much of a positive spin you can put on an economy crashing and carebears silently unsubbing. It may be of some interest to acedemics about how recessions can occur and MMO's in general as an example of how not to do things. |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 10:40:00 -
[1097] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:lead to skyrocketing prices. Which would then make people go "man it's suddenly worth doing even if my POS costs more to run" and prompt them to put it back up, bringing prices back down to a more reasonable level. If, you know, POS got shut down in the first place at all.
Except that at the higher prices demand has reduced so there is no longer a need for so many POS's. Producing more goods at the higher prices just leaves them unsold, and there is no profit to be made. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4028
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 10:48:00 -
[1098] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: aahahahahahahahaha aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahaha aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaha
what do you think happens when you restrict the supply of a product with highly inelastic demand that only has an alternative source that has a much higher marginal cost of production
a ninth grader in econ 101 could have figured this one out
Would be true if you had supplied the missing volume (at higher cost). But no, your own provided graph shows you provided a little fraction of what was needed. It'd be also nice to see which kind of "much higher marginal cost of production", because you are talking more vague than what you claim I do.
EvilweaselSA wrote:i am well aware you believe that having hit a lucky streak while reading entrails and proudly discussing how you don't know a single thing about the things you trade is actually skilled trading and not god playing a very hilarious joke.
It's a lucky streak going on since 2008. That's quite a TON of luck! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4028
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 10:50:00 -
[1099] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:ice will rise to a proper level where it is worth mining in nullsec obviously. that is the point. i suppose the hour has rolled around to make your broken clock correct for a little while.
Keep dreaming. The major change that we'll see is botting fleets finally running undisturbed, away from inquiring eyes, away from hi sec suicide gankers. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1877
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 11:31:00 -
[1100] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote:mynnna wrote:Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist. It will indeed . I am sure questions will be asked why the outcome was not foreseen by CCP when it was so obvious in hindsight. Questions will be asked of CCP's process - why was the internal economist not consulted? Where was CCP's risk management in this - ans they don't have a risk management function. What role the CSM played? By then CCP will be in damage limitation mode trying to work out how the hell they get the economy going again and recover the lost subs. This will prove to be far worse than Incarna where at the end of the day it created some useful publicity about a committed player base. There is not much of a positive spin you can put on an economy crashing and carebears silently unsubbing. It may be of some interest to acedemics about how recessions can occur and MMO's in general as an example of how not to do things.
I look forward to reading this thread back in a couple of months when Eve is doing just fine and seeing your character consigned to Doomheim in embarrassment. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 11:59:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:
I look forward to reading this thread back in a couple of months when Eve is doing just fine and seeing your character consigned to Doomheim in embarrassment.
Well lets both hope that I am am wrong especially as I see my six monthly sub was just taken. |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
269
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 12:34:00 -
[1102] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: what do you think happens when you restrict the supply of a product with highly inelastic demand that only has an alternative source that has a much higher marginal cost of production
Except POS fuel doesn't have a highly inelastic demand. Players do not 'have' to have a POS running to play the game. They only 'need' one if they're producing T2 or need to refine ore some place they otherwise could not, and even then there are alternatives (station labs are time consuming but can produce T2, orcas and rorquals can eliminate the need for on site refining, etc.)
The only result of this would be to drive up the price of T2 as more and more small operators are squeezed out by higher costs and extended production times, reducing competition (and therefor conflict) and allowing us to get back to the good old days of alliance dominated T2 production monopolies.
You remember how well THAT worked, right?
Soko99 wrote: Waiting to finish a cycle before bouncing when someone jumps into the system is FAR different than not knowing if anyone is in your system.
You sort of missed my point: in those places you don't need to know if someone is already in system because pirate patrols are so plentiful that you will always have at least one in system with you. You will very rarely finish a single cycle before some asshat is jumping in to try and kill you.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
34
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 12:52:00 -
[1103] - Quote
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41%2BB1U9WYjL._SL500_AA300_.jpg "Every mining attempt, a posibility to capital engagement escalation". Sadly this piece of cheese is rotten. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
692
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 13:25:00 -
[1104] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:the basic problem is that the sum total of the evidence you've posted is...well, zilch. you've posted hilariously incorrect things that could be easily refuted, and some things that are just blanket assertions too vauge to be wrong. but you've failed to grapple with the data in any way: we have two solid points and you studiously ignore them Sorry I have missed part of this conversation. Could you update me with your 2 solid points and the proof behind them? no, you can go back several pages and read the thread |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
692
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 13:32:00 -
[1105] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Would be true if you had supplied the missing volume (at higher cost). But no, your own provided graph shows you provided a little fraction of what was needed. It'd be also nice to see which kind of "much higher marginal cost of production", because you are talking more vague than what you claim I do.
"we" did not supply the missing volume. IRC did, mostly. but the devblog is quite clear in saying you are absolutely wrong and have no idea what you're talking about since numbers have meaning
highsec production went from 98% to 20%. yet supply only went from 100% to 80%. irc furiously ice mining away ameliorated three fourths of the missing volume. three fourths is not "a little fraction". these are numbers, and you can't stupid your way through them because I can keep going back to the actual numbers.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: It's a lucky streak going on since 2008. That's quite a TON of luck!
not really. it's almost certainly a combination of (a) you pegging an arbitrary date as the 'start' to make your trading seem better and cut out a history of losses beforehand (b) you simply being in the market when it has an overall positive trend and a monkey could replicate your results (c) you taking a market with a somewhat black-swan type risk so you will tend to be up until whoops you're wiped out
we know this because anytime you try to discuss actual things that can be verified about economics on such a simple system as eve you horrifically embarrass yourself so it's certainly not skill |
Frying Doom
2468
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 13:38:00 -
[1106] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Frying Doom wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:the basic problem is that the sum total of the evidence you've posted is...well, zilch. you've posted hilariously incorrect things that could be easily refuted, and some things that are just blanket assertions too vauge to be wrong. but you've failed to grapple with the data in any way: we have two solid points and you studiously ignore them Sorry I have missed part of this conversation. Could you update me with your 2 solid points and the proof behind them? no, you can go back several pages and read the thread eh, screw that. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Sissy Fuzz
Sissy Fuzz Communications
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 14:21:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Dmitri Ronuken wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important.
We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. You and others might be happy with with the "improved" risk/reward balance, but I'm not happy that you've removed a lot of the fun in mining. You just eliminated prospecting from the game, and any reason for miners to pick up scanning and astrometrics skills. Why not just make the "hidden" asteroid fields show up like the static belts? One button click is a joke of a separation. The only challenge left in mining now is ganking, and that's not the same kind of fun as scanning down a 1.25% gravimetric signature and being the first person to mine it was. If miners wanted to play PvP they'd play PvP in something other than mining barges.
This. Dammit.
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
601
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 14:33:00 -
[1108] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: No a real man eats grits and road kill.
Do you not even know what a redneck is??
I can agree that ganking is the far better way of collecting tears, but a real man does not need to make a child cry to feel better about himself.
I will say though, winning a fight you should have lost is far more rewarding then killing a noob in a mining ship.
Collecting tear is just the excuses bad PVPers use so they can stroke their e-peen through ganking.
A group of spider tanking drakes can be surprisingly hard to kill. A group of miners can be killed by a 1 week old noob, where is the challenge in that? I my book something that is so easy to do, is not worth doing, at least not in a game I pay to play.
That's pretty cool, and thanks to the sandbox, you can not-kill miners all day long! Glad you have fun! On the flipside, limiting yourself via eBushido is pretty silly, when your opponent is under no obligation to do the same. In many ways, EVE mirrors the behaviour of RL military. Yeah, there's all kinds of noise about "honor" and all that, but any vet can tell you, the military fights dirty. Ganks, you bet. Ambushes, for sure. Equivalents of gatecamps (static ambushes on chokepoints) are taught to day one boots. Why gank? A better question is, Why NOT gank? If you don't protect it, you don't deserve to have it. It's the EVE way. yes the real military does gank, but they gank other solders who have guns. Not women and children.
Evil spoke of a real man eating ribeye steak rather than squirrel meat. Yeah sure, a real man eats what even he wants. But a real man would not take candy from a baby. A porr little pansy could eat a ribeye steak just as easily as a real man, but it is the pansy that will be the one taking candy from a baby.
I am not talking about limiting your game play. If you want to be a ganker, go right ahead. Your not hurting me any. The only ships I ever lost to a gankers where cheap T1 haulers full of junk I was just getting rid of. No real loss to me, just some pocket change. But when I show up in a PVP fit ship with kill rights the gankers run and hid. Some real men they are right?
I just do not see how a gnaker can consider themself a PVPer. Sure it is a form of PVP, but it is called ganking. I ganker thinking they are a good PVPer is like some high school punk power shifting his civic thinking he is a street racer, to everyone else he is just pathetic.
Gankers speak of harvesting tears like it is something worth doing. What I see is a bunch of players that have gotten so used to easy fights through massive gate camps and blob warfare that easy is the only way they know. They have no idea how much more rewarding a challenging fight is. Real PVPers are the ones that would like to see an end to null sec blobs, where actual skill and tactics would matter, and 10 well skilled, properly fit elite PVPers could take on a 50 man blob and win.
I saw it happen once, well maybe not 50 man blob, but it was 3 highly skilled carrier pilots, that were attacked by a blob fleet. They not only survived but killed half the blob before the blob gave up and left. Lions and Sheep my friends. But in real PVP it is the gankers who are the sheep. Even if they call themselves Lions while taking candy from babies in high sec. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 14:33:00 -
[1109] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Soko99 wrote: Waiting to finish a cycle before bouncing when someone jumps into the system is FAR different than not knowing if anyone is in your system.
You sort of missed my point: in those places you don't need to know if someone is already in system because pirate patrols are so plentiful that you will always have at least one in system with you. You will very rarely finish a single cycle before some asshat is jumping in to try and kill you.
I get your point on that, but you're using a couple of busy systems.. there are plenty of low sec systems out there that have grav sites and are next to empty with barely any visitors. Sure getting out there could be a logistical nightmare on the short run, but it's no different than trying to bring your mining ship/hauler whatever into a WH that doesn't have it's own direct connection to HS.
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
831
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 14:41:00 -
[1110] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:yes the real military does gank, but they gank other solders who have guns. Not women and children.
...this is a gem
|
|
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
273
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 14:59:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:yes the real military does gank, but they gank other solders who have guns. Not women and children.
...this is a gem
He does have a point though, the worlds more professional militaries tend not to gank women and children for the ***** and giggles. They leave that to amateur hour mercs and tin pot dictators.
And, yes, the majority of gankers when confronted with actual PvP play docking games. I saw one yesterday sitting on station in a mach in a newb system with a can out that read 'Free Stuff'.
If that's your idea of 'PvP', you're pathetic.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1067
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:03:00 -
[1112] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote:mynnna wrote:Gonna enjoy moonwalking back into this thread in 3-4 months and proving everyone wrong.
Well, I'll have to make another thread for that, but whatever, you get the gist. It will indeed . I am sure questions will be asked why the outcome was not foreseen by CCP when it was so obvious in hindsight. Questions will be asked of CCP's process - why was the internal economist not consulted? Where was CCP's risk management in this - ans they don't have a risk management function. What role the CSM played? By then CCP will be in damage limitation mode trying to work out how the hell they get the economy going again and recover the lost subs. This will prove to be far worse than Incarna where at the end of the day it created some useful publicity about a committed player base. There is not much of a positive spin you can put on an economy crashing and carebears silently unsubbing. It may be of some interest to acedemics about how recessions can occur and MMO's in general as an example of how not to do things.
One of us is going to be right.
It's not going to be you.
Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:25:00 -
[1113] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Lady Areola Fappington wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: No a real man eats grits and road kill.
Do you not even know what a redneck is??
I can agree that ganking is the far better way of collecting tears, but a real man does not need to make a child cry to feel better about himself.
I will say though, winning a fight you should have lost is far more rewarding then killing a noob in a mining ship.
Collecting tear is just the excuses bad PVPers use so they can stroke their e-peen through ganking.
A group of spider tanking drakes can be surprisingly hard to kill. A group of miners can be killed by a 1 week old noob, where is the challenge in that? I my book something that is so easy to do, is not worth doing, at least not in a game I pay to play.
That's pretty cool, and thanks to the sandbox, you can not-kill miners all day long! Glad you have fun! On the flipside, limiting yourself via eBushido is pretty silly, when your opponent is under no obligation to do the same. In many ways, EVE mirrors the behaviour of RL military. Yeah, there's all kinds of noise about "honor" and all that, but any vet can tell you, the military fights dirty. Ganks, you bet. Ambushes, for sure. Equivalents of gatecamps (static ambushes on chokepoints) are taught to day one boots. Why gank? A better question is, Why NOT gank? If you don't protect it, you don't deserve to have it. It's the EVE way. Yes the real military does gank, but they gank other solders who have guns. Not women and children. Yes this does imply high sec miners are women and children, not solders, but they are just as easy to kill, and just as unlikely to fight back. So it does fit. Evil spoke of a real man eating ribeye steak rather than squirrel meat. Yeah sure, a real man eats what even he wants. But a real man would not take candy from a baby. A poor little pansy could eat a ribeye steak just as easily as a real man, but it is the pansy that will be the one taking candy from a baby. I am not talking about limiting your game play. If you want to be a ganker, go right ahead. Your not hurting me any. The only ships I ever lost to a gankers where cheap T1 haulers full of junk I was just getting rid of. No real loss to me, just some pocket change. But when I show up in a PVP fit ship with kill rights the gankers run and hid. Some real men they are right? I just do not see how a ganker can consider themself a PVPer. Sure it is a form of PVP, but it is called ganking. A ganker thinking they are a good PVPer is like some high school punk power shifting his civic thinking he is a street racer, to everyone else he is just pathetic. Gankers speak of harvesting tears like it is something worth doing. What I see is a bunch of players that have gotten so used to easy fights through massive gate camps and blob warfare that easy is the only way they know. They have no idea how much more rewarding a challenging fight is. Real PVPers are the ones that would like to see an end to null sec blobs, where actual skill and tactics would matter, and 10 well skilled, properly fit elite PVPers could take on a 50 man blob and win. I saw it happen once, well maybe not 50 man blob, but it was 3 highly skilled carrier pilots, that were attacked by a blob fleet. They not only survived but killed half the blob before the blob gave up and left. Lions and Sheep my friends. But in real PVP it is the gankers who are the sheep. Even if they call themselves Lions while taking candy from babies in high sec.
You heard it here, folks. Real, professional PvP is taking a bunch of brick tanked archons out and dumping all over a bunch of random cruisers and frigates. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
693
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:29:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: I saw it happen once, well maybe not 50 man blob, but it was 3 highly skilled carrier pilots, that were attacked by a blob fleet. They not only survived but killed half the blob before the blob gave up and left. Lions and Sheep my friends. But in real PVP it is the gankers who are the sheep. Even if they call themselves Lions while taking candy from babies in high sec.
here's the thing
you seem to think anyone anywhere cares about your opinion about what is the hounourouboule way to win
we don't
we care about crushing you and making you suffer and your relentless squealing about how unfair and dishounourouboule it is makes it even more fun |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
693
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:34:00 -
[1115] - Quote
like victims seem to have this idea that anyone cares about their opinion if their ganking was honourable or dishonourable
nobody in the last 7 years or so has cared that the guy they killed is squealing about how dishonourable they were instead of praising their skill, except to laugh at how whiny they are |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:51:00 -
[1116] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: "we" did not supply the missing volume. IRC did, mostly. but the devblog is quite clear in saying you are absolutely wrong and have no idea what you're talking about since numbers have meaning
highsec production went from 98% to 20%. yet supply only went from 100% to 80%. irc furiously ice mining away ameliorated three fourths of the missing volume. three fourths is not "a little fraction". these are numbers, and you can't stupid your way through them because I can keep going back to the actual numbers.
- Gallente ice interdiction: raw ice dropped (as it should) but refined ice dropped by just 22%. That "just" 22% did not come because null sec wholly supplied but from hi sec stockpiles (including Block Ukx's and mine (but I have a small one so it's irrelevant)). In fact, the lol sentence I highlighted posts ago: "However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand" is what happened after the stockpiles ended and the 22% "plus further 46%" indicate how much null sec would supply.
- Hulkageddon: numbers were even more drastic, all it takes is a pair of eyes and look at the graph.
EvilweaselSA wrote: not really. it's almost certainly a combination of (a) you pegging an arbitrary date as the 'start' to make your trading seem better and cut out a history of losses beforehand (b) you simply being in the market when it has an overall positive trend and a monkey could replicate your results (c) you taking a market with a somewhat black-swan type risk so you will tend to be up until whoops you're wiped out
we know this because anytime you try to discuss actual things that can be verified about economics on such a simple system as eve you horrifically embarrass yourself so it's certainly not skill
Too bad I can post a screenshot of my account start date, moreover you can find all my posts on finance forums (and some on my finance EvE thread on MD), see when they start what they do and so on and see my analyses and several trades applied. It's all written, all recorded and done in the *crysis* years, when markets went ranging (the hardest situation to trade), and trends deflated.
But hey, only you could imagine the crysis years are when markets trended and were easy. As for monkeys being able to replicate anything, it has to be why from 85% to 95% of the traders (including those who do the so called "copy trades") consistently lose money on the markets. Be my guest, try yourself how much it's easy. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
274
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 16:06:00 -
[1117] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: here's the thing
you seem to think anyone anywhere cares about your opinion about what is the hounourouboule way to win
we don't
we care about crushing you and making you suffer and your relentless squealing about how unfair and dishounourouboule it is makes it even more fun
Exactly, you're pathetic, miserable, talentless bastards, and you want other people to be miserable so you can feel better about yourselves. People suggesting you have no talent at PvP unless it's 500 to 1 makes your epeen look small, so you must mock them vigorously, because you have nothing else in your hollow, pathetic lives.
Point of fact, dueling is still a thing in some places, where PvPers get together and strut their stuff, and maybe if you had all taken notes, I wouldn't have eluded you yet again last time I made a run into null sec. Since even your bubble positioning seems to favor quantity over correct placement.
Admittedly, there might be such a thing, but I can't recall the last time Goons won an alliance tournament.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
696
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:17:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Exactly, you're pathetic, miserable, talentless bastards, and you want other people to be miserable so you can feel better about yourselves. People suggesting you have no talent at PvP unless it's 500 to 1 makes your epeen look small, so you must mock them vigorously, because you have nothing else in your hollow, pathetic lives.
you still think your opinion matters in the calculus. it doesn't.
we do not measure our epeen by your view of what it is. we measure our epeen by our ability to take things away from you and force you to do things you don't want to do. it's about power. not respect, not honor, power. your railing at how dishonorable we are and how little you respect us merely serves to illustrate our power because with all that rage you can...well, you can post and that's it.
we are not interested in your respect, or your measure of honor. we are interested in using our will to power, and using you as the pawn to demonstrate that raw power. trying to pretend you idea of space honor or space respect are important is basically an admission you have no real power and are desperately grasping for anything you can find. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
696
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:27:00 -
[1119] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: - Gallente ice interdiction: raw ice dropped (as it should) but refined ice dropped by just 22%. That "just" 22% did not come because null sec wholly supplied but from hi sec stockpiles (including Block Ukx's and mine (but I have a small one so it's irrelevant)). In fact, the lol sentence I highlighted posts ago: "However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand" is what happened after the stockpiles ended and the 22% "plus further 46%" indicate how much null sec would supply.
actually it means what the guy with access to the real data said it meant: that people conducted a massive shift away from gallente isotope use (because in every situation you're using gallente towers it's to react, and you can do that just as well with caldaris) because there was so significant a price difference and for much of t2 reacting it's all fuel prices
we can assume that the eve economist's interpretation is miles better than yours because (a)he does not make dumb errors about what causes prices that you've made and (b) he has access to better data and (c) he has a much better track record
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: - Hulkageddon: numbers were even more drastic, all it takes is a pair of eyes and look at the graph.
I already addressed your attempt to lie here. hulkageddon's figures measure all mining, but only one type of mining (ice) would be incentive in 0.0 as empire was choked to death. the reasonable assumption is that virtually all of that increase is ice (because nothing else seriously increased in profitability in null as a result). consequently, given the information we have from the ice mining devblog we know that you're lying and wrong.
you are attempting to lie about what data means. this will not work.
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Too bad I can post a screenshot of my account start date, moreover you can find all my posts on finance forums (and some on my finance EvE thread on MD), see when they start what they do and so on and see my analyses and several trades applied. It's all written, all recorded and done in the *crysis* years, when markets went ranging (the hardest situation to trade), and trends deflated.
But hey, only you could imagine the crysis years are when markets trended and were easy. As for monkeys being able to replicate anything, it has to be why from 85% to 95% of the traders (including those who do the so called "copy trades") consistently lose money on the markets. Be my guest, try yourself how much it's easy.
i know you're wrong because actual studies have been done and prove you're wrong and most of what you're saying is utter nonsense that's counteracted by hard data. also because i have watched you attempt to explain things in eve (a much simpler system) and noticed you botch basic facts so routinely it is a reasonable assumption you do so irl as well.
i also find it disturbing that you consistently attempt to push your irl financial scams on eve players and this is permitted by ccp; i heartily approve of anyone scamming idiots in the md forum out of their eve monies but the line should be drawn at permitting you to advertise and scam people out if irl money |
Suzan Deering
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:35:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Here comes odesy!
1) No outposts should not have 500-700 bulding slots, if you need that many get a second (third, forth) one or place some (more) towers.
2) Lets see if the mining changes will decrease the number of jumpfreighters going to the trade hubs from 0.0 to trade their high en minerals for low ends (or mods to refine). So, will it move the problem from 0.0 to highsec and from low end to high end minerals.
3) Keep an eye on the market and watch the ice product prices will soar.
