Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
333
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 20:20:00 -
[151] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote:They're not always built by the alliance, hence "or Alliance-bought."
This is a case where you want to say it's free because we mined it. That's not the case at all. It's not a planned economy, it's one based out of incentive and participation. It's a consumer-based economy.
When we buy Abaddons in high-sec (or guns to ship out to null to melt into Abaddons), we're interacting with high-sec. When the guns we buy are cheaper, the ships we make from them will be too. That's participatory consumer economics.
That pretty much shoots down all of your points.
Well if you are buying it from h-sec and hi-sec can only produce X amount of minerals, then shouldn't the prices remain the same. I mean hi-sec isn't getting a mineral buff, null-sec is. It is highly unlikley that null-sec is going to export their minerals to hi-sec as they claim to need it all. And its unlikley those null-sec alliances are going to manufacture goods in null and ship them to high either.
So if hi-sec doesn't get a boost of minerals, then won't the prices remain the same. There are course null sec alliances producing items in house (which I mentioned before) and selling it themselves at low prices because they like each other in the alliance.
But if you aren't doing that to buy your goods and still buy from hi-sec, then obviously you aren't mining your own minerals, then why would hi-sec mineral drop in prices by your agument?
Unless null exports its wealth to high, then its not going to happen.
If it keeps its wealth and makes my own goods, then yes, they are playing North Korea like I mentioned.
Unless, Null is going to export to hi and then complain about hi-sec industrialists making all the profits.
Notice my refutation isn't so personal. "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. |
Hae Sung
Da Learnin Corp
27
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:06:00 -
[152] - Quote
Captain Tardbar wrote: Well if you are buying it from h-sec and hi-sec can only produce X amount of minerals, then shouldn't the prices remain the same.
A couple of points:
1. Not all of the minerals in hisec are mined every day. Supply from just the low end belts in high security space has a ways to go until we reach a point where highsec is producing all that it can and supply cannot adjust to meet changing demand. I manage regularly to mine roughly 700m worth of low ends in a day 1 jump from a trade hub. 3 and 4 jumps away are systems with 10-15 belts that are barely touched as a matter of course.
2. For every unit of low ends that don't need to be mined in null, that's a corresponding unit that won't need to be purchased, compressed, and shipped out to null to be remelted down to feed the war forges. As Dave Stark and others have already pointed out in this thread, if a system is already mining out their hidden belts to force respawn, this will just mean a steady supply of some of the low ends that they will need to feed production locally. This will lower demand somewhat in highsec trade hubs that see a large amount of mineral compression and shipping.
Overall I foresee a slight drop in a couple of low ends, but nothing approximating an apocolyptic shift in the mineral landscape. As a person who focuses primarily on industry this mainly says to me that I can mine most of what I need now in null and has me actively looking as of yesterday's keynote speech for decent fits for my industry characters. Giving people a reason to be in null and out of highsec while not gutting highsec completely seems like a win-win in my book.
|
Captain Tardbar
NEWB ALERT
333
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:20:00 -
[153] - Quote
Hae Sung wrote:Captain Tardbar wrote: Well if you are buying it from h-sec and hi-sec can only produce X amount of minerals, then shouldn't the prices remain the same. A couple of points: 1. Not all of the minerals in hisec are mined every day. Supply from just the low end belts in high security space has a ways to go until we reach a point where highsec is producing all that it can and supply cannot adjust to meet changing demand. I manage regularly to mine roughly 700m worth of low ends in a day 1 jump from a trade hub. 3 and 4 jumps away are systems with 10-15 belts that are barely touched as a matter of course. 2. For every unit of low ends that don't need to be mined in null, that's a corresponding unit that won't need to be purchased, compressed, and shipped out to null to be remelted down to feed the war forges. As Dave Stark and others have already pointed out in this thread, if a system is already mining out their hidden belts to force respawn, this will just mean a steady supply of some of the low ends that they will need to feed production locally. This will lower demand somewhat in highsec trade hubs that see a large amount of mineral compression and shipping. Overall I foresee a slight drop in a couple of low ends, but nothing approximating an apocolyptic shift in the mineral landscape. As a person who focuses primarily on industry this mainly says to me that I can mine most of what I need now in null and has me actively looking as of yesterday's keynote speech for decent fits for my industry characters. Giving people a reason to be in null and out of highsec while not gutting highsec completely seems like a win-win in my book.
*does a Philip J Fry squint*
Can't tell if this an agreement or a round about way of telling me otherwise.
Yeah, if null still has to buy from hi-sec it means hi-sec minerals are still in demand so therefore will not drop in large price amounts.
If the alternative is true, and that Null is mining, manufacturing, and selling items to themselves it still proves my point as they aren't involved with high-sec anymores.
"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. |
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
595
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:30:00 -
[154] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:then he's lying that that they leave the BC hanging then, because to cycle it you have to mine the B and C ores.
this guy chronically posts misinformation or whines, he's the only person on the forums who i'd gladly not miss if he was forum banned or worse.
Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you'd understand what I'm saying.
1) I'm a high sec carebear. I'm telling you from past experience when I lived in null, and what friends tell me now.
2) they have system upgraded to 5. They cherry pick out the small, medium, extra large, and giant. They prioritize Ark, mexallon (Plag, Kern, Pyrox), the H rocks, veld/scord. Sometimes they take the B and C from those belts, sometimes not.