4) Aaaaw you have to change the thing you do so you can still do it because the have started scrambling in you favorite type of site. To you like all the other whiners I say:
Adapt or die. That is eve and hopefully always will be.
Long live the sandbox.
|
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
697
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:37:00 -
[1121] - Quote
Suzan Deering wrote:Here comes odesy! 1) No outposts should not have 500-700 bulding slots, if you need that many get a second (third, forth) one or place some (more) towers. you can't, there is an artificial limit of one per system |
stoicfaux
2667
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:51:00 -
[1122] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
New hacking/archaeology mechanics that turn "activate module, wait an arbitrary amount of time" into an engaging, skill-driven puzzle, derived from a new drive towards prototyping stuff - 3, 5, 6, and definitely 2 Make them Quicktime Events (QTE), because, you know, in the battle between Good and Evil, Evil has more fun.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:00:00 -
[1123] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: actually it means what the guy with access to the real data said it meant: that people conducted a massive shift away from gallente isotope use (because in every situation you're using gallente towers it's to react, and you can do that just as well with caldaris) because there was so significant a price difference and for much of t2 reacting it's all fuel prices
we can assume that the eve economist's interpretation is miles better than yours because (a)he does not make dumb errors about what causes prices that you've made and (b) he has access to better data and (c) he has a much better track record
An interpretation that uses words like:
"However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell" (i.e. he is surprised of that... the man with the numbers can't find a justification).
"probably due"
"lost patience with the high prices"
is as a good interpreation as it could be yours or mine. There are other and clear cut words to state economy numbers when those numbers and their cause are known, and those words are missing from the dev blog.
EvilweaselSA wrote: I already addressed your attempt to lie here. hulkageddon's figures measure all mining, but only one type of mining (ice) would be incentive in 0.0 as empire was choked to death. the reasonable assumption is that virtually all of that increase is ice (because nothing else seriously increased in profitability in null as a result). consequently, given the information we have from the ice mining devblog we know that you're lying and wrong.
I am talking of the vast HK induced decrease, you of your little null sec increase, apples and oranges but I can see you like to call the water to your mill.
Also, it DID work, because I have made 1/3 or more of my money exactly thanks to that HK.
EvilweaselSA wrote: i know you're wrong because actual studies have been done and prove you're wrong and most of what you're saying is utter nonsense that's counteracted by hard data. also because i have watched you attempt to explain things in eve (a much simpler system) and noticed you botch basic facts so routinely it is a reasonable assumption you do so irl as well.
I warmly invite you to go and post your opinion on one of the RL trading threads I post on. This is the official english one. Write at your leisure. Or keep dribbling here, showing you don't have the guts to confront with what you say in a forum where RL finance is all. I am awaiting you there.
Ah, here is a partial listing of both EvE and RL trades posted by me, some in real time.
EvilweaselSA wrote: i also find it disturbing that you consistently attempt to push your irl financial scams on eve players and this is permitted by ccp; i heartily approve of anyone scamming idiots in the md forum out of their eve monies but the line should be drawn at permitting you to advertise and scam people out if irl money
First of all it's nice to see something rubbing with salt on the same people who enjoy making life miserable and taking away from the others.
I find it amusing how one of the EvE economists actually likes my "scam" and my material:
CCP Quant wrote: "I was about to give you a link to a great example of community made market analysis, amazingly it turned out you are the author of that post! Dr. Eyj+¦ pointed that post out to me as a good read and I'll say I'm impressed, great work!"
How odd, eh? Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:08:00 -
[1124] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:flailing
Instead of flailing around wildly lets settle this like true nerds.
1 2 3 4 I declare an isk war http://i.imgur.com/991Q6r5.jpg | http://i.imgur.com/IQskyX4.jpg |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:20:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: is as a good interpreation as it could be yours or mine.
uh no, it's definitely better than yours for all the reasons I elaborated on and your interpretation has nothing to actually back it up besides your insanity
i also know there were massive tower shifts because even my own alliance which had been warned to stock up was switching towers by that time
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: I am talking of the vast HK induced decrease, you of your little null sec increase, apples and oranges but I can see you like to call the water to your mill.
in mining, generally, when large amounts is lowends. i know what you're talking about which is why I know you're wrong and keep explaining that you are using the drop in mining lowends amounts (which we would not expect to be replaced in null) with that of ice (which we would, and know have been)
you go "look mining dropped a lot in highsec and did not increase as much in null", i tell you of course it did because we ain't mining veld in null but we did mine more ice and you can look at the gallente ice interdiction to prove it and you sort of seize up and go BUT HULKAGEDDON
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Also, it DID work, because I have made 1/3 or more of my money exactly thanks to that HK.
you keep trying to claim that your fairly minor amounts of space money and real money lend credence to your views. i generally consider it gauche to try and use these sorts of arguments but suffice to say if you try to make space money or real money the determining factor in deciding which of us is right you are in for a world of hurt, poor man
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I warmly invite you to go and post your opinion on one of the RL trading threads I post on. This is the official english one. Write at your leisure. Or keep dribbling here, showing you don't have the guts to confront with what you say in a forum where RL finance is all. I am awaiting you there.
"you keep talking about double-blind testing proving my diamond audio wires do nothing, come to this audiophile forum of like-minded morons and say that!"
posting isn't about guts you moron |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:28:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: i also find it disturbing that you consistently attempt to push your irl financial scams on eve players and this is permitted by ccp; i heartily approve of anyone scamming idiots in the md forum out of their eve monies but the line should be drawn at permitting you to advertise and scam people out if irl money
First of all it's nice to see something rubbing with salt on the same people who enjoy making life miserable and taking away from the others. yeah uh i'm not real sure that "hahaha those goonies think that scamming people out of irl money is inappropriate so i should do it to make them unhappy" is a great banner to fly here |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
276
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:37:00 -
[1127] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: we measure our epeen by our ability to take things away from you and force you to do things you don't want to do. it's about power. not respect, not honor, power. your railing at how dishonorable we are and how little you respect us merely serves to illustrate our power because with all that rage you can...well, you can post and that's it.
*shrug* if that's how you measure it, then your epeen is quite small indeed. Your feeble efforts to thwart me have, again, and again, come to naught. Your failure against me has been truly epic on occasion. I mean, seriously, you'd think flooding a system with over 500 guys looking for a single T1 frig and bubbling the **** out of both exits you'd have had at least something to show for it.
So far:
Goonswarm Killmails for Cygnet = 0.
You tout your power'? Then explain your utter failure to take away anything from me. I'm not some noob. I can make money on anything you do, short of shut the game down. I have danced though your gate camps. I thumb my nose at your pathetic excuse for an alliance, a group hated, not for it's achievements, but for the fact it has to use exploits and dishonesty to get ahead. My holdings are so diverse you'd have to bankrupt every market in EvE to even bother me.
What does bother me is your efforts to run this game into the ground, again and again and again.
I like this game.
So **** off and quit trying to ruin it for your own selfish gains.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:39:00 -
[1128] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: we measure our epeen by our ability to take things away from you and force you to do things you don't want to do. it's about power. not respect, not honor, power. your railing at how dishonorable we are and how little you respect us merely serves to illustrate our power because with all that rage you can...well, you can post and that's it. *shrug* if that's how you measure it, then your epeen is quite small indeed. Your feeble efforts to thwart me have, again, and again, come to naught. Your failure against me has been truly epic on occasion. I mean, seriously, you'd think flooding a system with over 500 guys looking for a single T1 frig and bubbling the **** out of both exits you'd have had at least something to show for it. So far: Goonswarm Killmails for Cygnet = 0. im sorry you have several times implied that you seem to think we know or care who you are
why is that and who are you |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:40:00 -
[1129] - Quote
like as far as i can see you are faceless nobody #234124 and i don't really see why we'd care if we'd inflicted any pain on you personally or not (though given your blind rage i am fairly certain we have) as much as we'd care about the pain and suffering we've inflicted on the faceless nobody population (which is hilariously extensive) |
xinthorminaias
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:44:00 -
[1130] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Frying Doom wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:the basic problem is that the sum total of the evidence you've posted is...well, zilch. you've posted hilariously incorrect things that could be easily refuted, and some things that are just blanket assertions too vauge to be wrong. but you've failed to grapple with the data in any way: we have two solid points and you studiously ignore them Sorry I have missed part of this conversation. Could you update me with your 2 solid points and the proof behind them? no, you can go back several pages and read the thread
Since EvilweaselSA has refused to explain I thought I would go back and make my best attempt. He made a number of points, which were I presumed to counter the argument raised by a number of people that ice will not be mined in null sec to make up the shortfall in High sec and there will be a reduction in supply leading to an increase in price and consequent decrease in demand for ice isotopes, as POSGÇÖs in particular are taken off line and the higher prices reduces demand for tech2 items.
He cited some evidence for his assertion; a chart and devblog; which I suggest merely demonstrated that his memory of the existence of these sources was rather better than his ability to interpret the information. I believe his GÇ£two solid pointsGÇ¥ were:
EvilweaselSA wrote: When we interdicted gallente ice people did mine much more in null, despite our best efforts to stop them. That's confirmed by the devblog on it.
EvilweaselSA wrote: as you can see as mining in empire decreased during infinite hulkageddon, mining in 0.0 went significantly up from itGÇÖs march doldrums.
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/63999/1/Mined_Volume_2.png
He offered this chart above and you can see what could be a rise of up to 0.4m cubic meters from Null between March and May as overall production fell by over 3m cubic meters. You can probably draw your own conclusion about how well this supports his statements. I believe taken across the time series it is hard to conclude other than that there is at best no relationship between null production and price especially as high sec ore prices of all sorts peaked around mid June (you can check this in game) when null sec production was tailing off again.
He also referred to the following devblog, which I would bid you look at. Again, I cannot see that it supports his statements and indeed could quite easily be construed to mean the opposite.
The Devblog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/3295
The operative paragraph I have reproduced in full: The average price of Blue Ice rose by 152% from September to November, while the price of Oxygen Isotopes rose by 124% in the same period. The initial effect on traded volume was quite different, as Blue Ice quantity dropped by a whopping 80% from September to October while Oxygen Isotopes only fell by 22%. Although high-sec suppliers of Blue Ice were largely driven out for the time being, Oxygen Isotopes were still being supplied from outside of high security space. However, traded volume of Oxygen Isotopes fell by a further 46% from October to November, probably due to reduced demand as more starbase operators lost patience with the high prices and switched to starbase types that require different fuel. It is worth noting the article does state that GÇ£Oxygen Isotopes where still being supplied from outside of high security spaceGÇ¥ it makes no statement about production. Given that the Gallente Ice interdiction was planned in advance you would have expected some stock piling of the Isotopes by the perpetrators before and then released later at higher prices. Other contributers have pointed this out. It also goes on to state that demand fell at these prices by a whopping 46%.
Obviously EvilweasaelSA may feel that I have not picked up what he thought were his GÇ£solid pointsGÇ¥, in which case he is free to reply, but somehow I doubt he will.
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9121
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:44:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Suzan Deering wrote:Here comes odesy! 1) No outposts should not have 500-700 bulding slots, if you need that many get a second (third, forth) one or place some (more) towers.
What's the maximum number of manufacturing slots a system "should" have? Why?
Naturally this limit will apply to hi-sec as well?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:51:00 -
[1132] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: we measure our epeen by our ability to take things away from you and force you to do things you don't want to do. it's about power. not respect, not honor, power. your railing at how dishonorable we are and how little you respect us merely serves to illustrate our power because with all that rage you can...well, you can post and that's it. *shrug* if that's how you measure it, then your epeen is quite small indeed. Your feeble efforts to thwart me have, again, and again, come to naught. Your failure against me has been truly epic on occasion. I mean, seriously, you'd think flooding a system with over 500 guys looking for a single T1 frig and bubbling the **** out of both exits you'd have had at least something to show for it. So far: Goonswarm Killmails for Cygnet = 0. im sorry you have several times implied that you seem to think we know or care who you are why is that and who are you
someone who is clearly so badass he needs to post about it on an alt http://evewho.com/pilot/Cygnet+Lythanea |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:53:00 -
[1133] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote: He offered this chart above and you can see what could be a rise of up to 0.4m cubic meters from Null between March and May as overall production fell by over 3m cubic meters. You can probably draw your own conclusion about how well this supports his statements. I believe taken across the time series it is hard to conclude other than that there is at best no relationship between null production and price especially as high sec ore prices of all sorts peaked around mid June (you can check this in game) when null sec production was tailing off again.
the hulkageddon one is less relevant, but we can infer the increase in mining is solidly ice-related as even at hulkageddon prices it was not worth mining lowends in null; hence, the increase would be the one thing that did suddenly become worth mining more (ice).
xinthorminaias wrote: It is worth noting the article does state that GÇ£Oxygen Isotopes where still being supplied from outside of high security spaceGÇ¥ it makes no statement about production.
given the context it is abundantly clear this refers to production
there are (bad) arguments you can make that the evidence offered is not definitive. however, you can make no argument that the evidence offered in support of the "vv hypothesis" (that ice prices of 1500 do not cause increased ice mining in null) is anything as it doesn't exist. it is merely the primal scream of the highsec ice miner crying over his toys slightly changing even though they're actually changing in a way than benefits him |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1877
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:54:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Sir Marksalot wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:im sorry you have several times implied that you seem to think we know or care who you are
why is that and who are you someone who is clearly so badass he needs to post about it on an alt http://evewho.com/pilot/Cygnet+Lythanea He must be very important, we sent 500 goons to kill his t1 frigate!
lmao Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 18:57:00 -
[1135] - Quote
xinthorminaias wrote: Since EvilweaselSA has refused to explain I thought I would go back and make my best attempt. He made a number of points, which were I presumed to counter the argument raised by a number of people that ice will not be mined in null sec to make up the shortfall in High sec and there will be a reduction in supply leading to an increase in price and consequent decrease in demand for ice isotopes, as POSGÇÖs in particular are taken off line and the higher prices reduces demand for tech2 items.
uh no i'm arguing against the "vv hypothesis" which is that null will not mine ice even when it's 1500 per isotope
prices must rise until null will mine, and it is both right and proper that ice should rise to incentivize null production of it
this will, incidentally, be a subsidy for the better highsec miners who get to mine something close to 0.0 ore if they can beat out their lesser highsec brethren |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
276
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:01:00 -
[1136] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: im sorry you have several times implied that you seem to think we know or care who you are
why is that and who are you
Nice attempt, but a little late on the 'You are NO ONE!' line. You should have used it BEFORE you bragged about how you measure your epeen by your ability to deny me things, when, in all honesty, so far you have pretty much failed at that on every single occasion we've danced. This makes it look like you suddenly have no idea what you were talking about.
So, situation normal there.
Actually this is my main (and has been since the BoB/FA war), my alts are elsewhere. And, who on Earth would keep the same alt since 2004?
Though, I might add that this is the first time that this character has been accused of being an alt. Usually it's people who agree with me who are accused of being *my* alts.
And my alts have much funnier names. This name dates back to when I was 'serious business' about EvE.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:06:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Nice attempt, but a little late on the 'You are NO ONE!' line. You should have used it BEFORE you bragged about how you measure your epeen by your ability to deny me things, when, in all honesty, so far you have pretty much failed at that on every single occasion we've danced. This makes it look like you suddenly have no idea what you were talking about.
So, situation normal there.
no seriously who are you and why do you think anyone cares? you claimed we used 500 goons and bubbles to try and kill one of your t1 frigates which sounds...improbable...so clearly you harbor some belief that we care. why is that?
you seem to simply be a generic worthless highsec pubbie so i simply treat you as part of the generic blob of useless people we poke to listen to the screams rather than acting as if you are some individual who anyone would care about |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:07:00 -
[1138] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: i also find it disturbing that you consistently attempt to push your irl financial scams on eve players and this is permitted by ccp; i heartily approve of anyone scamming idiots in the md forum out of their eve monies but the line should be drawn at permitting you to advertise and scam people out if irl money
First of all it's nice to see something rubbing with salt on the same people who enjoy making life miserable and taking away from the others. yeah uh i'm not real sure that "hahaha those goonies think that scamming people out of irl money is inappropriate so i should do it to make them unhappy" is a great banner to fly here
You conveniently omitted the CCP economist statement about my work.
Keep raging more, it's fun to see. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:11:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You conveniently omitted the CCP economist statement about my work.
Keep raging more, it's fun to see. uh yeah you're puppetmastering away and i am raging i am so angry why am i turning green evilweasel smash
it's not like it's me or any goons you're convincing to place their life savings on black i dont really get why you think i'd be angry, disapproval isn't anger |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:11:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: im sorry you have several times implied that you seem to think we know or care who you are
why is that and who are you
Nice attempt, but a little late on the 'You are NO ONE!' line. You should have used it BEFORE you bragged about how you measure your epeen by your ability to deny me things, when, in all honesty, so far you have pretty much failed at that on every single occasion we've danced. This makes it look like you suddenly have no idea what you were talking about. So, situation normal there. Actually this is my main (and has been since the BoB/FA war), my alts are elsewhere. And, who on Earth would keep the same alt since 2004? Though, I might add that this is the first time that this character has been accused of being an alt. Usually it's people who agree with me who are accused of being *my* alts. And my alts have much funnier names. This name dates back to when I was 'serious business' about EvE.
You're in a 1-man corp in an alliance of a few miners/their mining alts. That screams "Hello everyone, I'm someone's industrial alt."
Still not sure where you're getting this 500-man anti-frigate gang story from though. It's almost as if it isn't true! |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:12:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Sir Marksalot wrote: You're in a 1-man corp in an alliance of a few miners/their mining alts. That screams "Hello everyone, I'm someone's industrial alt."
i dunno it sounds a lot more like highsec nobody to me |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:13:00 -
[1142] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You conveniently omitted the CCP economist statement about my work.
Keep raging more, it's fun to see. uh yeah you're puppetmastering away and i am raging i am so angry why am i turning green evilweasel smash it's not like it's me or any goons you're convincing to place their life savings on black i dont really get why you think i'd be angry, disapproval isn't anger
it's just a slightly more literate version of U MAD BRO? U MAD? LOL I TROL U! |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
403
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:15:00 -
[1143] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Sir Marksalot wrote: You're in a 1-man corp in an alliance of a few miners/their mining alts. That screams "Hello everyone, I'm someone's industrial alt."
i dunno it sounds a lot more like highsec nobody to me
I don't think people actually play like that, do they? Just sitting there all alone and shooting rocks and or 0.01isking people on mineral sell orders. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:15:00 -
[1144] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You conveniently omitted the CCP economist statement about my work.
Keep raging more, it's fun to see. uh yeah you're puppetmastering away and i am raging i am so angry why am i turning green evilweasel smash it's not like it's me or any goons you're convincing to place their life savings on black i dont really get why you think i'd be angry, disapproval isn't anger
Still no comment on the economist appreciation I see. Dodge much, eh?
EvilweaselSA wrote: uh no i'm arguing against the "vv hypothesis" which is that null will not mine ice even when it's 1500 per isotope
prices must rise until null will mine, and it is both right and proper that ice should rise to incentivize null production of it
this will, incidentally, be a subsidy for the better highsec miners who get to mine something close to 0.0 ore if they can beat out their lesser highsec brethren
Some will mine ice when it'll be that high, it'll still be an inferior income compared to most others. Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by:
- bot farms
- big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:23:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Still no comment on the economist appreciation I see. Dodge much, eh?
oh that's just a standard "hey that's neat" sort of comment by someone who clearly didn't spend much time thinking about it or reading it. you say too many dumb things for me to knock down each one, so i focus on the exceptionally dumb or exceptionally important ones. here, my focus is on your attempt to suggest that you be allowed to scam people irl because of your claim it gets under my skin. the problem is twofold; you don't really get the difference between "this is wrong and i disapprove" and I AM SO MAD; and you don't really get that making other people suffer irl because you are angry at people in a game is not good behavior
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by:
- bot farms
- big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
bot farms are unlikely because a temporary surge every four hours is inefficient for a botting farm, and big alliances with space and new people who would like to mine (old people will do so as well, of course) are exactly the people who are supposed to benefit here
so i suppose you've finally realized i was entirely right all along |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
833
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:24:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: Still no comment on the economist appreciation I see. Dodge much, eh?
He basically said he found it "interesting". That doesn't mean that an economist professionally endorses technical analysis (I'd actually be interested to see if there is one who does). |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1881
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:29:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Some will mine ice when it'll be that high, it'll still be an inferior income compared to most others. Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by:
- bot farms
- big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
Since CCP are actually cracking down on botting now I don't think you have to worry about those ice bot farms we used to constantly see in highsec nearly as much.
Good job trying to insinuate that nullsec is the home of botting despite CCP's own stats that 75% of bots found are in Empire though. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
834
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:31:00 -
[1148] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:technical analysis basically contains enough caveats that it is unfalsifiable: if you lost money, you did it wrong, if you gain money, you did it right
so no prominent anyone involved in science would give it a professional endorsement because it is that most despised of theories: something that isn't even defined enough to be wrong. you actually have to start reading it and its application though to understand how incoherent it is and on a brief glance it looks like someone is doing something interesting and useful because hey, graphs, lines, strange terminology everywhere someone's probably doing something scientific!
oops.
Sounds a lot like economics. |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:32:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:You conveniently omitted the CCP economist statement about my work.
Keep raging more, it's fun to see. uh yeah you're puppetmastering away and i am raging i am so angry why am i turning green evilweasel smash it's not like it's me or any goons you're convincing to place their life savings on black i dont really get why you think i'd be angry, disapproval isn't anger Still no comment on the economist appreciation I see. Dodge much, eh? EvilweaselSA wrote: uh no i'm arguing against the "vv hypothesis" which is that null will not mine ice even when it's 1500 per isotope
prices must rise until null will mine, and it is both right and proper that ice should rise to incentivize null production of it
this will, incidentally, be a subsidy for the better highsec miners who get to mine something close to 0.0 ore if they can beat out their lesser highsec brethren
Some will mine ice when it'll be that high, it'll still be an inferior income compared to most others. Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by: - bot farms - big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
So since you're a great economist, well liked by ~the people~, hated by us, and just generally an all around important guy on the internet.
Mind explaining to me why you think nullsec ice mining needs to push 110m/hr before 0.0 residents even consider it? |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
277
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:34:00 -
[1150] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote: no seriously who are you and why do you think anyone cares? you claimed we used 500 goons and bubbles to try and kill one of your t1 frigates which sounds...improbable...so clearly you harbor some belief that we care. why is that?
you seem to simply be a generic worthless highsec pubbie so i simply treat you as part of the generic blob of useless people we poke to listen to the screams rather than acting as if you are some individual who anyone would care about
It's so nice that you have finally reached the last refuge of an eve player losing a forum discussion: "You don't matter' or 'You're an alt!'.
There are a lot of movers and shakers in Eve, friend. Not all of them are Mittani or Chribba or Torn Soul, who openly broadcast their wealth, power, and influence. I like the subtle approach myself. A shipment of ammo and ships here, a passing mention there, a hilarious pile of bullshit in a chat channel on occasion, hiring some mercs to shore up a sagging corp there or to harass someone I don't like.
Whether or not 'you care' (and at least someone at goons does, either that or I have an amazing track record for being right in the path of something else you're gunning for) is immaterial to me, the player, because you have zero impact on my ability to enjoy the game.
What is material to me is that you seem to be intent on doing everything you can to make EvE fail. I suppose you see that as the final challenge of being a group of utter twats is the sort of 'Epic Tears' you likely imagine that would result from the one act that would ruin the game for everyone.
The Most Interesting Player In Eve. |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:38:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:technical analysis basically contains enough caveats that it is unfalsifiable: if you lost money, you did it wrong, if you gain money, you did it right
so no prominent anyone involved in science would give it a professional endorsement because it is that most despised of theories: something that isn't even defined enough to be wrong. you actually have to start reading it and its application though to understand how incoherent it is and on a brief glance it looks like someone is doing something interesting and useful because hey, graphs, lines, strange terminology everywhere someone's probably doing something scientific!
oops. Sounds a lot like economics. it's very difficult to seperate out good economics from bad economics because it's too much of a political football: i want (x policy), so i want x policy to be economically good, find me a way it's good
or, the more dangerous kind, i want to understand everything so i will make assumptions that allow me to explain everything even if they're obviously wrong (this is the rational actor hypothesis mostly which has zero empirical foundation but lets you make econ easy)
however, economics makes specific, falsifiable predictions (if we cut the budget we will get out of this recession) that can be tested and although the insane complexity of a modern economy and the inability to experiment well makes it hard to do that, it is possible - it just takes a lot longer to separate out the falsified theories (and then longer still to kill them because people want them to be true to support their politics) |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:38:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote: no seriously who are you and why do you think anyone cares? you claimed we used 500 goons and bubbles to try and kill one of your t1 frigates which sounds...improbable...so clearly you harbor some belief that we care. why is that?
you seem to simply be a generic worthless highsec pubbie so i simply treat you as part of the generic blob of useless people we poke to listen to the screams rather than acting as if you are some individual who anyone would care about
It's so nice that you have finally reached the last refuge of an eve player losing a forum discussion: "You don't matter' or 'You're an alt!'. There are a lot of movers and shakers in Eve, friend. Not all of them are Mittani or Chribba or Torn Soul, who openly broadcast their wealth, power, and influence. I like the subtle approach myself. A shipment of ammo and ships here, a passing mention there, a hilarious pile of bullshit in a chat channel on occasion, hiring some mercs to shore up a sagging corp there or to harass someone I don't like. Whether or not 'you care' (and at least someone at goons does, either that or I have an amazing track record for being right in the path of something else you're gunning for) is immaterial to me, the player, because you have zero impact on my ability to enjoy the game. What is material to me is that you seem to be intent on doing everything you can to make EvE fail. I suppose you see that as the final challenge of being a group of utter twats is the sort of 'Epic Tears' you likely imagine that would result from the one act that would ruin the game for everyone.
Quoted so you can't edit.
Now,
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:What is material to me is that you seem to be intent on doing everything you can to make EvE fail. I suppose you see that as the final challenge of being a group of utter twats is the sort of 'Epic Tears' you likely imagine that would result from the one act that would ruin the game for everyone. Do you mind qualifying this with pretty much anything at all? Or are you just going to leave it with GRR GOONS BAD.
Also explain to me how you're so good at eve and economics that you think ice mining needs to approach 110m/hr before it becomes viable in nullsec. Thanks in advance. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:40:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: It's so nice that you have finally reached the last refuge of an eve player losing a forum discussion: "You don't matter' or 'You're an alt!'.
There are a lot of movers and shakers in Eve, friend. Not all of them are Mittani or Chribba or Torn Soul, who openly broadcast their wealth, power, and influence. I like the subtle approach myself. A shipment of ammo and ships here, a passing mention there, a hilarious pile of bullshit in a chat channel on occasion, hiring some mercs to shore up a sagging corp there or to harass someone I don't like.
Whether or not 'you care' (and at least someone at goons does, either that or I have an amazing track record for being right in the path of something else you're gunning for) is immaterial to me, the player, because you have zero impact on my ability to enjoy the game.
well you're presupposing people care about what you think about who won a forum discussion so you're presupposing you have importance again
but seriously who are you and why do you suppose anyone would care, you claimed we had 500 people trying to hunt you when was this, you keep alluding to your supposed importance but then run like hell anytime you're asked to explain why you would be important or relevant at all. you keep making this point as some reason we should listen to you or that we should feel bad because we didn't kill you but that doesn't work if we are just like who is this pubbie with delusions of relevance?? |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:43:00 -
[1154] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
It's so nice that you have finally reached the last refuge of an eve player losing a forum discussion: "You don't matter' or 'You're an alt!'.
I forgot to add that you being either a generic altposting moron and or utterly irrelevant is pretty central to our theory of "This guy's 500 goon tried to hunt me down story might be bullshit."
Sorry. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
700
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:45:00 -
[1155] - Quote
my question isn't even yet to prove you're irrelevant,
i would probably do that once i got an answer if i was not paralyzed with laughter, but right now i am just puzzled at why on earth you'd think you were an Priority Target of the Goonswarm Federation launch the boatman and 500 of his comrades to hunt down this man's t1 frigate |
Sir Marksalot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 19:57:00 -
[1156] - Quote
So I took the data he provided involving topes that cost 2500 isk and made a spreadsheet. I used a quantum laffo curve to extrapolate the supply and demand mechanics of the trickle down ozone economy which showed that I should double what ozone is worth in my spreadsheet. Basic knowledge of econ101 tells us to ignore stront and heavy water because who cares.
http://i.imgur.com/TBMtek7.jpg
Which brings me to this. And why you're both bad at eve and economics. Remember that yield is being doubled in about a month, so go ahead and double the isk values here.
http://i.imgur.com/i1gib3L.jpg
e: Wrong screenshot. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 20:37:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Lets sic digi on him and let him know what true annoyance is bring back images |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 21:00:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Some will mine ice when it'll be that high, it'll still be an inferior income compared to most others. Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by:
- bot farms
- big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
Since CCP are actually cracking down on botting now I don't think you have to worry about those ice bot farms we used to constantly see in highsec nearly as much. Good job trying to insinuate that nullsec is the home of botting despite CCP's own stats that 75% of bots found are in Empire though.
Bolded the keyword.
"Found" in empire means people (including me) report suspicious botters, suicide gankers focus on those with "numbered names" and with pods warping in and out after their ship's been popped.
Once outside of hi sec, who's going to report and / or kill the botters? Certainly not the landlord (ready to close many eyes when he gets paid very well), certainly not the alliance officer who's getting a tip over the RMTed ISK. Certainly not the solo PvPer because bots will warp to safe / POS the second somebody appears in local.
So, yes. Found is the keyword. They find 75% of the bots in empire because they are under the sun and have nobody to tip and keep their mouth shut.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
255
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 21:04:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Topic locked temporarily for some much needed dusting, scrubbing, wiping and other cleaning related tasks.
ISD Ezwal Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4036
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 07:25:00 -
[1160] - Quote
I wish to sincerely thank ISD Ezwal for some massive and thankless work he has done! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
Rondee
Black Core Federation Black Core Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:46:00 -
[1161] - Quote
Ok, so now all we need in order to find a grav site is a one-click operation instead of actually scanning it? Seriously, CCP?
|
HulkDriver001
Inappropriate Contact
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:49:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Some will mine ice when it'll be that high, it'll still be an inferior income compared to most others. Imo it has to go to 2500 pu to really push the switch. Even then, it'll be done by:
- bot farms
- big alliances with tons of space to accomodate such stuff and lots of newer characters that might opt for that.
Since CCP are actually cracking down on botting now I don't think you have to worry about those ice bot farms we used to constantly see in highsec nearly as much. Good job trying to insinuate that nullsec is the home of botting despite CCP's own stats that 75% of bots found are in Empire though.
And yet that 25% of nullsec bots is responsible for 90% of the RMT alliances in the game. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
836
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:35:00 -
[1163] - Quote
HulkDriver001 wrote:And yet that 25% of nullsec bots is responsible for 90% of the RMT alliances in the game.
[citation needed]
|
|
ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 19:58:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Removed a rumor mongering post.
Please refrain from posting rumors and suppositions. ISD Cura Ursus Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 07:52:00 -
[1165] - Quote
no post from CCP Fozzie in like 5000 pages and edited down to 40 ish pages. lots of posts removed by isd im guessing this is a dead horse
i just have a few questions at the very least one i would like answered. 1) risk verses reward in WH space in regard to graves being removed as a sig into a unknown.
i have no problem with the risk reward thing i just honestly dont see the increase of reward verses increased danger that this adds yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5720
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 10:46:00 -
[1166] - Quote
LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:no post from CCP Fozzie in like 5000 pages and edited down to 40 ish pages. lots of posts removed by isd im guessing this is a dead horse
i just have a few questions at the very least one i would like answered. 1) risk verses reward in WH space in regard to graves being removed as a sig into a unknown.
i have no problem with the risk reward thing i just honestly dont see the increase of reward verses increased danger that this adds
I'm going to assume you've just missed the 10 posts I've made in this thread so far, as well as the 6 I made in the main discussion thread in the Science and Industry subforum. Easy mistake in long and active threads. I've been watching this thread every day, just haven't had a lot of time to post in the last couple days between work and national holidays and the fanfest flu. Don't worry, I haven't forgotten you.
As for the risk/reward balance in WH ore sites, whether the reward is worth it to you is of course subjective, but most ores in wormholes are increasing in value and a few of them are doubling in value. You can't argue that the reward isn't being increased. I'm confident that the risk can be managed, especially since I know for a fact there will be tricks in the new scanner system that you smart wormholers will be able to twist to your advantage. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Cadava Mendosa
Blackstar Privateer Consortium Enigma Project
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 11:23:00 -
[1167] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:LoanWolf Tivianne wrote:no post from CCP Fozzie in like 5000 pages and edited down to 40 ish pages. lots of posts removed by isd im guessing this is a dead horse
i just have a few questions at the very least one i would like answered. 1) risk verses reward in WH space in regard to graves being removed as a sig into a unknown.
i have no problem with the risk reward thing i just honestly dont see the increase of reward verses increased danger that this adds I'm going to assume you've just missed the 10 posts I've made in this thread so far, as well as the 6 I made in the main discussion thread in the Science and Industry subforum. Easy mistake in long and active threads. I've been watching this thread every day, just haven't had a lot of time to post in the last couple days between work and national holidays and the fanfest flu. Don't worry, I haven't forgotten you. As for the risk/reward balance in WH ore sites, whether the reward is worth it to you is of course subjective, but most ores in wormholes are increasing in value and a few of them are doubling in value. You can't argue that the reward isn't being increased. I'm confident that the risk can be managed, especially since I know for a fact there will be tricks in the new scanner system that you smart wormholers will be able to twist to your advantage.
Nowwwwww you have me seriously intrigued Fozzie. Keep up the good work, I'm dying to get my hands on the new systems. I am terrified for the WH miners though. though these "tricks" I am looking forward to learning :)
|
Cadava Mendosa
Blackstar Privateer Consortium Enigma Project
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 12:28:00 -
[1168] - Quote
actually now you mention it. we were told there would be a Dev blog explaining the new system shortly after fanfest. Can I send you over a Charon full of Flu medication if it means seeing that Dev blog? :P |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5724
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 12:29:00 -
[1169] - Quote
Cadava Mendosa wrote:actually now you mention it. we were told there would be a Dev blog explaining the new system shortly after fanfest. Can I send you over a Charon full of Flu medication if it means seeing that Dev blog? :P
I can do you one better. The new scanner should be on sisi later today. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Cadava Mendosa
Blackstar Privateer Consortium Enigma Project
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 12:45:00 -
[1170] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Cadava Mendosa wrote:actually now you mention it. we were told there would be a Dev blog explaining the new system shortly after fanfest. Can I send you over a Charon full of Flu medication if it means seeing that Dev blog? :P I can do you one better. The new scanner should be on sisi later today.
Ok you've definitely earnt yourself a charon load of cookies too. and some exotic dancers for good measure.
Now... only 4 hours till Hometime...
|
|
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
192
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:26:00 -
[1171] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:As for the risk/reward balance in WH ore sites, whether the reward is worth it to you is of course subjective, but most ores in wormholes are increasing in value and a few of them are doubling in value. You can't argue that the reward isn't being increased. I'm confident that the risk can be managed, especially since I know for a fact there will be tricks in the new scanner system that you smart wormholers will be able to twist to your advantage.
Well...the prices of ores have not come up enough that mining ore is anywhere near as lucrative as mining gas or pewing Sleepers. It will all depend on the terrain of the wormhole in which the grav spawns. The threshold of "this is too hard to defend and it's not worth it compared to other things I can do" is now much lower. Even if you doubled the value of every single ore, it still wouldn't measure up to the other ways of making isk.
I appreciate that this maneuver heavily favors the hunter (I do so look forward to it), but I worry that the prey may dwindle. I certainly won't be mining nearly as often, and I'm not the world's most cautious miner to begin with.
CCP Fozzie wrote:Cadava Mendosa wrote:actually now you mention it. we were told there would be a Dev blog explaining the new system shortly after fanfest. Can I send you over a Charon full of Flu medication if it means seeing that Dev blog? :P I can do you one better. The new scanner should be on sisi later today.
I am excited for party times. |
Raven Solaris
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:37:00 -
[1172] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Cadava Mendosa wrote:actually now you mention it. we were told there would be a Dev blog explaining the new system shortly after fanfest. Can I send you over a Charon full of Flu medication if it means seeing that Dev blog? :P I can do you one better. The new scanner should be on sisi later today.
Well then, time to reinstall Sisi. |
Sylvia Nardieu
audacity.
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:45:00 -
[1173] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:As for the risk/reward balance in WH ore sites, whether the reward is worth it to you is of course subjective, but most ores in wormholes are increasing in value and a few of them are doubling in value. You can't argue that the reward isn't being increased. I'm confident that the risk can be managed, especially since I know for a fact there will be tricks in the new scanner system that you smart wormholers will be able to twist to your advantage.
Ok, so let's say that wh residents will be able to manage their risk to a certain degree. What about lowsec and risk vs reward? I'm shooting blind here but my guess is that it was (next to npc nullsec) the least active area in terms of mining ores. I really can't see how the proposed changes will make lowsec mining any more viable, but can see how it will be less the case. |
Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
109
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:58:00 -
[1174] - Quote
Sylvia Nardieu wrote:Ok, so let's say that wh residents will be able to manage their risk to a certain degree. What about lowsec and risk vs reward? I'm shooting blind here but my guess is that it was (next to npc nullsec) the least active area in terms of mining ores. I really can't see how the proposed changes will make lowsec mining any more viable, but can see how it will be less the case. Don't you have local in lowsec? |
Sylvia Nardieu
audacity.
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 14:32:00 -
[1175] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Sylvia Nardieu wrote:Ok, so let's say that wh residents will be able to manage their risk to a certain degree. What about lowsec and risk vs reward? I'm shooting blind here but my guess is that it was (next to npc nullsec) the least active area in terms of mining ores. I really can't see how the proposed changes will make lowsec mining any more viable, but can see how it will be less the case. Don't you have local in lowsec?
Since when having local equals balancing risk and reward . |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 14:54:00 -
[1176] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'm going to assume you've just missed the 10 posts I've made in this thread so far, as well as the 6 I made in the main discussion thread in the Science and Industry subforum. Easy mistake in long and active threads. I've been watching this thread every day, just haven't had a lot of time to post in the last couple days between work and national holidays and the fanfest flu. Don't worry, I haven't forgotten you. As for the risk/reward balance in WH ore sites, whether the reward is worth it to you is of course subjective, but most ores in wormholes are increasing in value and a few of them are doubling in value. You can't argue that the reward isn't being increased. I'm confident that the risk can be managed, especially since I know for a fact there will be tricks in the new scanner system that you smart wormholers will be able to twist to your advantage.
I have avoided continuing my arguments on this thread. I believe your previous response was clear about grav sites, and that no further arguments could stop this change. Your comments here reinforce my evaluation of the situation. It is clear to me that valid arguments (although perhaps not sufficiently persuasive arguments) can be made for some individuals that the rewards are not increasing. Given your firm determination I do not see any need to go into the details. I just think you need to know that there are reasonable people who disagree with you despite your position and firm beliefs.
I will be happy to review these "tricks," and consider whether they truly help the situation. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5742
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:07:00 -
[1177] - Quote
Update on the Ice anom composition numbers and a change to Krystallos: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2994968 Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Sassums
Wormhole Exploration Crew R.E.P.O.
78
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 05:11:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
633
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 13:12:00 -
[1179] - Quote
Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed.
If you don't like it, go to highsec. R Tape loading error |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 14:18:00 -
[1180] - Quote
Salpad wrote:Good that you're re-balancing high-end ores, to make them worth more, but why not do a little for mid-end ores as well? Ones like Jaspet, Hedbergite and Hemorphite? Ores typically found in low-sec but also in high-sec gravimetric sites?
Currently their value per m3 is the same as the low-end ores, or only a very few percent (as in single digits) higher.
Of course, if that changes after the expansion, so that we have a clearer value-per-m3 hierarchy, with low-end < mid-end < high-end then that's fine, but if such a hierarchy does not emerge clearly, could you consider giving a slight boost to mid-end ores? Just somehing like +15% mineral content.
Really? Have you checked the prices? Hedbergite, Hemorphite, and Jaspet are the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th most valuable ores right now, at least according to cerlestes.de. Beat out only by Arknor. I believe the reason these ores were left untouched is because they apear in high sec grav sites. Sites which will no longer need to be scanned down.
I would love to see low sec ores valued high enough to make low sec mining worthwhile, but I do not see that ever happening.
|
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 14:23:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Bario Norte wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products. You say you are not "planning" changes... but ICE compression will be by far at a disadvantage... can you please take a look at just doing something about the ice compressions so its not like 1.5 HULKS for 1 Rorqual!!! Also, the "local market" as you stated will not buy the volume of ice that is mined in o.o even if prices are WAY LESS then jita prices. Furthermore, it does not solve the problem about how to get the ICE to so-called (0.0 market hub) from the mining system! Thanks. Well in my experience ICE sells very well, often well above Jita prices at any null sec outpost where a character with perfect refining skills can process it at 100%. Even a 35% facility can give you 98.5% refine, which is pretty good. ICE products sell well at any null sec station or outpost.
As far as the local market goes, the capacity is certainly there. After all 85-90% of all ICE products are consumed in low and null sec, not in high sec. Sellin g in high sec generally means most of what is sold is shipped back out to null. |
Sylvia Nardieu
audacity.
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:19:00 -
[1182] - Quote
Here's an idea which might provide miners out of hisec a fighting chance - give skiff +2 warp core strength back, and provide procurer with +1 too? |
MOUNT EVEREST
Mysterious Island 0001
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:20:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Executive summary: I'm certainly no expert on moon mining or flying capitals in combat or otherwise, but I can tell you it has always irked me that I can't mine moons in high security space (that's right, isn't it?). I mean, I see the moons, they are everywhere, and you're telling me I can't mine them? Is there some game lore that tells me why things are this way, or is it just politics? For Trit's sake, just let me mine a little cheese off a moon in high... plain colby would be fine. I don't want to have to reinvent myself in low/null security space just so I can try out moon mining long enough to see if I like it. That goes for flying and building big ships as well. Currently we can't build or fly the biggest ships in high sec, right? You need to figure out a way for me to try these things alone in my own good time without risking my imaginary life. I swear by Green Eggs and Ham, don't you know that when I die in this game it can feel like I died in real life? I do not like it, Sam I Am !!
Details: Maybe you could place limits on moon mining, sort of like you've done on planetary interaction, so at least a small scale operation could be achieved in highsec. As far as building ships, perhaps the process could take longer in high security. You could say this is due to the bureaucracy of concord regulations or something like that to make it reasonably believeable. As far as flying capitals or titans, concord could install some kind of damping technology on each ship built in high security that would suppress certain of their advantages while in empire - enough to prevent them from unbalancing the game. If someone wanted to bring, say, a Titan into high sec for the first time, they would be held up in doing so until the concord technology was added to their ship. There could even be skills needed to implement that technology on such ships for travel in highsec, along with a modified gate mechanic skill that would allow use of a standard gate. As always, politics will rule the day, and the fate of these ideas too. Don't know but that others have had these ideas, but I wanted to be heard. These are my ideas, and mine alone. I mined them from my head, where I now have room for more cheese. Thanks for taking the time to read this. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:34:00 -
[1184] - Quote
This thread is supposed to be about the resource shake up. As far as I am concerned that does include ICE, but does not include ganking, or ship balancing.
The resource changes as far as ore composition changes look great. I really like what I see.
The ICE changes seem a little extreme but I do not think it will be near as hard to adapt as many believe. According to the figures I have seen this will not be a big issue. ICE fields will now deplete. So what. that was a needed change. At least they will respawn every 4 hours, not at down time. That will mitigate the impact more than enough.
Many players seem outraged that high sec ICE will only be enough to cover 80% of the over all demand. That means 20% of the ICE will need to be mined in low or null sec. This is all demand, not just high sec demand, that makes a huge difference. I do not see a problem with this. Why?
First of all I believe that currently more than 20% of the available ICE is mined in null sec already. Anyone who has lived in null sec knows ICE mining ops are nearly as common as ore mining ops. Capitals need ICE for fuel, Jump bridges need ICE for fuel, POSes that run the facilities to build super capitals and run jump bridge networks need ICE for fuel, The ICE demand in null sec is huge. Much of this demand is for Liquid Ozone which high sec ICE is not a good source of. High sec ICE has only 25 LO per block, while Dark Glitter has 1000 LO per block. A very large amount of dark glitter is mined in null sec. Which brings us to my other point.
According to the stats I have seen 85-90% of the ICE consumed in game is consumed in low and null, only 10-15% of ICE products sold are consumed in high sec. So high sec consumes 10-15% of the ICE but will (after June 4th) produce up to 80% of the total ICE available. This seems fine to me, it just means less ICE will go through Jita, this 20% will be more than offset just bey ICE currently being mined in Null being sold in null rather than being shipped to Jita. This will drive change in how ICE products are handled and marketed, but there will be no shortage of ICE products. If there is, capital ships and jump bridges will be hit much harder than POSes. I believe this change will work out just fine.
The only issue I have with the proposed changes in Odyssey is the move of grav sites to anomalies. This is game breaking to me. Null sec mining is risky as it is, now the little risk mitigation we had is gone. We now have to rely on alliance/corp PVPers to provide protection for the nullbear miners. FOZZIE, that is just not going to happen!
I have yet to see a single post in this thread that supports this change. It does not matter if you mine in null, low, or W-space, the needed mechanics for risk mitigation that make mining in dangerous space possible will be gone if this change goes through.
In all dangerous space whether it be roaming gangs or solo PVPers, you still need to have at least one probe launcher to find and attack the local miners hiding in the grav sites. In W-space most pilots do have a probe launcher, this increases risk, but you still have D-scan to alert you to incoming threats. Cloaked ships do not show on D-scan but their probes do. No probes, No warning.
What happens if grav sites are changed to anomalies? Several things. If grav sites are moved over to anomalies we will see the following changes.
- Null sec miners will no longer have the security of having to be scanned down before they can be attacked. Currently the only real threats are ships with a probe launcher, but you can mitigate the risk by watching D-scan for probes. Considering that only about 10% of the roaming gangs in null sec have a ship with a probe launcher, only about 10% of the ships passing through represent an actual threat. After this change not only will there be no probes to watch D-scan for, but every ship can find the anomaly with its onboard scanner. this not only reduces the warning time of an attack, but moves the threat from about 10% of the ships to 100%. So we lose a significant amount of warning, plus get an increase in base risk by a factor of 10. that is 1000% increase! (10x increase not 10%), while the ore composition changes will only give a 10-15% boost to the reward. This is a huge change. null sec mining risk vs reward was fairly well balanced before, now we have a 1000% increase in risk, with only a 10-15% increase in reward > balance gone.
- Low sec mining is an activity that is barely done now, as the risk vs reward makes it not worth while. Yet low sec mining will get the same 1000% increase in risk, without the benefit of any increased reward. And this is suposed to increase low sec mining? WTF have they been smoking??
- W-space mining is currently the lowest income stream available in W-space, but you can not control the sites that spawn so you either run the grav sites or do nothing until something else spawns. This sucks, but is acceptable as it is. You have no local to warn you about possible threats, but you still have D-scan. Since most PVP ships in W-space are cloakys the ships will not show on D-scan, but their probes will, provided they need probes to find you. In W-space almost every ship has a probe launcher so you are looking at more a shift from 95% of the ships representing a threat, to 100% not the 10 times increase seen in null sec. But you have the added risk mitigation of being able to somewhat control, the entrances to your space. Wormholes can be closed making it unlikely you will have visitors. Every thing you do in W-space out side of the POS except for maybe PI is in sites that you enemy has to scan down. Grav sites will be useless to wormhole dwellers. You won't see new threats in system due to no local, in coming Cloaked ships do not show on D-scan, and you will not see probes as they will not be need to find you, not to mention your ship is slow, and unarmed.
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:37:00 -
[1185] - Quote
,,,, |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:49:00 -
[1186] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. |
Sassums
Wormhole Exploration Crew R.E.P.O.
78
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:16:00 -
[1187] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion.
Being able to instantly warp to a miner is hardly a challenge. If you had issues finding miners before you just had no idea what you were doing. Good WH scouts could pin a miner in under 30 seconds. Which at least is a fraction of a fighting chance compared to point, click, warp.
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
634
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 18:21:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion.
The only fail around here is you. Odyssey is supposed to fix some of the risk vs reward inbalance in the game, and that's exactly what's delivering. R Tape loading error |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
610
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 18:39:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Sassums wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. Being able to instantly warp to a miner is hardly a challenge. If you had issues finding miners before you just had no idea what you were doing. Good WH scouts could pin a miner in under 30 seconds. Which at least is a fraction of a fighting chance compared to point, click, warp. WOW, right over your head.
Yes it is easy to scan down either the grav site, or the ship in the grav site. Both methods however need a probe launcher on your ship. And if the miner sees a red or neut in the system they just have to watch D-scan for probes. Risky? Yes but manageable as most PVPers roaming null sec do not fit a probe launcher. As a result the risk vs reward is balanced.
the increase this change will do for miners is much less from the fact that the belts are easier to find, it is from the fact that now every ship will be able to find them. 30 seconds down to 10 seconds to get the warp point is not the problem. The problem is before only about 10% of the roamers had a probe launcher and were an actual threat, every ship in the game has a system scanner. So now 100% of the roaming ships are a threat.
Sure in W-space the impact is much smaller. But most wormhole dwellers have adeveloped a second nature for watching D-scan for threats, If you are ratting, or mining, or anything else in a wormhole site, you just watch for combat probes on D-scan. How do you suggest you acheive that same risk mitigation when there are no combat probes to see on D-scan. That 30 second window is small but enough for an alert pilot to GTFO. With not needing probes out at all to find you that 30 second warning becomes zero. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
610
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 18:55:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. The only fail around here is you. Odyssey is supposed to fix some of the risk vs reward imbalance in the game, and that's exactly what's delivering. Really?
According to the CSM minutes the Odyssey expansion was primarily about fixing null sec industry and encouraging more industrial players to move from high sec out to null.
The risk vs reward balance that was supposed to be fixed was the fact that a high sec miner made the same if not more isk/hr as a null sec miner, while the null sec miner had much higher risk. The idea was to increase the reward for null sec miners to offset the already higher level of risk and return it to a somewhat balanced state.
They have added 10 pounds to the reward side of that scale which was great, but then they added 100 pounds to the risk side which makes it even worse than it was before.
CSM developers clearly stated in the CSM minutes that they wanted to expand and support null sec industry, including both mining and manufacturing. The ore composition changes alone would have done this nicely. But the added risk from moving grav sites to anomalies tips the scale way to far in the wrong direction.
|
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
635
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 19:15:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. The only fail around here is you. Odyssey is supposed to fix some of the risk vs reward imbalance in the game, and that's exactly what's delivering. Really? According to the CSM minutes the Odyssey expansion was primarily about fixing null sec industry and encouraging more industrial players to move from high sec out to null. The risk vs reward balance that was supposed to be fixed was the fact that a high sec miner made the same if not more isk/hr as a null sec miner, while the null sec miner had much higher risk. The idea was to increase the reward for null sec miners to offset the already higher level of risk and return it to a somewhat balanced state. They have added 10 pounds to the reward side of that scale which was great, but then they added 100 pounds to the risk side which makes it even worse than it was before. CSM developers clearly stated in the CSM minutes that they wanted to expand and support null sec industry, including both mining and manufacturing. The ore composition changes alone would have done this nicely. But the added risk from moving grav sites to anomalies tips the scale way to far in the wrong direction.
Industry will be viable outside highsec. It's really that simple. R Tape loading error |
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 22:52:00 -
[1192] - Quote
after spending some time in sisi playing around took me a while to find one but i found a wh hoped in played with the scanning and i admit that with the new scanning setup it may be eraser to spot new sigs but i have a few questions about the update time of the hud for the sigs is it updated in real time or on a delay what im asking is how long from spawn till it shows up on the overlay ?
im also curious about the way the ore sights will spawn will they have effects on combat sights in wh space or they on there own timer if i have to warp off because of a gank how long till it despawns or will it simply just be there till its emptied
ps CCP Fozzy i wasent implying that you wasent watching the topic only that you wasent really commenting on most of the banter back and forth yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2844
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 23:51:00 -
[1193] - Quote
Rondee wrote:Ok, so now all we need in order to find a grav site is a one-click operation instead of actually scanning it? Seriously, CCP?
No you still have to actually probe it down, the scanner just tells you that it's there & gives you the general location.
Do you people actually read things, or do you just skim over the details & complain about the first thing you don't like the sound of? The guy who was sitting next to me in the first nullsec round table who had obviously not had a shower since before boarding his flight to Iceland, you really stank. You know who you are. |
LoanWolf Tivianne
Ace's And 8's
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 00:24:00 -
[1194] - Quote
you dont even have to scan them down if you have active overlay on it will show you ever thing in the system ore sights and combat sights can be hovered over and warped to
other sights still have to be scaned down
the overlay updates im guessing in real time ish like ever second or so
edited to add that in a empty system any new sig would show up in space but in a full system it would still show up just might not be as easy to see its new yea my spelling sucks so do you go back to work school teacher your not wanted here |
OldWolf69
IR0N. SpaceMonkey's Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 09:17:00 -
[1195] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Rofl, sir. I'm affraid you'll go hisec soon too. If you ever left hisec. Btw industry was viable also before, outside hisec. But legends will be legends forever, in this game. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5773
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 10:52:00 -
[1196] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: According to the CSM minutes the Odyssey expansion was primarily about fixing null sec industry and encouraging more industrial players to move from high sec out to null.
Odyssey isn't about making people move to nullsec, it's about presenting people with options of many different activities to do out in space, in all areas of space.
When the last CSM summit was happening we had not yet begun the planning stage for what would become Odyssey. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1437
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 11:29:00 -
[1197] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Rondee wrote:Ok, so now all we need in order to find a grav site is a one-click operation instead of actually scanning it? Seriously, CCP?
No you still have to actually probe it down, the scanner just tells you that it's there & gives you the general location. Do you people actually read things, or do you just skim over the details & complain about the first thing you don't like the sound of?
Actually grav and ice sites are anomalies in Odyssey, which means the on board scanner finds them at 100%. (Not sure if some kind of subtle Goon troll)
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 11:39:00 -
[1198] - Quote
ICE : I'm sure somebody thought of this already, but if hi sec will only supply 80% of the game's ice needs, then if more players want POSes, hi sec ice will be less of the total percentage. I'm sure some people will think this is good, and others won't. I just wanted to make sure this little factoid is out there for discussion. It may be a moot point if the number of POSes remains the same over time. |
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 12:09:00 -
[1199] - Quote
after looking through everything and going on sisi to test it out. im really happy about the ice changes. the ice prices will spike as crap. like double if not triple the price that is now. and i can cycle a ice belt by myself in about 2 hours. i just feel bad for everyone that has to go to work / school or something like that. cuz those guys wont get to mine at all. i just cycle the belt in a way that it despawns right as they come from work and spawns as they go to sleep. god im so happy im unemployed^^ |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Yulai Federation
95
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 13:24:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Bario Norte wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie]
We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products. I think you're misunderstanding everything, Fozzie.
- The ore has to be moved into the station for refining (haulers move it to POS, because the docking/undocking timer, the kickout velocity, docking crawling, etc takes time), and not all ice systems have refineries, so the ice has to be moved to the refinery
- What's being sold on the market is really isotopes, not ice cubes. And if it were ice cubes, someone would still have to move it to the refinery.
- it's just ice compression, not ore compression what is the issue
- You are currently not just not improving ice compression, but make it even more problematic than it is currently
- Ice compression has nothing to do with the choice of market. The topes are going to the market, and not the ice.
|
|
Leana Darkrider
Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 14:03:00 -
[1201] - Quote
got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5775
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 14:47:00 -
[1202] - Quote
Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space?
They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
615
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 15:35:00 -
[1203] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Rondee wrote:Ok, so now all we need in order to find a grav site is a one-click operation instead of actually scanning it? Seriously, CCP?
No you still have to actually probe it down, the scanner just tells you that it's there & gives you the general location. Do you people actually read things, or do you just skim over the details & complain about the first thing you don't like the sound of? WOW you are very clueless for a goon.
You will not need to probe it down. Sure, it is not on the overview, but a single click on your system scanner will give you a warp to. No searching or narrowing down its location, no probes needed, no probe launcher, just the normal system scanner every ship has built in. Just one click. Almost exactly the same effort for finding a static belt. If fact if you do not have belts on your overview, warping to a belt or anomaly is basically the exact same effort.
Click the system scanner and warp to the anomaly, or click in space and warp to the selected static belt. Where does the probing down come in? You mean using combat probes to get a lock on the actual ship to warp in within point range? That may be the better option for grav sites, but when they become anomalies anyone without a probe launcher can still find the site in only a couple seconds.
As I said before, the problem is not how easy the site is to find, using combat probes in the current system is still very easy to find miners. The problem is now you no longer need combat probes to find them. the threat has gone from only roamers with probe launchers to every passing ship. Any ship, even a freighter or a shuttle will now be able to find these sites with a single click. But again I say, it is not the single click that is the main problem, it is the any ship part that is the problem. It is the fact that you no longer need a probe launcher or scanning skills to get that warp in. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
615
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 16:16:00 -
[1204] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: According to the CSM minutes the Odyssey expansion was primarily about fixing null sec industry and encouraging more industrial players to move from high sec out to null.
Odyssey isn't about making people move to nullsec, it's about presenting people with options of many different activities to do out in space, in all areas of space. When the last CSM summit was happening we had not yet begun the planning stage for what would become Odyssey. I refer to the questions raised by the developers to the CSM.
It was basically asked what would be required to promote/encourage null sec industry. Would unlimited slots in out posts do it? The reply was that was a good start. The bigger problem was mineral supply.
I see solutions to these specific issues in Odyseey.
Null sec stations and out posts have gotten more manufacturing slots across the board.
The changes to ore composition as one of the things I have been advocating for some time. Also a great change, this will go a long way to balance the mineral supply in null sec.
The changes to ICE fields I did not see coming, but I can see the logic behind it. unlimited supply was a broken mechanic. reducing the size of ICE belts, and making them deplete was a good move. changing them over to anomalies is not a big deal, I see that aspect having zero impact. Anomalies are just as easy to find as static belts. This just seems like a waste of time, as anomalies as we know them currently in game are not significantly different from static Plexes and belts that show on the overview. Unless there are changes to the onboard ship scanners that make that task more challenging. Similar to the probe mechanics we currently have. But there has been no comment to indicate to me this might be the case.
However the decision to move gravametric sites to anomalies just does not make sense to me. This is a totally different situation from the ICE belts. The ICE belts were static, that change just adds some depth. But gravametric sites require significant effort, equipment, and skills to find. Sure a skilled probe user can find them almost as easily as an anomaly, but they need the skills and equipment to do the job. Moving them to anomalies has basically dumber them down. Now any idiot can find them without any scanning skills or effort. How is this an improvement?
On top of this we have the safety issue. Mining in null sec is barely doable as it is. Many do it, but the risk level is fairly high. Nobody mines in the static belts unless deep inside alliance territory where you never see a non blue. Null sec mining is restricted to gravametric sites, not just because they have better ores, but because they offer an added level of safety. This change removes that level of safety. You have commented that alliances will have to set up and protect there miners. Do you play the same EVE I do? That just will not happen.
To most PVPers, carebears, or in this case nullbears are little more than squatters and scavengers not worth a second though, unless you are shooting at them. It is carebears and null bears that are the common ganking targets in all MMO's. Why? Because PVPers hate carebears. It really is that simple.
No PVPer is going to drop what ever they are doing to go play babysitter to a bunch of miners. So of the huge alliances may force members to do so, but I thought CCP wanted to support smaller groups rather than the huge blocks that make null sec so stagnant.
Almost every change in Odyseey looks like a major improvement, I will however only speak of the ones that affect my gameplay directly. There is just this one change I see causing me major problems. based on the comments of this thread, most other null sec miners have the same issues. Only the gankers are supporting this change, as they believe it will give them easier targets. My must EVE be made easier for gankers and harder for industrial players? Gankers have it far to easy already.
I lived in Null sec for two years, I mostly supported my self with mining, I did PVP and join CTA's when ever I was on, But I was basically still and indy player. I left Null sec when the alliance I was in lost there space. My wife had are second child at about the same time and I got very busy at work. I just have not had the time to spend in game to reestablish new Null sec roots and get back out there. But I have plans to.
I just don't see how my plan can work with this change. Mining in Null sec in high risk, even in friendly space. That little bit of security you get from knowing that when you are in a grav sites nobody can find you without probes was a big deal. That was what made null sec mining work. Now you plan to take that away, while giving us nothing new to mitigate the risk associated with industrial activity in dangerous space. The added availability of manufacturing slots is nice, as well as the changes to ore composition, but these changes will make little difference if there are no nullbears left to take advantage of them.
I know Odyssey was not about making players move to null sec. But I was under the impression that it was among other things about supporting and encouraging null sec industry. This change goes against the grain when compared to all the other changes Odyseey brings.
|
Leana Darkrider
Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:33:00 -
[1205] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts.
This is something my little brain can't comprehend. Why treating Amarr space differently?
|
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 18:33:00 -
[1206] - Quote
As one of the few actual industrialist in 0.0 I am loving this update. It would mean I would have to import a whole let less minerals from empire. Throw away half of my compression and just buy from local miners. But then looking closer at numbers, there is a great deal of trit and pyerite coming. But little to none mexallon. So just looking at trit and pye we can actully do quite some production but then we have this huge bottleneck of mexallon.
Here are the numbers: www.firvain.org/ss/20130510181132275.png
Looking at it, If we mine the Giant belt 13 times, we have all the trit, pye, isogen, nocx, zydrine and megacyte. but we are only a third on our way for mexallon. So we still have this massive gap of minerals and instead of having several minerals which you can counter with compression. Lackign only 1 mineral is pretty hard to compress. So there needs to be more mexallon in the belts to really fix this problem. Or we are still where we are now |
Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
115
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 18:52:00 -
[1207] - Quote
Leana Darkrider wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts. This is something my little brain can't comprehend. Why treating Amarr space differently? There are 4 different kinds of ice, which are required for 4 different kinds of fuel. Before there was basically endless supply of ice, so the distribution of ice belts across the empires wasnt really important. As Amarr is the biggest Empire, spacewise, it got more ice belts. Now with Ice beeing a scarce resource, that would lead to an imbalance towards Amarr fuel. So only some former ice belt systems now get ice anomalies (the others have ice removed completely). |
Leana Darkrider
Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:28:00 -
[1208] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts. This is something my little brain can't comprehend. Why treating Amarr space differently? There are 4 different kinds of ice, which are required for 4 different kinds of fuel. Before there was basically endless supply of ice, so the distribution of ice belts across the empires wasnt really important. As Amarr is the biggest Empire, spacewise, it got more ice belts. Now with Ice beeing a scarce resource, that would lead to an imbalance towards Amarr fuel. So only some former ice belt systems now get ice anomalies (the others have ice removed completely).
This doesn't makes sense. All the ice fields in the three empires are being removed and anomalies replaces them. Why not remove the ice fields in Amarr empire aswell and also replace them with anomalies. Now, as I understand it correctly, all the ice fields in the empires are being removed, with the exception for Amarr space. Amarr space still will have static ice fields. Here's the list of systems that will keep static ice fields:
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
Even if the ice fields in Amarr space would be removed and anomalies replaces them, that wouldn't mean there would be an inbalance in fuel.
With this exception, my guess would be that the prices of minnie, galente and caldari ice will go skyhigh, because you can find those only through anomalies and Amarr ice will be stable or drop a little because you still have static ice fields. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp V.A.S.T.
76
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:44:00 -
[1209] - Quote
Leana Darkrider wrote: This doesn't makes sense. All the ice fields in the three empires are being removed and anomalies replaces them. Why not remove the ice fields in Amarr empire aswell and also replace them with anomalies. Now, as I understand it correctly, all the ice fields in the empires are being removed, with the exception for Amarr space. Amarr space still will have static ice fields. Here's the list of systems that will keep static ice fields:
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
Even if the ice fields in Amarr space would be removed and anomalies replaces them, that wouldn't mean there would be an inbalance in fuel.
With this exception, my guess would be that the prices of minnie, galente and caldari ice will go skyhigh, because you can find those only through anomalies and Amarr ice will be stable or drop a little because you still have static ice fields.
You understand incorrectly.
Some Amarr systems are having their ice fields removed entirely.
All other ice fields are being replaced with anomalies.
|
Leana Darkrider
Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:47:00 -
[1210] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote: This doesn't makes sense. All the ice fields in the three empires are being removed and anomalies replaces them. Why not remove the ice fields in Amarr empire aswell and also replace them with anomalies. Now, as I understand it correctly, all the ice fields in the empires are being removed, with the exception for Amarr space. Amarr space still will have static ice fields. Here's the list of systems that will keep static ice fields:
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
Even if the ice fields in Amarr space would be removed and anomalies replaces them, that wouldn't mean there would be an inbalance in fuel.
With this exception, my guess would be that the prices of minnie, galente and caldari ice will go skyhigh, because you can find those only through anomalies and Amarr ice will be stable or drop a little because you still have static ice fields.
You understand incorrectly. Some Amarr systems are having their ice fields removed entirely. All other ice fields are being replaced with anomalies.
If this is the case, I'm happy and have nothing more to say. thank you :)
|
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:53:00 -
[1211] - Quote
Leana Darkrider wrote:Now, as I understand it correctly, all the ice fields in the empires are being removed, with the exception for Amarr space. Amarr space still will have static ice fields. Here's the list of systems that will keep static ice fields:
Afivad, Agal, Avada, Bashakru, Chanoun, Dantan, Dihra, Erkinen, Esteban, Gamis, Gelhan, Gosalav, Jarzalad, Jerma, Kothe, Manatirid, Miah, Moutid, Ordion, Raravoss, Riavayed, Seil, Talidal, Warouh.
Even if the ice fields in Amarr space would be removed and anomalies replaces them, that wouldn't mean there would be an inbalance in fuel.
With this exception, my guess would be that the prices of minnie, galente and caldari ice will go skyhigh, because you can find those only through anomalies and Amarr ice will be stable or drop a little because you still have static ice fields.
There will not be any more static ice fields. If there was a static ice field then in Odyssey there will be an ice anomaly.
Amarr has many static ice fields right now (Amarr is the largest empire). In Odyssey only certain systems in Amarr will have ice anomalies. The systems in your list will have ice anomalies instead of static belts. There will be no other ice fields in Amarr high sec. Amarr is being treated differently because it is large and they want to limit the ice available to a quantity similar to those found in the other countries (Minmatar, Gallente, Caldari). |
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 22:08:00 -
[1212] - Quote
and btw. just a general question.
which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous? our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 2 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so. if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour.
at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi |
Aria Ning
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 04:58:00 -
[1213] - Quote
xP0nYx wrote:and btw. just a general question. which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous? our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so. if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour. at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png
So what if the invading party brings friends? |
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 05:50:00 -
[1214] - Quote
Aria Ning wrote:xP0nYx wrote:and btw. just a general question. which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous? our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so. if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour. at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png So what if the invading party brings friends? Granted you can always dock up or fly to PoS every time a non-blue enters the system but depending on your location that could disrupt a lot of mining time.
actually it allready happend that some dudes brought some blackops with their bomber. we lost about 10 retrievers yes. but we killed 1 blackops + bomber who made the cyno. so we won the isk war and those guys have never been seen again. so if u use retrievers its really hard for the neuts to win the isk war. that mostly drives the pvper away. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
329
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 08:46:00 -
[1215] - Quote
I got a very important question.
Why didnt Jaspet, Hemorphite and Hedbergite get boosted also? Lowsec could need that boost tbh. LF CSM8 candidate. Are you what lowsec needs? --->-átinyurl.com/afaawrb
|
El 1974
Green Visstick High Green Rhino
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 12:56:00 -
[1216] - Quote
So if I understand it correctly CCP wants ice to be a strategic resource and to be so significant quantities of those resources have to be mined in 0.0. The distribution of ice types was designed around the assumption that strontium would be the most valuable ice product which turned out not to be the case.
Now CCP is restricting ice mining in hisec to force people to mine it in 0.0. In the process hundreds of ice miner accounts will be cancelled. Oddyssey will cause the largest drop in active accounts since Incarna. In addition to this I don't think the solution CCP is now planning to implement will be very effective in turning ice into a conflict driver.
Since the cause of the problem is known, an alternative solution is easy to find. Strontium should be made more scarce. CCP could increase strontium consumption by raising the fuel needed for siege cycles, or find new uses for strontium. Another solution would be to simply remove the 1 strontium found in hisec ice. |
TijsseN
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 17:49:00 -
[1217] - Quote
As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey. |
Sicyon
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 19:21:00 -
[1218] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:I got a very important question.
Why didnt Jaspet, Hemorphite and Hedbergite get boosted also? Lowsec could need that boost tbh.
Was actualy wondering the same thing. Seems a lot if not all the low-sec systems will only be used for ratting and FW. No reward in mining in any of those with the current changes. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4067
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 20:05:00 -
[1219] - Quote
xP0nYx wrote:and btw. just a general question. which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous? our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so. if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour. at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png
EvE certainly will be better once it will be even more biased towards huge blobbers, multi-boxers and bot farms!
I mean, who cares for those poor tramps who just have 2 accounts, they should unsub right now!. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
741
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 20:44:00 -
[1220] - Quote
nerd friends plz it is unfair that irl social skills provide in game advantage |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9274
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 20:53:00 -
[1221] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:xP0nYx wrote:and btw. just a general question. which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous? our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so. if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour. at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png EvE certainly will be better once it will be even more biased towards huge blobbers, multi-boxers and bot farms! I mean, who cares for those poor tramps who just have 2 accounts, they should unsub right now!.
I only have 2 accounts :(
1 Kings 12:11
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4067
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 23:08:00 -
[1222] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:nerd friends plz it is unfair that irl social skills provide in game advantage
Multiboxers are certainly masters of social skills. They are as social as your hand when you do self sex. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Lady Areola Fappington
New Order Logistics CODE.
197
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 01:06:00 -
[1223] - Quote
I doubt the new changes will help multiboxers. Multibox systems pretty much depend on a static environment, like the current non-depleting icebelts.
Hopefully we'll get more people working together on this, what with EVE being a multiplayer game and all. Don't worry miners, I'm here to help!
|
yo gen ichi
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 07:08:00 -
[1224] - Quote
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:I doubt the new changes will help multiboxers. Multibox systems pretty much depend on a static environment, like the current non-depleting icebelts.
Hopefully we'll get more people working together on this, what with EVE being a multiplayer game and all.
actually it doesnt. i take my little small frig to fly one time through te belt ( they are about 70km big) make corpbookmarks every few kms, then warp all retrievers at diffrent spots and start mining. since they all got a big ore hanger i just need to warp to pos every now and then to haul. easy as that. and since my retrievers lock the ice block wich is the closest to them i just need to mine down from close range to further away roids.
that way u can easy multibox the new belts. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 13:34:00 -
[1225] - Quote
TijsseN wrote:As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey.
We would all love to see that.. except there won't be organized mining ops with backup.. Just how often has your own corp assigned 10-15 pilots to guard the miners in null?
|
Messoroz
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
360
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 18:05:00 -
[1226] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.
So CCP is changing their position on ABC ores in wormhole space? Last I checked, a year ago CCP was OUTRAGED that wspace was generating so much in minerals. |
MT Sackett
Looksee Lightbringers
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 19:06:00 -
[1227] - Quote
Messoroz wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Kadl wrote:Welcome back Fozzie.
There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.
I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important. We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable. So CCP is changing their position on ABC ores in wormhole space? Last I checked, a year ago CCP was OUTRAGED that wspace was generating so much in minerals.
the ore changes will have little use to those not in null space, most worm hole miners are not there to mine more trit and other low end minerals. do you really need to haul trit to hi sec with all the logistical dangers ? not a lot different for low sec, that is if you are willing to mine in low sec which will probably be the most dangerous mining you can do. |
Alexander DeKine
Aliastra Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 19:38:00 -
[1228] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts.
In regards to the amount that you populated onto the test system, are the new ice fields only gonna have about 100-150 blocks per roid with about 20 roids in each belt ? |
Xylorn Hasher
Sumiyoshi-Kai
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 07:38:00 -
[1229] - Quote
Nice changes, however:
- Making Gravi sites d-scanable is bad idea that will make mining in lowsec FAR TOO DANGEROUS. This will make opposite effect that far less ppl will mine them.
CCP leave them as they are - probable with probes only. We probe whole systems anyways, so Its not big issue for pirates ,but it will encourage bears more to come and mine. As they at least will feel more safe.
- Ice Gravis spawn only in systems that had Ice belts before change. - It is also bad idea. It would be far better for ppl to actually roam around and look for Ice gravis than just sit in same system and wait for spawn.
Where is exploration in this? Hit D-scan and warp to belt? LoL
I would make Ice gravi sites spawning in random locations, more ppl would have equal chances to find them, not actually camp them with fast mining setups like Orca + 3 Macs.
All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana-áconsumption. |
Xylorn Hasher
Sumiyoshi-Kai
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 07:49:00 -
[1230] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Chris Winter wrote: Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.
With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.
The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.
So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :)
There is a big problem. This change will kill mining in WH. As they will have completly no chancess to escape.
All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana-áconsumption. |
|
Xylorn Hasher
Sumiyoshi-Kai
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 08:09:00 -
[1231] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Aria Ning wrote:Right. The probing bought you additional time to get out of dodge if you saw someone out with combat probes on your D-scan. But this systems just makes it even riskier to mine. In fact I think the scanning system itself may defeat the ore redistribution's purpose, meaning you're getting more reward but a lot more risk, the risk might even outweigh the reward. It takes ~30 seconds for me to get to an anomaly from the time I jump in to the time that I drop out of warp in the anomaly, even if the anomaly is particularly close to my in-gate (less than 1AU). That's the time necessary to run the system scanner (10 seconds), during which I d-scan to determine the range they're at, the time to choose the anomaly (2-3 seconds), and then the time to enter and exit warp. If they're further away, they're safer. On top of that, gravimetric anomalies are a hell of a lot larger than ratting anomalies and the warp-in point for an intruder may not actually be anywhere near the points you'd sit miners at to mine from, adding extra safety.
What? Child its 21st century. We use cloaky ships and cloaky neutral warpins thease days. Also you can warp your cloaky alt first at 100km then you can warp your cloaky pirate to alt at another 100km so he will be 200km from grid center able to warp to any rock out there.
Learn how to play this game pls.
All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana-áconsumption. |
Loan--Wolf
Ace's And 8's
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 19:20:00 -
[1232] - Quote
with this new scanning system and my skill and experience at scanning if your in a wh and did not see me pop in the wh and your mining you are dead meat you no long have to run dscan and system scanner it updates with a hud shows ever sig in the system in a few seconds after your in. even if the graves was scanned by probes the new systems cuts the time in half its hit a button re-size the probes to 32 or 64 depending on the probes scan and re-size scan
|
Baric Doomstalker
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 02:46:00 -
[1233] - Quote
I was wondering if with these new ice changes would there be a fire lit under miners to clear belts for re spawn, but with these re spawns would there be at least one massive ice from another region IE a blue ice in amarr space or if the null and low sec ones will get a little of all here and there the faster they are mined? |
MT Sackett
Looksee Lightbringers
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 04:33:00 -
[1234] - Quote
Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5843
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 09:19:00 -
[1235] - Quote
MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
2805
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 10:12:00 -
[1236] - Quote
Roids and ice and all this stuff is surely interesting to some people, but what about the drone fixes?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 13:17:00 -
[1237] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.
How is making it easier to find a defenseless mining ship in a WH supposed to provide a challenge? Or better yet, how is the miner supposed to provide the challenge? If all the grav site generations is the same code in the game, whether it's low/null/WH then I understand the change since you can't separate it into an anom in 1 space type and a signature in another. Otherwise, this change in a WH is just a plain "We don't want you guys to mine in WHs" |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
618
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 14:03:00 -
[1238] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:TijsseN wrote:As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey. We would all love to see that.. except there won't be organized mining ops with backup.. Just how often has your own corp assigned 10-15 pilots to guard the miners in null? ^^ THIS IS THE BIG PROBLEM.
PVPers do not and will not sit in a belt baby sitting miners just in case a gank fleet shows up.
How many times have goonswarm PVPers shown up to protect miners in there space? More likely they will show up to gank their own blues just because they are mining, than actually protect them.
This change will not result in large mining fleets with escorts for null sec gankers to hunt down. It will result in a massive drop in null sec mining, and a massive increase in the value of high end minerals. once the turbulence in gone and every thing settles out null sec mining may be one of the highest income activities in game as it will have to be to of set the risk enough for nullbears to risk the constant ganks in such an easily accessed belt.
Not that miners having a high income is a problem, but when that high income is a result of excessively high prices for high end minerals we will see a much wider gap between established characters and new characters trying to get a foot hold. This goes against the goal of making EVE more accessible for new players.
Why put this added risk on the null sec miners? the rewards for null sec miners are not currently high compared to the risk. If it was we would see far more miners in null sec than we currently do. Drastically increasing the risk while only slightly increasing the reward will not draw new miners into null, but it likely will drive some existing null sec miners out. No matter hopw you look at it this change is a drastic increase in risk for null sec miners. If this is CCPs idea of encouraging null sec industry then someone needs a smack upside the head.
In order for this to work players have to play the game the way CCP envisions it, large mining ops, supported by large PVP fleets for protection. Sounds great, except that the PVPers are not going to be forced into this role of babysitting the nullbear miners. Without those PVP babysitters null sec mining will have a risk vs reward comparable to what we currently see in low sec, how much mining happens there? If null sec mining drops off so will the supply of high end minerals. What happens to EVE when the bottleneck of high end minerals stops a large amount of high sec production? CCP can not dictate to players how to play the game. Trying to force players into these roles will not end well.
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
618
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 14:44:00 -
[1239] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. Sorry Fozzie, but that makes no sense to me.
How is dumbing down that part of the game an answer to anything?
The challenge to miners will now be finding creative ways to avoid gankers? As with this change even the dumbest gankers, with zero scanning skills, can find any gravametric anomaly with a single click? While I agree EVE is meant to ba a harsh place, and there is really no need to discourage ganking as it contribute to the hostile environment. But promoting ganking will do far more harm than good.
look at Age of Conan for example. Hyboria is a harsh world, the developers there decided promoting ganking would enhance the danger of that world, but as a result the game became nothing more than a gankfest and spawn camping. The game died as a result.
Gankers are not loyal players, they will go where the easy PVP is. They do not care about the experience of other players, infact they go out of their way the ruin the game experience for newer and weaker players. Is this what you want to promote??
Harvesting tears should not be the focus of EVE. Not if you want to see continued success. I am not saying you should try to hinder ganking, but do not encourage or promote it. Gankers are the lowest form of PVPer, and require no encouragement to cause other players to suffer, they do it for the tears, not the in game rewards. If you want to keep the gankers subing, you need to keep their targets in abundance.
When the gankers run out of targets they will leave. If the targets grow and become more abundant, then the number of gankers will also grow, the game as a whole will grow. The best way to keep the gankers around is to promote the activities of the common ganker targets. Give the gankers more targets, they will not leave just because they must put some effort into finding those targets.
However by giving the gankers more targets, I do not mean making targets easier to find. removing that challenge is the wrong move. Game mechanics that will cause a large increase in null sec industrial characters will generate far more targets for the gankers than making the few targets there are easier to find. While at the same time will seem to be a change more for the benefit of the nullbears. So everybody wins.
I was hoping for a response to my other post, here but you seem to just avoid the question each time it comes up. And I am not the only one asking it.
So far the only players that have supported the idea of moving grave sites to anomalies are the gankers. Every post I have read by players this change actually affects, across what 6 threads now, has been against this change. There is a reason for it. you seem to be missing the point. But have not stated a point from CCPs side as the why this change was needed.
If the current grav site mechanics are to limiting, then change those mechanics. Currently grav sites, especially the largest grav sites are the hardest signatures to find. Make them easier to find, increase their base signature, even to the point of being able to lock down the signature at 4 or 8 AU with good skills and probes, but leave them as grav sites, keep probes as a requirement to find them. If gankers want to gank these miners, they must use probes to find them, but if they have probes, finding them could be much easier than it is now.
It would be fine if a pilot with good scanning skills could find a site in seconds using probes. This adds risk, while still leaving some form of mitigation, but allowing for anyone to find the sites instantly without the use of probes is just going to far in the wrong direction. Not only are you dumbing down the exploration feature, but this will turn null sec mining into a bigger gankfest than high sec mining. Even a ganker enjoys the hunt, making that hunt to easy is a loss of content and game play for both sides. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
753
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 15:30:00 -
[1240] - Quote
every supercap owner was against supercap balancing too
98 of 100 titan owners want to have their aoe dd restored, guess we best do that |
|
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:12:00 -
[1241] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Soko99 wrote:TijsseN wrote:As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey. We would all love to see that.. except there won't be organized mining ops with backup.. Just how often has your own corp assigned 10-15 pilots to guard the miners in null? ^^ THIS IS THE BIG PROBLEM. PVPers do not and will not sit in a belt baby sitting miners just in case a gank fleet shows up. How many times have goonswarm PVPers shown up to protect miners in there space? More likely they will show up to gank their own blues just because they are mining, than actually protect them. This change will not result in large mining fleets with escorts for null sec gankers to hunt down. It will result in a massive drop in null sec mining, and a massive increase in the value of high end minerals. once the turbulence in gone and every thing settles out null sec mining may be one of the highest income activities in game as it will have to be to of set the risk enough for nullbears to risk the constant ganks in such an easily accessed belt. Not that miners having a high income is a problem, but when that high income is a result of excessively high prices for high end minerals we will see a much wider gap between established characters and new characters trying to get a foot hold. This goes against the goal of making EVE more accessible for new players. Why put this added risk on the null sec miners? the rewards for null sec miners are not currently high compared to the risk. If it was we would see far more miners in null sec than we currently do. Drastically increasing the risk while only slightly increasing the reward will not draw new miners into null, but it likely will drive some existing null sec miners out. No matter hopw you look at it this change is a drastic increase in risk for null sec miners. If this is CCPs idea of encouraging null sec industry then someone needs a smack upside the head. In order for this to work players have to play the game the way CCP envisions it, large mining ops, supported by large PVP fleets for protection. Sounds great, except that the PVPers are not going to be forced into this role of babysitting the nullbear miners. Without those PVP babysitters null sec mining will have a risk vs reward comparable to what we currently see in low sec, how much mining happens there? If null sec mining drops off so will the supply of high end minerals. What happens to EVE when the bottleneck of high end minerals stops a large amount of high sec production? CCP can not dictate to players how to play the game. Trying to force players into these roles will not end well.
just to one thing clear. this anom changes wont have any effect on 0.0 mining. cuz as soon as a neutral pops up in local you warp to pos anyways. you usually dont wait till u see probes cuz the guy could have a blue warp in or a bookmark. we live in the times of awoxers and so on. in WH on the other hand, im sorry for u guys you are pretty much screwed with this. there are a lot of ways in 0.0 to avoid getting caught by any kind of neutral. for example: if a neut is in sys stay under pos or docked. if u keep this rule in mind its hard to get caught in the first place. make sure you get your mining ship into warp under 12 seconds, so as soon as a neut comes in, you start warping and will be in warp before most ships can be at your position. |
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
230
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:46:00 -
[1242] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.
The problem I see is that if you shift the equation too much in the favor of the predator you will reduce the supply of prey,
This is exactly why I think the changes to combat anoms are so poorly conceived as it's based on the same faulty logic that has so many people calling for moving L4's to low sec.
Increase the risk too much and people will find alternative activities and the only ones that continue in said activities will be those most prepared. This is why hunters use blinds and try to remain silent, because it's damned hard to bag a deer that has heard humans in the area, they'll be skittish and quick to bolt. Where as if they feel secure and safe they'll just stand around doing their things.
Having grav sites so that they had to be probed down provided a heightened sense of security to those who mined in them. This heightened sense of security would tend to make them slower to react to danger which in turn provided opportunities that skilled predators could take advantage of.
If you really want to increase the amount of conflict, then you need to create greater incentives for people to have their ships in space. Preferably low or null space. You also have to give the prey a fighting chance otherwise you end up with a situation where they are hunted to extinction which in this case means players cease engaging in the dangerous activity.
Consider Forsaken hubs, you think the problem is that they are too easy which prevents other anoms from being used, so rather than adjust the other anoms to be more similar to the popular forsaken hubs you change the forsaken hubs to suck just as much as the others. You do this without understanding why Forsakens are so popular a choice in the first place, you seem to think it's the lack of scrams that are their primary draw, while the thing that actually makes the other anoms unpopular is not the scram part but the fact that you can not effectively engage frigates with the ships required to tank them or the weapon systems most suitable for dealing with larger ships.
The lack of scramblers is a nice bonus but it's not the reason why people avoid the other anoms. Don't believe me, leave the frigates out and put warp disruptors on the dire cruisers and see if that changes which anoms are used the most.
The problem is that for the most part mission rats orbit at long range, requiring the use of long range weaponry/ammo that is poorly suited for use against close orbiting high speed targets (frigates) the AI changes further complicated matters because it effectively removed the traditional counter for frigates in PVE content, since drones are on the KOS list of the rats they are extremely difficult to use to deal with rats that can get in under those long range weapon systems that are required to engage the cruisers and above.
The hub change will not cause people to team up to make poorer rewards than they could get running L4's in high sec (which is actually pretty pathetic isk/hr if you don't play the LP market) They will move to other activities (high sec L4 alts for example) which will make null even more of a ghost town than it normally is.
What you should be doing is figuring out ways to increase the numbers of ships flying in space. Remove the frigates from more anoms, increase the bounties on the frigates in the lower level anoms so that there is some incentive to run them. Hell why not be able to make decent isk/hour on all those little frig heavy anoms, give people the option to speed boat them in smaller ships built specifically to fight frigates. Would it really be all that horrible if a newer player in rifter could make 10 mil or so a tick running the basic anoms?
As it stands now a fully upgraded system in null can support 2-3 ratters. 2-3 while there are what 20+ anoms in those systems that are being ignored because they just aren't worth messing with. If those other anoms were changed to make them more attractive then you'd have more pilots in null earning their isk, creating more targets for the roaming gangs to hunt. Driving more conflict and generating more content.
Not to mention the fact that making the content more difficult introduces a selection bias towards harder to kill prey, So not only will the change to Forsaken hubs decrease the number of potential targets it will result in those remaining targets being better prepared and harder to catch/kill.
|
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:08:00 -
[1243] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. The problem I see is that if you shift the equation too much in the favor of the predator you will reduce the supply of prey, This is exactly why I think the changes to combat anoms are so poorly conceived as it's based on the same faulty logic that has so many people calling for moving L4's to low sec. Increase the risk too much and people will find alternative activities and the only ones that continue in said activities will be those most prepared. This is why hunters use blinds and try to remain silent, because it's damned hard to bag a deer that has heard humans in the area, they'll be skittish and quick to bolt. Where as if they feel secure and safe they'll just stand around doing their things. Having grav sites so that they had to be probed down provided a heightened sense of security to those who mined in them. This heightened sense of security would tend to make them slower to react to danger which in turn provided opportunities that skilled predators could take advantage of. If you really want to increase the amount of conflict, then you need to create greater incentives for people to have their ships in space. Preferably low or null space. You also have to give the prey a fighting chance otherwise you end up with a situation where they are hunted to extinction which in this case means players cease engaging in the dangerous activity. Consider Forsaken hubs, you think the problem is that they are too easy which prevents other anoms from being used, so rather than adjust the other anoms to be more similar to the popular forsaken hubs you change the forsaken hubs to suck just as much as the others. You do this without understanding why Forsakens are so popular a choice in the first place, you seem to think it's the lack of scrams that are their primary draw, while the thing that actually makes the other anoms unpopular is not the scram part but the fact that you can not effectively engage frigates with the ships required to tank them or the weapon systems most suitable for dealing with larger ships. The lack of scramblers is a nice bonus but it's not the reason why people avoid the other anoms. Don't believe me, leave the frigates out and put warp disruptors on the dire cruisers and see if that changes which anoms are used the most. The problem is that for the most part mission rats orbit at long range, requiring the use of long range weaponry/ammo that is poorly suited for use against close orbiting high speed targets (frigates) the AI changes further complicated matters because it effectively removed the traditional counter for frigates in PVE content, since drones are on the KOS list of the rats they are extremely difficult to use to deal with rats that can get in under those long range weapon systems that are required to engage the cruisers and above. The hub change will not cause people to team up to make poorer rewards than they could get running L4's in high sec (which is actually pretty pathetic isk/hr if you don't play the LP market) They will move to other activities (high sec L4 alts for example) which will make null even more of a ghost town than it normally is. What you should be doing is figuring out ways to increase the numbers of ships flying in space. Remove the frigates from more anoms, increase the bounties on the frigates in the lower level anoms so that there is some incentive to run them. Hell why not be able to make decent isk/hour on all those little frig heavy anoms, give people the option to speed boat them in smaller ships built specifically to fight frigates. Would it really be all that horrible if a newer player in rifter could make 10 mil or so a tick running the basic anoms? As it stands now a fully upgraded system in null can support 2-3 ratters. 2-3 while there are what 20+ anoms in those systems that are being ignored because they just aren't worth messing with. If those other anoms were changed to make them more attractive then you'd have more pilots in null earning their isk, creating more targets for the roaming gangs to hunt. Driving more conflict and generating more content. Not to mention the fact that making the content more difficult introduces a selection bias towards harder to kill prey, So not only will the change to Forsaken hubs decrease the number of potential targets it will result in those remaining targets being better prepared and harder to catch/kill.
plz listen to this guy he knows what hes talking about. thats the reason why our ratters only take forsaken hubs. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
649
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:10:00 -
[1244] - Quote
Risk vs Reward, carebears just want the reward. Anyway the more you cry the more EvE Online grows, so keep on crying. R Tape loading error |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
2814
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:21:00 -
[1245] - Quote
Xylorn Hasher wrote:
There is a big problem. This change will kill mining in WH. As they will have completly no chancess to escape.
If your wh mining op security relies on seeing probes on dscan and then warping out, you are doing it terribly wrong.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
MT Sackett
Looksee Lightbringers
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:03:00 -
[1246] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.
Hmm, not trying to be difficult but I am now more confused than ever, what challenge by other players will the upgrade provide to ACESS the sites? Access will soon be a click away.
-Does the access of sites have nothing to do with the change? Is this just a by product of code issues in game and its not worth doing something different (hanger issues in capital ships come to mind) if that's it just say so.
This is not a game ender but curiosity has got me. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:34:00 -
[1247] - Quote
xP0nYx wrote:
just to one thing clear. this anom changes wont have any effect on 0.0 mining. cuz as soon as a neutral pops up in local you warp to pos anyways. you usually dont wait till u see probes cuz the guy could have a blue warp in or a bookmark. we live in the times of awoxers and so on. in WH on the other hand, im sorry for u guys you are pretty much screwed with this.
The chicken sh*t miners are the ones that warp off every time they see a neutral in system. If you do that it defeats the purpose of mining in null, as you spend more time safed up than actually mining. I always wait to see if they are actually a threat first. As I have said before, only a small percentage of PVP roamers have a probe launcher, those that do not are not much of a threat. Sure I lost a couple mining ships. If I get caught by someone smart enough to out manuver me, then good for them. but I spent 90% of my time actually in the belts mining when I was in null, not POSed up.
xP0nYx wrote: there are a lot of ways in 0.0 to avoid getting caught by any kind of neutral. for example: if a neut is in sys stay under pos or docked. if u keep this rule in mind its hard to get caught in the first place. make sure you get your mining ship into warp under 12 seconds, so as soon as a neut comes in, you start warping and will be in warp before most ships can be at your position.
Seriously?? These days there is almost always at least 1 neut in system. when I am mining, I actually mine, I will not spend 80% of my time POSed up. If I am going to do that I will just mine in high sec. When probes show on scan you have plenty of time to warp off, it takes at least 30 seconds for them to get a lock on your position. This is the proper way to do it. What you describe is what the paranoid, wannabe miners that barely make 10m/hr do.
This anomaly change will be game breaking for the miners like me who actually mine, rather than sit in a station or POS waiting for perfect safety to undock. Sitting in a POS shield is just a waste of my time.
Besides, if you are correct and the safety net provided by the need to scan down mining ships in grav sites was a non issue, than why is mining in non grav sites near non existent? |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:37:00 -
[1248] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:every supercap owner was against supercap balancing too
98 of 100 titan owners want to have their aoe dd restored, guess we best do that
Yes because an OP combat mechanic is comparable to nerfing a non combat ships only means of defense in a hostile environment. |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:53:00 -
[1249] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Risk vs Reward, carebears just want the reward. Anyway the more you cry the more EvE Online grows, so keep on crying.
Didn't your momma ever teach you to either say something constructive or not bother?
Care to enlighten us in HOW exactly was null sec mining and WH mining as it is now, a JUST reward based system with no risk? And while at it, explain if you could oh wise one, on how post changes mining will provide INCREASED risk to a literally no warning gank in WH space. (You do know what WH space is like right? ) |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
621
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 13:55:00 -
[1250] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. The problem I see is that if you shift the equation too much in the favor of the predator you will reduce the supply of prey, This is exactly why I think the changes to combat anoms are so poorly conceived as it's based on the same faulty logic that has so many people calling for moving L4's to low sec. Increase the risk too much and people will find alternative activities and the only ones that continue in said activities will be those most prepared. This is why hunters use blinds and try to remain silent, because it's damned hard to bag a deer that has heard humans in the area, they'll be skittish and quick to bolt. Where as if they feel secure and safe they'll just stand around doing their things. Having grav sites so that they had to be probed down provided a heightened sense of security to those who mined in them. This heightened sense of security would tend to make them slower to react to danger which in turn provided opportunities that skilled predators could take advantage of. If you really want to increase the amount of conflict, then you need to create greater incentives for people to have their ships in space. Preferably low or null space. You also have to give the prey a fighting chance otherwise you end up with a situation where they are hunted to extinction which in this case means players cease engaging in the dangerous activity. Consider Forsaken hubs, you think the problem is that they are too easy which prevents other anoms from being used, so rather than adjust the other anoms to be more similar to the popular forsaken hubs you change the forsaken hubs to suck just as much as the others. You do this without understanding why Forsakens are so popular a choice in the first place, you seem to think it's the lack of scrams that are their primary draw, while the thing that actually makes the other anoms unpopular is not the scram part but the fact that you can not effectively engage frigates with the ships required to tank them or the weapon systems most suitable for dealing with larger ships. The lack of scramblers is a nice bonus but it's not the reason why people avoid the other anoms. Don't believe me, leave the frigates out and put warp disruptors on the dire cruisers and see if that changes which anoms are used the most. The problem is that for the most part mission rats orbit at long range, requiring the use of long range weaponry/ammo that is poorly suited for use against close orbiting high speed targets (frigates) the AI changes further complicated matters because it effectively removed the traditional counter for frigates in PVE content, since drones are on the KOS list of the rats they are extremely difficult to use to deal with rats that can get in under those long range weapon systems that are required to engage the cruisers and above. The hub change will not cause people to team up to make poorer rewards than they could get running L4's in high sec (which is actually pretty pathetic isk/hr if you don't play the LP market) They will move to other activities (high sec L4 alts for example) which will make null even more of a ghost town than it normally is. What you should be doing is figuring out ways to increase the numbers of ships flying in space. Remove the frigates from more anoms, increase the bounties on the frigates in the lower level anoms so that there is some incentive to run them. Hell why not be able to make decent isk/hour on all those little frig heavy anoms, give people the option to speed boat them in smaller ships built specifically to fight frigates. Would it really be all that horrible if a newer player in rifter could make 10 mil or so a tick running the basic anoms? As it stands now a fully upgraded system in null can support 2-3 ratters. 2-3 while there are what 20+ anoms in those systems that are being ignored because they just aren't worth messing with. If those other anoms were changed to make them more attractive then you'd have more pilots in null earning their isk, creating more targets for the roaming gangs to hunt. Driving more conflict and generating more content. Not to mention the fact that making the content more difficult introduces a selection bias towards harder to kill prey, So not only will the change to Forsaken hubs decrease the number of potential targets it will result in those remaining targets being better prepared and harder to catch/kill. I agree 100%
The solution to bringing more life to null sec, is giving more reason to be there. Null sec is dangerous space. Many players like that about null, but that is not why they are there. Most are there for the isk, because that is why there corp/alliance lives there.
PVP is generated by high player populations in PVP areas. Most of Null Sec is a ghost town, so the PVP is limited. |
|
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 14:35:00 -
[1251] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:xP0nYx wrote:
just to one thing clear. this anom changes wont have any effect on 0.0 mining. cuz as soon as a neutral pops up in local you warp to pos anyways. you usually dont wait till u see probes cuz the guy could have a blue warp in or a bookmark. we live in the times of awoxers and so on. in WH on the other hand, im sorry for u guys you are pretty much screwed with this.
The chicken sh*t miners are the ones that warp off every time they see a neutral in system. If you do that it defeats the purpose of mining in null, as you spend more time safed up than actually mining. I always wait to see if they are actually a threat first. As I have said before, only a small percentage of PVP roamers have a probe launcher, those that do not are not much of a threat. Sure I lost a couple mining ships. If I get caught by someone smart enough to out manuver me, then good for them. but I spent 90% of my time actually in the belts mining when I was in null, not POSed up. xP0nYx wrote: there are a lot of ways in 0.0 to avoid getting caught by any kind of neutral. for example: if a neut is in sys stay under pos or docked. if u keep this rule in mind its hard to get caught in the first place. make sure you get your mining ship into warp under 12 seconds, so as soon as a neut comes in, you start warping and will be in warp before most ships can be at your position. Seriously?? These days there is almost always at least 1 neut in system. when I am mining, I actually mine, I will not spend 80% of my time POSed up. If I am going to do that I will just mine in high sec. When probes show on scan you have plenty of time to warp off, it takes at least 30 seconds for them to get a lock on your position. This is the proper way to do it. What you describe is what the paranoid, wannabe miners that barely make 10m/hr do. This anomaly change will be game breaking for the miners like me who actually mine, rather than sit in a station or POS waiting for perfect safety to undock. Sitting in a POS shield is just a waste of my time. Besides, if you are correct and the safety net provided by the need to scan down mining ships in grav sites was a non issue, than why is mining in non grav sites near non existent?
i have never lost a mining ship in 0.0 to a roamer. maybe because i was stupid afk or so. but not while actually mining. and if in your system is allways a neutral then that might be because u fight them and give them entertainment. i mine like 2-3 Billion ISK a day in my sys and i dont have any problems. of course i dont mine in a system with station.... how stupid is that.... and if there really is a camper. just move to another system. there is space enought out there.
and for your question why ppl dont mine in regular asteroids..... have you actually ever been in 0.0? the roids are like 80 km off each other. and in a large hidden belt there is a spot where u stand and never ever have to move till the belt is empty. of course if your rorqual booster and so on dont have the propper skills it sucks but if your good skilled its all fine. |
Adunh Slavy
788
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 15:54:00 -
[1252] - Quote
If mining becomes too dangerous, then supplies of mins will go down, prices will go up, rewards will go up, protecting miners will be worth it.
There is a lot of ISK in Eve, time to let the market do its job. |
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
233
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 17:51:00 -
[1253] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:If mining becomes too dangerous, then supplies of mins will go down, prices will go up, rewards will go up, protecting miners will be worth it.
There is a lot of ISK in Eve, time to let the market do its job.
The thing is that if you want PVP then you want to encourage stupid people to do stuff, It's damned hard to kill someone who knows what they are doing and paying attention. Stupid/afk people ARE Content for solo/small gang PVPers.
Personally I lose ships all the time, either through afkish ratting and paying too little attention to intel/local or from just doing stupid stuff because I give no fucks and figure why not throw this Daredevil at the obvious covops hot dropper. I do this because currently I can make sufficient isk to more than cover my losses. If the circumstances change to the point where my money generating activity ceases to be able to cover my behavior then I'll change that behavior and there will be that fewer targets for the roaming gangs who previously profited from my behavior.
I get that part of the draw of EVE is the idea that loss has a consequence but that has to be carefully balanced by making recovery from loss easy enough to not encourage risk aversion. The more painful loss the more careful people become, the more careful they become the less action takes place.
This doesn't mean that there should not be risk or that loss should not sting, but it does mean that you can't make that sting too painful or the risk too great vs the potential reward or else people will change their behavior in a way that results a loss of positive results of their activity.
Currently Forsaken hubs sit at that sweet spot when it comes to risk vs reward, The risk exists but can be mitigated by smart behavior or through income generation. That's why people mainly run them, the other anoms fail in that calculation which is why they are not used. Thinking about it tediousness of an activity is also a rather important factor in this equation and is a large part of why people do forsaken hubs over other potentially more lucrative anomalies. The planned changes are going to change that calculation making them just as tedious and unappealing as all the other anoms and the most likely result will not be people doing more of the other types of anomalies but fewer people in general doing any anomalies.
The same goes for mining. If you want miners to kill then you have to tweak the risk vs reward calculus to the that spot where people are willing to take risks. The problem with changing grav sites from signatures to anoms is that they remove some of the ability for smarter players to mitigate their risks, and no you won't see any significant changes to mining output or profit per hour because for the most part Null is a ghost town and the bots and semi/mostly afk miners will continue to do their thing in remote systems and just dock up on those rare occasions where hostiles are roaming about.
Worm holers get doubly screwed because they tend to lack the intel assets that null sec or even low sec folks have, Not only will they lack intel channels to track hostiles on approach, they don't even have local to know if someone is in their system. They are left with pretty much 0 way to mitigate their risk changing their activity from one where they can exercise some measure of skill to protect themselves to a question of pure luck. This change will result in fewer players taking that chance and thus reduce the number of potential targets available to shoot.
If you want good vibrant PVP content then you need an active vibrant population of prey. Changes that make being prey overly risky, unrewarding or tedious discourage that active vibrant population. Resulting in a corresponding reduction in PVP content. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
2836
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 18:00:00 -
[1254] - Quote
Skex Relbore wrote: Worm holers get doubly screwed because they tend to lack the intel assets that null sec or even low sec folks have, Not only will they lack intel channels to track hostiles on approach, they don't even have local to know if someone is in their system. They are left with pretty much 0 way to mitigate their risk changing their activity from one where they can exercise some measure of skill to protect themselves to a question of pure luck. This change will result in fewer players taking that chance and thus reduce the number of potential targets available to shoot.
Yeah, that's why the wormhole folks never do PVE in multibillion T3 and blinged capital fleets, there's absolutely no way to know if hostiles are coming!
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Skex Relbore
Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn
233
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 18:18:00 -
[1255] - Quote
Roime wrote:Skex Relbore wrote: Worm holers get doubly screwed because they tend to lack the intel assets that null sec or even low sec folks have, Not only will they lack intel channels to track hostiles on approach, they don't even have local to know if someone is in their system. They are left with pretty much 0 way to mitigate their risk changing their activity from one where they can exercise some measure of skill to protect themselves to a question of pure luck. This change will result in fewer players taking that chance and thus reduce the number of potential targets available to shoot.
Yeah, that's why the wormhole folks never do PVE in multibillion T3 and blinged capital fleets, there's absolutely no way to know if hostiles are coming!
I'm not a worm hole dweller myself but I'd imagine that the ability to use DScan to see probes provides a fair degree of warning further anything that would represent a significant threat to a fleet of blinged out T3 and capitals would show up on DSCAN themselves unlike the single cloaky ship that would be required to kill a solo miner.
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
625
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:24:00 -
[1256] - Quote
xP0nYx wrote:
i have never lost a mining ship in 0.0 to a roamer. maybe because i was stupid afk or so. but not while actually mining. and if in your system is allways a neutral then that might be because u fight them and give them entertainment. i mine like 2-3 Billion ISK a day in my sys and i dont have any problems. of course i dont mine in a system with station.... how stupid is that.... and if there really is a camper. just move to another system. there is space enought out there.
and for your question why ppl dont mine in regular asteroids..... have you actually ever been in 0.0? the roids are like 80 km off each other. and in a large hidden belt there is a spot where u stand and never ever have to move till the belt is empty. of course if your rorqual booster and so on dont have the propper skills it sucks but if your good skilled its all fine.
Well I have only lost 2 mining ships in 3 years, So not what I would consider a problem. My point was POSing up every time a neutral pops up in the system is not the right way to mine. Sure it is safer, but not everyone has access to systems so deep inside blue territory you never see a neutral. In the system like where I used to mine you see a few non blue pass thru every hour. You can POS up and wait until they leave, like a null bear baby, or you can watch D-scan for probes while you keep mining. I prefer the latter, and I would say my way works well as I spend far less time sitting in a POS than I would doing it your way, And the risk is not bad considering I only lost 2 Ships in three years.
So tell me again why being a pansy is better? Perhaps your name should be xMyLittlePonYx, xHellokittYx, or even xPokemoNx.
I have read far to many threads with nullbears complaining about AFK cloakers and being camped by neuts. Yet players like you still promote such unnecessary behavior. With my method there is no issue, other than a mild additional risk, and need to pay more attention to what is happening around you. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
625
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:31:00 -
[1257] - Quote
Roime wrote:Skex Relbore wrote: Worm holers get doubly screwed because they tend to lack the intel assets that null sec or even low sec folks have, Not only will they lack intel channels to track hostiles on approach, they don't even have local to know if someone is in their system. They are left with pretty much 0 way to mitigate their risk changing their activity from one where they can exercise some measure of skill to protect themselves to a question of pure luck. This change will result in fewer players taking that chance and thus reduce the number of potential targets available to shoot.
Yeah, that's why the wormhole folks never do PVE in multibillion T3 and blinged capital fleets, there's absolutely no way to know if hostiles are coming! Exactly the point. The warning is the fact that those activities are done in sites that have to be scanned down. You know when someone is coming because you see them, or their probes on D-scan. Not to mention you are in a combat ship and can some what defend your self if they do come.
On the flip side, when mining in W-space D-scan is the only intel tool you have, other than mutiboxing scouts on the incoming holes. Moving grav sites to anomalies removes that single layer of warning/intel a W-space miner has. If this happens W-space mining will stop. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1864
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 20:38:00 -
[1258] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. From the CSM winter 2012 minute, concerning wars:
"Solomon: The strong prey on the weak, but the weak arenGÇÖt responding, and nobodyGÇÖs getting particularly fun or nourishing gameplay out of this. Is that a failure?"
The way miners respond to challenge is to mine elsewhere.
Be prepared for the exact same thing Solomon said to happen with mining in dangerous space. Look at the stats of what players end up doing, and see if its a failure. (In this case, ore mined in various types of space.) http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
661
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 21:58:00 -
[1259] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Risk vs Reward, carebears just want the reward. Anyway the more you cry the more EvE Online grows, so keep on crying. Didn't your momma ever teach you to either say something constructive or not bother? Care to enlighten us in HOW exactly was null sec mining and WH mining as it is now, a JUST reward based system with no risk? And while at it, explain if you could oh wise one, on how post changes mining will provide INCREASED risk to a literally no warning gank in WH space. (You do know what WH space is like right? )
Typical diarrhea post from a member of the double digit IQ club. It's really too bad you have the need to take a dump on the forum. R Tape loading error |
Soko99
Repercussus RAZOR Alliance
33
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 23:31:00 -
[1260] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Soko99 wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Risk vs Reward, carebears just want the reward. Anyway the more you cry the more EvE Online grows, so keep on crying. Didn't your momma ever teach you to either say something constructive or not bother? Care to enlighten us in HOW exactly was null sec mining and WH mining as it is now, a JUST reward based system with no risk? And while at it, explain if you could oh wise one, on how post changes mining will provide INCREASED risk to a literally no warning gank in WH space. (You do know what WH space is like right? ) Typical diarrhea post from a member of the double digit IQ club. It's really too bad you have the need to take a dump on the forum.
I see.. yet you still haven't given any evidence to your post about the risk vs reward you raised.. Whereas throughout the thread I have given proof on my stance..
|
|
BYRAN BRASSBALLS
The Generic Corp
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 04:56:00 -
[1261] - Quote
Well EVE was fun why it lasted. |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo
2844
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 06:15:00 -
[1262] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: Exactly the point. If the w-space combat sites were moved to anomalies you would not see blinged out mutibillion isk T3's running them. Currently they have that security of needing to be scanned down. The warning is the fact that those activities ARE done in sites that have to be scanned down. You know when someone is coming, because you see them, or their probes on D-scan. Not to mention you are in a combat ship and can some what defend yourself when they do come.
Good morning Bugsy,
Wormhole combat sites are in fact anomalies and don't need to be scanned down. There are sigs too, but anomalies are the bread and butter.
Warning is not the probes, unless you are ******** and willing to die.
Quote:On the flip side, when mining in W-space D-scan is the only intel/protection tool you have, other than mutiboxing scouts on the incoming holes. Moving grav sites to anomalies removes that single layer of warning/intel a W-space miner has. If this happens W-space mining will stop.
Exactly. like you said, you need to watch the existing holes, and keep probes out for new ones. There is no difference in securing a PVE or a mining op. The single layer of warning is when hostiles enter your system. If you let them do their thing long enough to start probing, they are in control of the situation.
Anyway, mining in wormholes is a niche thing due to the fact that grav sites are painfully rare. I've lived in C2s, C3s, and C5s and none of the holes spawned gravimetric at any profitable or steady rate, more like once or twice a month.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
626
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 13:33:00 -
[1263] - Quote
Roime wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: Exactly the point. If the w-space combat sites were moved to anomalies you would not see blinged out mutibillion isk T3's running them. Currently they have that security of needing to be scanned down. The warning is the fact that those activities ARE done in sites that have to be scanned down. You know when someone is coming, because you see them, or their probes on D-scan. Not to mention you are in a combat ship and can some what defend yourself when they do come.
Good morning Bugsy, Wormhole combat sites are in fact anomalies and don't need to be scanned down. There are sigs too, but anomalies are the bread and butter. Warning is not the probes, unless you are ******** and willing to die. Quote:On the flip side, when mining in W-space D-scan is the only intel/protection tool you have, other than mutiboxing scouts on the incoming holes. Moving grav sites to anomalies removes that single layer of warning/intel a W-space miner has. If this happens W-space mining will stop. Exactly. like you said, you need to watch the existing holes, and keep probes out for new ones. There is no difference in securing a PVE or a mining op. The single layer of warning is when hostiles enter your system. If you let them do their thing long enough to start probing, they are in control of the situation. Anyway, mining in wormholes is a niche thing due to the fact that grav sites are painfully rare. I've lived in C2s, C3s, and C5s and none of the holes spawned gravimetric at any profitable or steady rate, more like once or twice a month. Sites in general do not spawn fast or often in W-space. You have to run what is available. grav sites included. |
Tank Huffington
Pod Is My Copilot
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 18:10:00 -
[1264] - Quote
darmwand wrote:Quote:pilots will be able to find all Ore Sites using their shipGÇÖs built-in anomaly scanning equipment I'm sure that's going to encourage people to mine in low-sec Sounds promising though, good to see that our industrialist friends get some love.
Oh...I see what you did there. That's what they call sarcasm isn't it? |
Tank Huffington
Pod Is My Copilot
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 18:31:00 -
[1265] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Dilbert HighSeed wrote:LOL..just love reading the null bears "wah, wah...my null sec income might be affected". High sec just took another body slam, and you clowns laugh when high sec gets crushed. Now we have one ship class potentially affected by an NPC change, and people lose their minds.
Hypocrites all of you. Ice mining getting moved to anomalies is a "body slam"? Seriously? Check your privilege.
It's not the move that slams Ice it's the fact that the ice will deplete and takes 4hrs to respawn. But I do like moving the ice into Anomalies. It makes it much harder for Bots to survive. |
Tank Huffington
Pod Is My Copilot
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 18:57:00 -
[1266] - Quote
Dalilus wrote:another dev blog explaining how the "idependent" csm and ccp are taking care of their favorite pets; the lowsec, null and w bears while continuing to nerf highsec.
I think that the intent is to create more conflict and to encourage more people to move into Null Sec. High Sec is very profitable with minimal risk. The only real risk comes when someone puts a griefing war decc on you or you chose to join Faction Warfare. Null Sec encourages people to work together more than high sec and therefore opens up more player driven content.
It's not petting Null Sec by moving all hidden ore belts into basic anomaly sites. This makes it much harder for null sec miners to do their job without hostiles warping to you without ever putting probes into space. As it is now, if you are mining in a Hidden Belt then you have to keep an eye on your D-Scan and if you see Probes then you dock up. The hostiles have to actually do some work to find you. Removing that is just dumbing things down for griefers.
Null sec is supposed to be more profitable because of the risks you take being out there. Everyone says, "If a hostile enters your system then you need to dock up." but that does nothing about the AFK cloakies who park in systems 23/7 thereby shutting down an entire system while they hop on their main to rake in the ISK elsewhere. And yes, you can have PVP pilots provide security but that's an even more mind numbing job than mining. Sitting there waiting for hours to see if that cloaky is really going to do anything. |
Tank Huffington
Pod Is My Copilot
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 19:56:00 -
[1267] - Quote
Liz Laser wrote:My preferred place to Eve is null-sec, but it requires me to have a lot of free time to meet the obligations of being in a corp. I haven't had that free time in a long while. So when I do have a free moment, I spend it in high-sec. Except time spent in high-sec keeps becoming less and less valuable and I don't even login except to change skills. So now when work/business/social-life have me very busy I might as well just let my subscription lapse until I have time to be in null-sec again. I'm a firm believer in adapt or die, but when I and others make the above described adaptation, I worry it will be Eve that dies. Have I missed the improvement that is going to make it worthwhile to login if hi-sec is all you have time for?Null sec needs love, I'll be the first to admit it. But you aren't going to coerce people into null or low-sec. Either they lack the time to be part of corps, or they lack the balls/fangs/bloodthirstiness to want to be there. I have about 45 minutes a night I could spend in high-sec. I spend that 45 minutes in SWTOR. You don't need to make high-sec the best place, but you do have to make it interesting and worthwhile to log into. Or God has to create more PvPers.
Good point.
|
Loan--Wolf
Ace's And 8's
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 23:45:00 -
[1268] - Quote
Quote: Exactly. like you said, you need to watch the existing holes, and keep probes out for new ones. There is no difference in securing a PVE or a mining op. The single layer of warning is when hostiles enter your system. If you let them do their thing long enough to start probing, they are in control of the situation.
Anyway, mining in wormholes is a niche thing due to the fact that grav sites are painfully rare. I've lived in C2s, C3s, and C5s and none of the holes spawned gravimetric at any profitable or steady rate, more like once or twice a month.
agreed and when they do there allways a lot of k162s spawn at the same time
on to the rest for the most part c3 and lower the change is not so much more risk to be honest but i think the risk grows very fast in c4/c5 and c6 whs
and for the people that blame the miners when they die maby you should try living in a wh before you go insulting people all it takes is getting up to get a beer for something bad to happen and most of the time they already have bookmarks any way and you never see the probes just a T2 or T3 cloaky ship decloakeing and poping you ship
and yes to the people that will feel the need to point out you should get up and get a beer while your mineing i know this but mineing is so boraing drinking is the only way i can force my self to do |
|
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
59
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 19:45:00 -
[1269] - Quote
A post consisting only of a personal attack has been deleted. ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Loan--Wolf
Ace's And 8's
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 05:32:00 -
[1270] - Quote
so this discussion is dead no willing to change ? it personally makes no deference to me i can tell you that i think CCP needs to start listing to some of the carebears tho after all you in it for the money right pvp is a verry small part of your pay day no matter how much the ones that say its all eve is about try to make you think it is |
|
xP0nYx
Nordgoetter Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 00:07:00 -
[1271] - Quote
Loan--Wolf wrote:so this discussion is dead no willing to change ? it personally makes no deference to me i can tell you that i think CCP needs to start listing to some of the carebears tho after all you in it for the money right pvp is a verry small part of your pay day no matter how much the ones that say its all eve is about try to make you think it is
well i personally got my stuff all together now. i have a stockpile of ice saved up for the price spike and got my mining fleet and cynos rdy to farm out all the ice belts as fast as possible. and since now everyone has to look for himself i guess there will be a lot of alliance mates that gonna be mad at me. but well they can tell that to ccp.... |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 03:51:00 -
[1272] - Quote
So, since Plasmonic Metamaterials and Nonlinear Metamaterials already have all of their components ingame, ready to build on patch day, how about you release the Thulium Hafnite and Promethium Mercurite reactions (and alchemy reactions) now so that we can get them building and ready to equalize things a bit??? |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 03:53:00 -
[1273] - Quote
And seriously, you made Hafnium the bottleneck now???
|
Drago Morris
The reality disfunction
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 18:30:00 -
[1274] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Leana Darkrider wrote:got a few questions about these changes:
Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?
Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space? They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts.
Would it be possible to know why so many will not be replaced and why Derelik will have only 2 on the same side of the map? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6055
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:24:00 -
[1275] - Quote
Laendra wrote:So, since Plasmonic Metamaterials and Nonlinear Metamaterials already have all of their components ingame, ready to build on patch day, how about you release the Thulium Hafnite and Promethium Mercurite reactions (and alchemy reactions) now so that we can get them building and ready to equalize things a bit??? We considered staggering the release of the intermediate reaction blueprints and the composites, but it would only have been feasible to push the composites later than June 4th as opposed to putting the intermediate reactions earlier. In the end we made the call that it would be best to just get everything out in one release, as people can stockpile construction components before the patch to help smooth out any short period of undersupply.
Drago Morris wrote: Would it be possible to know why so many will not be replaced and why Derelik will have only 2 on the same side of the map
Simply because there were so many Amarr highsec ice belts that the addition of supply as a meaningful concept for ice would have skewed the market too far towards Amarr towers. When we we deciding what belts to remove we considered geography, (including across regions, often when one area of a region seems empty it's because there's an ice belt just across the border in another region) and we also considered the volume of ice being mined there over the past several months. When we had two similar ice belts and had to remove one of them, we'd generally keep the most popular one as to cause the smallest disruption possible to the local miners. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6055
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:45:00 -
[1276] - Quote
We also have one other change to announce from the plan posted in the numbers dev blog. Due to a technical issue, the Outpost booster manufacturing slot numbers will not be changing. All the other outpost changes are going ahead as planned, except for the booster manufacturing slots which will be keeping their pre-Odyssey values. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Kaetti
Hawking Applied Sciences Institute
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:06:00 -
[1277] - Quote
Will you change the amount of mexallon in the belt? Because with the new numbers there is a severe lack of mexallon in all 5 0.0 belts |
Drago Morris
The reality disfunction
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 17:46:00 -
[1278] - Quote
Drago Morris wrote: Would it be possible to know why so many will not be replaced and why Derelik will have only 2 on the same side of the map
CCP Fozzie wrote: Simply because there were so many Amarr highsec ice belts that the addition of supply as a meaningful concept for ice would have skewed the market too far towards Amarr towers. When we we deciding what belts to remove we considered geography, (including across regions, often when one area of a region seems empty it's because there's an ice belt just across the border in another region) and we also considered the volume of ice being mined there over the past several months. When we had two similar ice belts and had to remove one of them, we'd generally keep the most popular one as to cause the smallest disruption possible to the local miners.
Whilst I do not doubt your logic that there are too many Ammar Hi Sec Ice belts would it be possible for you to have another look at the overall numbers and distribution because having looked at the maps i think you may have overdone it.
Please bear in mind a great many players simply mine ice to fuel their own pos to carry out research and manufacturing, activities i think you must agree that are fundamental to our game |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 19:58:00 -
[1279] - Quote
Still not sure why there is so much disparity in the metamaterial compositions...
For instance, right now, Plasmonic catches a huge break, requiring a R64, 2x R16 and a R8...everything else has 1 of each rarity.
But, upon closer examination, there is a disparity already built into the racial materials...(e.g. Rolled Tungsten Alloy requires R8 + R32, whereas the rest require R8 + R16)
My suggestion would be a wider sweep of material adjustments...
Photonic Metamaterials - Crystallite Alloy (Cobalt + Cadmium) + Thulium Hafnite (Thulium + Hafnium) Plasmonic Metamaterials - Fernite Alloy (Scandium + Vanadium) + Neo Technite (Neodymium + Technetium) <= new Terahertz Metamaterials - Rolled Tungsten Alloy (Tungsten + Mercury <= change) + Promethium Platnite (Promethium + Platinum) <= new Nonlinear Metamaterials - Titanium Chromide (Titanium + Chromium) + Caesarium Dysporite (Dysprosium + Caesium) <= new
This would give each metamaterial a spread of each rarity R8-R64, while leveling out the usage of the R32/R64s, and flattening out the cost of racial materials too.
Clearly, this could be swapped around some to meet regional materials, or regional materials could be adjusted. My best advice would be a complete cataclysmic randomization (a capsuleer accidently activates ancient Jove technology that sweeps across the universe) of moon materials within regions to put everyone on equal footing, and make for an interesting resources race. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6068
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 13:29:00 -
[1280] - Quote
Laendra wrote: For instance, right now, Plasmonic catches a huge break, requiring a R64, 2x R16 and a R8...everything else has 1 of each rarity.
But, upon closer examination, there is a disparity already built into the racial materials...(e.g. Rolled Tungsten Alloy requires R8 + R32, whereas the rest require R8 + R16)
Neither of these statements is correct, so you may want to double check your numbers. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Aegis Solaris
1892
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 15:43:00 -
[1281] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Drago Morris wrote: Would it be possible to know why so many will not be replaced and why Derelik will have only 2 on the same side of the map
Simply because there were so many Amarr highsec ice belts that the addition of supply as a meaningful concept for ice would have skewed the market too far towards Amarr towers. When we we deciding what belts to remove we considered geography, (including across regions, often when one area of a region seems empty it's because there's an ice belt just across the border in another region) and we also considered the volume of ice being mined there over the past several months. When we had two similar ice belts and had to remove one of them, we'd generally keep the most popular one as to cause the smallest disruption possible to the local miners. CCP Fozzie, the new distribution has one odd property.
Say I log in my ice miner and see there is no spawn. What to do? Go to another system! Well, in Gallente, Matari, and Caldari space there are places where there are three or more ice systems all within a couple of jumps of each other.
But not in Amarr space. There the closest pair of systems are 5 or 6 jumps apart. In other space you can check in just a couple of minutes if there are any nearby spawns, but in Amarr space it will take 5 times as long to search out nearby ice systems to see if you can mine, or if its time to go do something else.
If we ever get new a starbase system, one thing I could like to have is a "remote scanner", that is a scanner I can place as a small starbase and it constantly scans the system. I can be anywhere, connect to the scanner and it tells me what anomalies are in its solar system without me having to travel there. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:25:00 -
[1282] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Laendra wrote: For instance, right now, Plasmonic catches a huge break, requiring a R64, 2x R16 and a R8...everything else has 1 of each rarity.
But, upon closer examination, there is a disparity already built into the racial materials...(e.g. Rolled Tungsten Alloy requires R8 + R32, whereas the rest require R8 + R16)
Neither of these statements is correct, so you may want to double check your numbers.
Hmmm, seems like I had my rarity switched around. Ignore my ramblings :)
Edit: It would be nice if the gases were equally used... Evap and Silicates, come on...give some love to Atm and Hyd... |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:49:00 -
[1283] - Quote
So, I just checked the rest of the usages, including alchemy...
R64 - Dysprosium - 3 Reactions R64 - Promethium - 2 Reactions R64 - Neodymium - 3 Reactions R64 - Thulium - 2 Reactions
R64s - fairly even
R32 - Caesium - 2 Reactions R32 - Hafnium- 5 Reactions R32 - Mercury- 6 Reactions R32 - Technetium - 1 Reaction
R32 disparity? I think so...even it out some, or you are going to favor one area of the universe vs another.
R16 - Cadmium - 7 Reactions R16 - Chromium - 6 Reactions R16 - Platinum - 6 Reactions R16 - Vanadium - 7 Reactions
R-16s - fairly even
R8 - Cobalt - 4 Reactions R8 - Scandium - 3 Reactions R8 - Titanium - 3 Reactions R8 - Tungsten - 2 Reactions
R8 disparity - take a Cobalt and make it a Tungsten to even it out, from the Alchemy reactions
G - Atmospheric Gases - 3 Reaction G - Evaporite Deposits - 5 Reactions G - Hydrocarbons - 2 Reactions G - Silicates - 4 Reactions
Gas disparity - take a Evaporite Deposit and make it a Hydrocarbon (preferably from the Intermediates and not Alchemy) |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7990
|
Posted - 2013.05.25 06:57:00 -
[1284] - Quote
if your changes turn out to "ruin the 0.0 community" are you going to break your cycle to fix everything and get it back to an imbalanced state for us ASAP like you did for the incursion communities, which probably have a lower percentage of "people who actually pay out of pocket for eve online" than every other group in the game, including full-time wormhole dwellers mine quotes from my posts at your peril, badposters
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. |
kyrieee
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
133
|
Posted - 2013.05.26 17:27:00 -
[1285] - Quote
Laendra wrote:So, I just checked the rest of the usages, including alchemy...
All reactions are not consumed equally. You need to do a deeper analysis. |
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 03:59:00 -
[1286] - Quote
kyrieee wrote:Laendra wrote:So, I just checked the rest of the usages, including alchemy... All reactions are not consumed equally.
Thank you for your response Captain Obvious
I was merely referring to the usages inside defined reactions, not the actual usages of those reactions, something that only the devs themselves could, maybe, determine by mining the data from the database, and not something us mere mortals could dig into.
But, since you seem to be a dev yourself, why not enlighten us with how often each of the reactions are actually created (via normal reactions and via alchemy) and then tell us how much is actually used (vs how many are merely sold) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6101
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 10:19:00 -
[1287] - Quote
Laendra wrote:kyrieee wrote:Laendra wrote:So, I just checked the rest of the usages, including alchemy... All reactions are not consumed equally. Thank you for your response Captain Obvious I was merely referring to the usages inside defined reactions, not the actual usages of those reactions, something that only the devs themselves could, maybe, determine by mining the data from the database, and not something us mere mortals could dig into. But, since you seem to be a dev yourself, why not enlighten us with how often each of the reactions are actually created (via normal reactions and via alchemy) and then tell us how much is actually used (vs how many are merely sold)
It is possible for players to use the information available to them to get a fairly accurate estimate of the usage of each reaction, although the exact numbers are kept under wraps by CCP.
However, let me assure you that I was aware of all those numbers when I made this design. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6101
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 11:13:00 -
[1288] - Quote
Hey everyone, got one more update to provide to you all.
Unfortunately this change mentioned in the dev blog:
Quote:In order to encourage competition for the best mining systems and to bring adequate rewards to fully upgrading the Ore Prospecting Array, we will also be adding new variations of the Extra Large and Giant Asteroid Clusters that will only be found in locations with excellent system quality (truesec). These belts will contain improved (+5% and +10%) variations of the ore that can be found in their standard versions.
Will not be able to make it into the initial Odyssey release. It's still very high on our backlog, but as usual I can't promise anything until we have had a chance to release plan it for the 1.1 patch. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
MainDrain
7th Deepari Defence Armada Apocalypse Now.
209
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 12:25:00 -
[1289] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:
If we ever get new a starbase system, one thing I could like to have is a "remote scanner", that is a scanner I can place as a small starbase and it constantly scans the system. I can be anywhere, connect to the scanner and it tells me what anomalies are in its solar system without me having to travel there.
This i like, im fairly sure there was a similar POS module in days gone by that was pulled called a System scanner (may be unrelated, ive just seen it on market) |
Psihius
S-DNK U.C.F. Alliance
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 12:57:00 -
[1290] - Quote
I'm monitoring the ore/mineral market and it seems that ore changes actually have some dips in relative value, where some low-sec ores provide more value than some 0.0 exclusive ores.
Just take a look at this spreadsheet: Current numbers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmJ6H6s5fsbBdDlpSTVjYlF2ZDRBak1nSlNDRWF6eVE&hl=en_US#gid=0 Odyssey adjusted numbers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmJ6H6s5fsbBdDlpSTVjYlF2ZDRBak1nSlNDRWF6eVE&hl=en_US#gid=33
Spodumain has a big dip in it's price even with adjusted numbers, and actually Hemorphite and Hedbergite have more value than Gneiss, Dark Ochre, Spodumain, Crokite and Bistot. And though I expect some adjustments for Gneiss, other ores will just decrease in value as tritanium and peyrite adjust, it does not really affect Hemorphite and Hedbergite because of their composition.
Any plans to make some adjustments or further balancing will be done post-Odyssey? |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9579
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 14:19:00 -
[1291] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone, got one more update to provide to you all. Unfortunately this change mentioned in the dev blog: Quote:In order to encourage competition for the best mining systems and to bring adequate rewards to fully upgrading the Ore Prospecting Array, we will also be adding new variations of the Extra Large and Giant Asteroid Clusters that will only be found in locations with excellent system quality (truesec). These belts will contain improved (+5% and +10%) variations of the ore that can be found in their standard versions. will not be able to make it into the initial Odyssey release. It's still very high on our backlog, but as usual I can't promise anything until we have had a chance to release plan it into the 1.1 patch development schedule.
As long as it doesn't get forgotten, a small delay is no biggie.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Laendra
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2013.05.27 15:38:00 -
[1292] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: It is possible for players to use the information available to them to get a fairly accurate estimate of the usage of each reaction, although the exact numbers are kept under wraps by CCP.
However, let me assure you that I was aware of all those numbers when I made this design.
Really? I'd love to know how I could find out how much Neo Mercurite is produced overall (not just sold on the market, or produced into something useful and sold), and of that amount, how much is produced via alchemy vs standard reactions...and then repeat that information for every reaction. That'd be an awesome trick for the standard player to pull off. |
Sassums
Wormhole Exploration Crew R.E.P.O.
78
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 21:56:00 -
[1293] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Sassums wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Sassums wrote:Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster).
It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward?
This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed. If you don't like it, go to highsec. Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. Being able to instantly warp to a miner is hardly a challenge. If you had issues finding miners before you just had no idea what you were doing. Good WH scouts could pin a miner in under 30 seconds. Which at least is a fraction of a fighting chance compared to point, click, warp. WOW, right over your head. Yes it is easy to scan down either the grav site, or the ship in the grav site. Both methods however need a probe launcher on your ship. And if the miner sees a red or neut in the system they just have to watch D-scan for probes. Risky? Yes but manageable as most PVPers roaming null sec do not fit a probe launcher. As a result the risk vs reward is balanced. the increase this change will do for miners is much less from the fact that the belts are easier to find, it is from the fact that now every ship will be able to find them. 30 seconds down to 10 seconds to get the warp point is not the problem. The problem is before only about 10% of the roamers had a probe launcher and were an actual threat, every ship in the game has a system scanner. So now 100% of the roaming ships are a threat. Sure in W-space the impact is much smaller. But most wormhole dwellers have adeveloped a second nature for watching D-scan for threats, If you are ratting, or mining, or anything else in a wormhole site, you just watch for combat probes on D-scan. How do you suggest you acheive that same risk mitigation when there are no combat probes to see on D-scan. That 30 second window is small but enough for an alert pilot to GTFO. With not needing probes out at all to find you that 30 second warning becomes zero.
Right over your head actually - Null Sec has a warning the second someone jumps into the system. It's called Local.
Seeing as I live in WH Space - the minute a new WH appears and someone jumps in, I have no idea. All they have to do is fire their scanner and warp to the Ore sites like you would to an anom and bam they have me.
Explain how that is balanced?
Once again they are catering to the null sec folks. |
Loan--Wolf
Ace's And 8's
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 02:03:00 -
[1294] - Quote
eve is a school yard full of bullies and ccp likes it that way i personally cant afford to sub 4 accounts and a pos so ill be leaving soon been fun |
Jed Clampett
The Order Of Viision Brothers of Apocrypha.
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 06:58:00 -
[1295] - Quote
CCP finally goes to where it should have started.
The Ice anomalies strategy is much more fair in distributing mining opportunities throughout various logon times than mining belts . It makes true bots a bit harder to operate both getting started and over sustained time. (Though frankly bots sound like mostly urban legend compared to massive multi-box. One guy in Solitude is running 11 toons to mine with cloned names.)
Reducing ice belts to 80% limited resource gives a real reason to move out of hi sec. It reflects a heavy prior mining of hi sec. Perhaps lo sec and null should have some limited life roid ice belts to reflect a less mining depleted area....or just much larger deposits in ice anomalies. I would suggest CCP slowly creep % from hi sec down to 60% over next year or two.
CCP should do the same for ore. Belts could be left as permanent part of "anomalies" but be mostly worthless scattered slag from past mining.
Consider gating anomalies to reflect NPC megacorp influence (ownership) and noobs. Gates might limit ship sizes or impose fee by mining/hauling ability. Thus distribution of ore is not only across time zones but favors those folk still training and less lo sec ready. |
Udonor
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 07:18:00 -
[1296] - Quote
Gated resource belts or anomalies in hi sec?
Well I guess that makes sense. NPC Megacorps would have claimed some sort of rights on most hi sec ore, at least in belts.
But government probably forces them to give limited free licensed access to miners in training (noobs) . Say 1M m3 of each ore. Probably some additional ore mining could be licensed for a fee -- though if CCP wants people to leave hi sec when toons mature the amount should be finite one time buy.
Gates could decrement that ore license by one cargohold worth each time you enter regardless of if in mining ship or hauler. That would discourage huge mining fleets from raping hi sec resources and force those mature toons into lo, null or wh. Heh when your license expires you can still mine but now you are just another red cross rat in the belt unprotected by CONCORD. Maybe you get bounty based on amount mined/hauled without license.
And the possibilities for piracy would be amazing if the mining license was a physical "bearer bond" type item in cargo. It could be sold on market for profit. But more likely CODE could finally govern high sec mining with an iron hand...much like how RL unions and the mob control certain RL businesses. Better economics for the future of EVE. |
Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
624
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:58:00 -
[1297] - Quote
Sassums wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Sassums wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Vaju Enki wrote: quote=Sassums -- Whatever Fozzie is smoking either A isn't enough, or B needs to be shared because to think the risk vs reward by changing the way grav sites are discovered is laughable at best. Making something easier is only something SOE would do (See their SWG disaster). -- It makes absolutely no sense for me to be able to instantly warp to a hidden Grav Site within a WH and destroy the folks mining there without as much as a single form of warning. The only warning they have is if someone within the corp or alliance in the WH system happens to scan and see a new signature appear or if the miner happens to D-Scan before the hostile vessel can cloak. Please enlighten me as to how this is risk vs reward? -- This is simply huge risk. No Reward. The amount of 200mil + Mining vessels that will be lost hardly makes up for the isk regained from mining. I'm sorry but your logic is severely flawed.
If you don't like it, go to highsec.
Except that one of the driving factors behind odyssey is supposed to be encouraging more players to move out of high sec, not those already gone to come running back. If your solution to Odyssey is go back to high sec, than Odyseey is a failed expansion. Being able to instantly warp to a miner is hardly a challenge. If you had issues finding miners before you just had no idea what you were doing. Good WH scouts could pin a miner in under 30 seconds. Which at least is a fraction of a fighting chance compared to point, click, warp. WOW, right over your head. Yes it is easy to scan down either the grav site, or the ship in the grav site. Both methods however need a probe launcher on your ship. And if the miner sees a red or neut in the system they just have to watch D-scan for probes. Risky? Yes but manageable as most PVPers roaming null sec do not fit a probe launcher. As a result the risk vs reward is balanced. the increase this change will do for miners is much less from the fact that the belts are easier to find, it is from the fact that now every ship will be able to find them. 30 seconds down to 10 seconds to get the warp point is not the problem. The problem is before only about 10% of the roamers had a probe launcher and were an actual threat, every ship in the game has a system scanner. So now 100% of the roaming ships are a threat. Sure in W-space the impact is much smaller. But most wormhole dwellers have adeveloped a second nature for watching D-scan for threats, If you are ratting, or mining, or anything else in a wormhole site, you just watch for combat probes on D-scan. How do you suggest you acheive that same risk mitigation when there are no combat probes to see on D-scan. That 30 second window is small but enough for an alert pilot to GTFO. With not needing probes out at all to find you that 30 second warning becomes zero. Right over your head actually - Null Sec has a warning the second someone jumps into the system. It's called Local. Seeing as I live in WH Space - the minute a new WH appears and someone jumps in, I have no idea. All they have to do is fire their scanner and warp to the Ore sites like you would to an anom and bam they have me. Explain how that is balanced? Once again they are catering to the null sec folks.
The Grav sites moving to d-scannable anoms is complete and utter crap. This is a NERF to NULL a HUGE NERF to WH's.
Move "regular" belts (& ice) to d-scan sites.
Leave the Grav sites alone!! HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression - The only way to go! |
Jed Clampett
The Order Of Viision Brothers of Apocrypha.
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:54:00 -
[1298] - Quote
ROFLMAO - "speculators start your engines"
And with those words and the details on null sec ore enhancement Fozzie set off large EVEwide ripples of price hikes about 30 days early.
Why?Because I and every other miner able to do so has been holding back all their null sec ores if possible. Creating...gasp...an artificial shortage or megacyte and to less extent zydrine and even noxcium.
OK when 4 June gets here the prices for those minerals should plunge as glut follows famine for a couple weeks. The excess amounts mined and held will give way to new normal levels. One theory (CCPs) being that the newly balanced null ores will lead to mostly null self-contained mining and industry. But since null will likely still hate mining over pew pew...I wonder if megacyte exports will drop.
Yup if CCP is right they are basically predicting megacyte shortages in high and low sec as a self-sufficient null sec mostly leaves highsec industry to wither. All given that excess megacyte is no longer needed to fund imports of hi sec minerals in the CCP vision.
And of course ice product price will climb.
So thanks for the vision of doubling most prices CCP.
I the old days we could have recycled loot...but wait didn't CCP make sure to take most of that away a year or two ago?
I love it. CCP is finally realizing how to beat people with the economic stick to force most people to leave hi sec ASAP. |
Alundil
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
206
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 19:34:00 -
[1299] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.
What, exactly, is the point of this overly (purposely?) vague comment? We are talking about the one of the most defenseless hull type in the game (second only to freighters/variants).
What "challenge" to the player(s) are you referring to? Who is the "player" in your comment?
(disclaimer: I prefer to hunt and would rather log off than mine even under the current mechanics and only do so in the direst of needs - these new mechanics would ensure my flat refusal to fit a mining laser of any type, ever)
If you're suggesting to increase the challenge for players seeking to hunt and disrupt miners then you will fail at that goal and only succeed in making their jobs easier (read: LESS challenging). This is a group that needs no lowering of the entry barriers as it's already exceedingly easy to hunt and disrupt miners in all space other than HiSec space.
If you're suggesting to increase the challenge for players seeking to mine ore in any locale other than HiSec, congratulations. You've succeeded in making their jobs nigh on impossible (read: WH and 0.0/LoSec mining is already easily disrupted and very attention demanding. This is a group that needs no further increase in difficulties heaped upon them as mining in these areas is already far riskier than anywhere else.
I quite simply do not understand the concept or goals of this change. Please explain the reasoning behind this change. Otherwise it looks poorly thought-out at best and needlessly arbitrary and ignorant to your customers at worst. |
Sassums
Wormhole Exploration Crew R.E.P.O.
100
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 23:07:00 -
[1300] - Quote
Alundil wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:MT Sackett wrote:Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.
What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?
Thanks
We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us. What, exactly, is the point of this overly (purposely?) vague comment? We are talking about the one of the most defenseless hull type in the game (second only to freighters/variants). What "challenge" to the player(s) are you referring to? Who is the "player" in your comment? (disclaimer: I prefer to hunt and would rather log off than mine even under the current mechanics and only do so in the direst of needs - these new mechanics would ensure my flat refusal to fit a mining laser of any type, ever) If you're suggesting to increase the challenge for players seeking to hunt and disrupt miners then you will fail at that goal and only succeed in making their jobs easier (read: LESS challenging). This is a group that needs no lowering of the entry barriers as it's already exceedingly easy to hunt and disrupt miners in all space other than HiSec space. If you're suggesting to increase the challenge for players seeking to mine ore in any locale other than HiSec, congratulations. You've succeeded in making their jobs nigh on impossible (read: WH and 0.0/LoSec mining is already easily disrupted and very attention demanding. This is a group that needs no further increase in difficulties heaped upon them as mining in these areas is already far riskier than anywhere else. I quite simply do not understand the concept or goals of this change. Please explain the reasoning behind this change. Otherwise it looks poorly thought-out at best and needlessly arbitrary and ignorant to your customers at worst.
There is no challenge here, clearly CCP has no idea what they are doing, especially when it comes to WH's.
I jump into a WH in a stealth bomber. D-Scan, see there are Hulks on scan, fire off my onboard scanner (while staying cloaked). Warp to the belt. Kill you.
CCP has yet to explain how that is fair or balanced.
They are once again catering to the Null Sec folks who have this awesome warning called Local. We dont have that in WH space. Someone needs to removed whoever came up with this cockeyed idea. |
|
Teclador
Stardust Heavy Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
36
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 01:32:00 -
[1301] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Drago Morris wrote: Would it be possible to know why so many will not be replaced and why Derelik will have only 2 on the same side of the map
Simply because there were so many Amarr highsec ice belts that the addition of supply as a meaningful concept for ice would have skewed the market too far towards Amarr towers. When we we deciding what belts to remove we considered geography, (including across regions, often when one area of a region seems empty it's because there's an ice belt just across the border in another region) and we also considered the volume of ice being mined there over the past several months. When we had two similar ice belts and had to remove one of them, we'd generally keep the most popular one as to cause the smallest disruption possible to the local miners.
"Simply because there were so many Amarr highsec ice belts" - WHAT ???
Seriously @ CCP Fozzie, when did you lastly have a look at the Starmaps? Amarr is the System richest Region in whole Eve and with your changes you have to travel a hell more than in any other Region to reach an Ice belt.
The other side of the Medal is, that you remove Ice Belts without a closer look to there neighborhood systems with Ice in and the Systems remains with ice are worth nothing because of some factors like less other belts/system attractions or "on short words" in Systems with only a hand full of Moons.
Here as an example explained on Domain: Dotlan - Domain
As for instance "Bashakru", next nearest Ice Belt in 7 jumps, next two in 9 jumps.... Some part of this Region will getting dry.
And on your next Statement that "the Market is going too far towards Amarr Towers" i can say that there is not only the Amarr Tower that goes within this Math, whats about the Capital Ships or the other Towers (Usability) ? |
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
105
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 13:41:00 -
[1302] - Quote
Quote:As mentioned in the main blog, we are planning to increase the number of installations available in all player-built outposts, as well as increase the number of installations provided by outpost upgrades. There are no plans to change the special bonuses provided by outposts (such as manufacturing time bonuses) or the refining rates of outposts in Odyssey.
Quote:EVE Online: Odyssey will not be the last expansion to iterate on Outposts, as there are many other changes we expect to make before weGÇÖre done. However the installations added in Odyssey will be a very important improvement for nullsec industry and Outpost value.
With this in mind, I'd like to make a suggestion on refineries for later Odyssey patches.
Currently it's only possible to achieve a perfect refine rate at tier 1 Minmatar outposts. They start out with a base rate of 35%, then upgrade from tiers 1/2/3 to 40, 45, and 50% respectively. With good skills/implants you can get 100% rates at the tier 1 upgrade, and so virtually all Minmatar outposts built receive a tier 1 refine upgrade.
The other racial outposts currently have refinery upgrades but at extremely low rates of 10% / 20% / 30%. This is utterly pointless, as at best you will get around a 90% return and for less than the cost of this tier 3 upgrade an alliance can just put down a Minmatar station to get perfect refines.
To make refinery upgrades worth using for other racial outpost types, they should be buffed like so: Tier 1 = 20% Tier 2 = 30% Tier 3 = 40%
This means that it becomes possible to get perfect refines at non-Minmatar stations, but it is a huge investment and still requires decent skills to do so.
I'm also hoping we can get blueprints for the outpost upgrade platforms, as we already have for outpost eggs themselves. That way they can be player-produced instead of NPC-seeded in certain regions.
|
Ellendras Silver
Axial tilt
17
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 14:47:00 -
[1303] - Quote
Loan--Wolf wrote:eve is a school yard full of bullies and ccp likes it that way i personally cant afford to sub 4 accounts and a pos so ill be leaving soon been fun
can i have your stuff? |
Jin Rich
Entropy Extension
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:59:00 -
[1304] - Quote
Hey! I can't find Photonic Metamaterial Reaction blueprints on the market-window under "Manufacture & Research/Reactions/Complex Reactions" - it's not in the list and not displayed there. But when making a hyperlink to it in a chat window, and then right-clicking and choosing "view market details" I can find it. Bug in Market Window?
|
Shock
Interim Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 12:36:00 -
[1305] - Quote
I don't understand why CCP kept the respawn of Ice belts linked to the same systems.
It would have been much better to tie it back into exploration, making the ice belts respawn randomly within the region (maybe with some added weight to the original systems). And not these stupid anomalies, but proper signatures that need to be scanned down.
edit: sure, there are the casuals that just want to mine a bit without the hassle of chasing belts, but those still have ores available to them. Lazy labour doesn't deserve much profits. |
Benteen
Drone A.I. Servicing Inc.
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 09:43:00 -
[1306] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Ice anom sizes are tuned so that high sec is capable of providing about 80% of the ice needs of New Eden right now, if fully mined. GÇ£Fully minedGÇ¥ meaning 23.5/7, and every anomaly sucked dry, presumably? Sounds reasonably scarce. In my experience, not all ice fields were occupied, let alone 23/7. Some systems with multiple ice belts only had one belt commonly used. [Farewell to my quiet Amarrian systems.] I imagine a great deal of pressure on belts closest to hubs, and an initial shortage of ice products. Miners don't like to move, and might find other things to do with their time as a result.
I already have, enjoying playing another game due to RL job meaning I don't get anything to mine these days.
I used to mine ice because it was pretty much the only thing that was left by the time I was able to get online. Now the local belts have been removed completely (Molea system) and the nearest are mined out within minutes of spawning. Nice job CCP, you've managed to nuke one of the few things I could do without destroying my standings or getting blown to hell at a gate camp trying to find something to mine. Add in the lack of probe use to find the "hidden belts" due to that auto scanning feature and you end up with gankers having a field day due to reduced size of belts and ease of locating them. Probe use for finding them would have made mining a FAR more interesting profesion... but the scan changes removed that.
Pretty sure i'm not the only angry carebear right now (I have PvP'd but can't afford to do it all the time).
The pyramid of life has been disrupted, looking forward to seeing how PvP'ers like mining to build their opwn ships and ammo. |
Nemesis Bosseret
Dysfunctional Nocturnal Rejects
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 09:36:00 -
[1307] - Quote
joy forms are broken |
Nemesis Bosseret
Dysfunctional Nocturnal Rejects
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 09:36:00 -
[1308] - Quote
[/quote]
However the decision to move gravametric sites to anomalies just does not make sense to me. This is a totally different situation from the ICE belts. The ICE belts were static, that change just adds some depth. But gravametric sites require significant effort, equipment, and skills to find. Sure a skilled probe user can find them almost as easily as an anomaly, but they need the skills and equipment to do the job. Moving them to anomalies has basically dumbed them down. Now any idiot can find them without any scanning skills or effort. How is this an improvement?
On top of this we have the safety issue. Mining in null sec is barely doable as it is. Many do it, but the risk level is fairly high. Nobody mines in the static belts unless deep inside alliance territory where you never see a non blue. Null sec mining is restricted to gravametric sites, not just because they have better ores, but because they offer an added level of safety. This change removes that level of safety. You have commented that alliances will have to step up and protect their miners. Do you play the same EVE I do? That just will not happen.
No PVPer is going to drop whatever they are doing to go play babysitter to a bunch of miners. Some of the huge alliances may force members to do so, but I thought CCP wanted to support smaller groups rather than the huge blocks that make null sec so stagnant. This change does not support smaller groups trying to get a foot hold in null.
Why must EVE be made easier for gankers and harder for industrial players? Gankers have it far to easy already.
I know Odyssey was not about making players move to null sec. But I was under the impression that it was among other things about supporting and encouraging null sec industry. This change goes against the grain when compared to all the other changes Odyseey brings.[/quote]
Ok attempt Number 3 of posting this, and it glitching out..
As to ur direct assualt on CCP on nullsec and how nul sec industry kinda just got a kick to the gonads..... ummm yeah dude if u havent noticed since they started the incursion kick every new so called improvement has actually screwed indy guys everywhere first off faction ships... big issue if a faction ship is better than a T2 ship........ whats the point of me training for months to fly a T2 Marader or Black ops, when i can go get a nice shiny faction ship at half price and do the same thing............ or in some cases they broke the faction ships ie the bhaalgorn or curse by making the cheap T1 armegedon a Neut boat now........... or messing with cap supplies on the apoc, or screwing with the Reis
Lol Or my favorite nerf to date, BPO's to most major ships in the game adding the wonderful extra materials so now research is almost pointless and is slanted to keep everything balanced on prices when CCP gets a whim to change this. Fact is they claim they want all this nice stuff and for it to be balanced and o push people to null sec because it can be more lucrative truth is the more they mess with the game that they made that was great and go on the nerf nerd war and start breaking everything they set years ago for a reason they are just going to lose fan base, lose people subscribing, because whats the point.... i spend billions on BPO's and billions to fuel a stick but CCP doesnt like that i can make it 100 mil cheaper than everyone else so they go an add extra materals to my BPO and remove the amount that actually can get researched off?
this wanna be expansion to exploration if anything broke exploration and just made it so everyone could do it. and made any real scanners completely useless for there time and effort expended into the game getting good at it,
Rebalancing ships.......... pft, yeah ok rebalance them now, and in 6 months rebalance them again and again, and eventually no one will play. there is nothing balanced with how they are now, odviously no one in ccp really plays this game any more. or understands how a real pvper is going to sit and look at the mechanics and just tweek it to there advantage no matter what they do, of course unless ur in an WELP fleet and all u know how to do is push F1 thru F4 and thats it, which part of me thinking is what is happing because most of these rebalances or nerfs are kinda slanted to that kinda tactic, which leads me to believe that if anyone in CCP does play this game all they do is Welp fleet combat and never goes off on solo roams and if some how someone kills there shinny ship that it must be an imbalance in the ship or game mechanics. Just saying its what it looks like to me and alot of others.
All in all, every time i hear CCP is going to be adding some new wonderful patch, i sit and read patch notes and plug it into EFT/EVE HQ and try to figure out what they are going to screw up next, As to null sec industry............ LMFAO yeah ok, last i checked every indy i know has fled nul because it is a total waist of money to be out there, u can make the same isk if not more just running incursions or doing similar operations playing the market in High Sec, Nul sec is mostly a dead zone with a few groups with money fighting over the last resoarces they have left IE tech moons and the last real monopoly in the game, and if its not these groups its a few others sitting there trying to kill stuff, for some lost cause until they run outta money and are forced back to high sec... Which really it sucks, ive wanted to go to nul for years and every new patch that comes out pushes me further and further away from ever wanting to go out there, But ill go back to drinking and just popping stuff when i find it sitting in low. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 44 :: [one page] |