Then, they cycle the large several times a day.
3) To maintain industry 5, they have to mine 12 million M3 a day. The large is 5.4 million m3. cycling it 2-3 times a day is sufficient to maintain industry 5.
4) I never said they cherry pick the large. They cherry pick the other 4, and cycle the large.
|
Dave Stark
2910
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 21:41:00 -
[155] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote:Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you'd understand what I'm saying.
LHA Tarawa wrote:as null miners start going after the B and C they currently leave sit now
i did read what you wrote, but frankly your english is lacking and i had to guess at what you meant. |
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
595
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:23:00 -
[156] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you'd understand what I'm saying. LHA Tarawa wrote:as null miners start going after the B and C they currently leave sit now i did read what you wrote, but frankly your english is lacking and i had to guess at what you meant.
I don't understand what you are having problems understanding.
Dominion made it possible to cycle null clusters. The result was to push the isk/hr of high end minerals down to the profitability of high. Once B and C profitability was on par with high end ores, null miners started focusing more on "what they need" rather than the race to cherry pick the ABCs.
B and C became no more profitable, but less needed than, say the trit/pyr/mex. As a result, they became pretty low on the cherry picking priority list. Null sec miners, in at least some locations, cherry pick the non-large clusters, and then cycle just the large. The large has a good Ark/mexallon ratio... the profit and needs that they use to make the decisions.
As a result of not being more profitable, and not providing minerals that are the null bottlenecks, they let a lot of B and C go unmined in the non-large clusters.
NOW, with B and C providing trit and pyrite (needed for bottlenecks), I suspect that they will no longer be left behind. The result would be, I suspect, crashing prices of high end ores, as they become the left-over by product of null trit and pyrite mining.
|
Dave Stark
2912
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:31:00 -
[157] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote:Dave Stark wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you'd understand what I'm saying. LHA Tarawa wrote:as null miners start going after the B and C they currently leave sit now i did read what you wrote, but frankly your english is lacking and i had to guess at what you meant. I don't understand what you are having problems understanding. Dominion made it possible to cycle null clusters. The result was to push the isk/hr of high end minerals down to the profitability of high. Once B and C profitability was on par with high end ores, null miners started focusing more on "what they need" rather than the race to cherry pick the ABCs. B and C became no more profitable, but less needed than, say the trit/pyr/mex. As a result, they became pretty low on the cherry picking priority list. Null sec miners, in at least some locations, cherry pick the non-large clusters, and then cycle just the large. The large has a good Ark/mexallon ratio... the profit and needs that they use to make the decisions. As a result of not being more profitable, and not providing minerals that are the null bottlenecks, they let a lot of B and C go unmined in the non-large clusters. NOW, with B and C providing trit and pyrite (needed for bottlenecks), I suspect that they will no longer be left behind. The result would be, I suspect, crashing prices of high end ores, as they become the left-over by product of null trit and pyrite mining.
right i see, if you had actually formed a coherent sentence to begin with, we could have avoided this.
and no, cherry picking different asteroids from non-large grav sites won't really impact the market. any market impact will be due to the cycling of the large grav sites. the volume of ore per 4 days from other grav sites just isn't significant enough to make a noticable impact. |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
335
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:31:00 -
[158] - Quote
Now I need popcorn for both the skill and mining changes.
This cannot end well. I'll be short on popcorn. Really CCP, what do you think you're doing? Remove insurance. |
Kharamete
Feral Solutions Inc
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 22:59:00 -
[159] - Quote
If the OP would just calm down a bit and think about it, he will understand that what CCP is doing is restricting supply of ice. Ice mining changes is a buff, not a nerf
That supply is provided in large part by high-sec today. There are vast networks of POS:es in null, all those Tech-moon mining poses for instance, that require a constant supply of fuel. In addition the whole of the cap ship fleets depend on ice products that are imported from high sec today, and which will be imported from high sec in two months time still - except at a higher price.
The pressure on High Sec ice will continue to be high. Except now there is a restricted supply. Prices will go up and up and up. There won't be that many more ice-miners in null-sec either if you think about what is also coming; the change to how the ice belts are placed coupled with the change to 'warp to zero on ice miners'. CCP has just given a new method to screw with alliances. If their ice systems are camped, they won't mine.
If they are desensitised to afk cloakers in the minings systems and start to mine, they will die horribly. If I wanted to shut an alliance down, I would certainly perma cloak in their ice systems and have black ops ships on standby. This time the afk cloaking wouldn't just deny individual members isk, it would also be a strategic warfare thing to deny the target alliance their capital ship fuel and their POS fuel. Oh yes. To prevent this, many members would be tied down in watching over the miners. There are so many sweet things going that I'm dizzy.
So, this is why high sec will still supply the vast bulk of ice. But at a much higher price. So, it is a buff. Not a nerf. And if you would think beyond your immediate agenda, you would see this. It's like always with CCP. Be careful what you ask for, you may very well get it.
Oh, and buy Amarr towers and Amarr caps. There's a pro-market tip for you. |
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
595
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:05:00 -
[160] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:If the OP would just calm down a bit and think about it, he will understand that what CCP is doing is restricting supply of ice. Ice mining changes is a buff, not a nerf
But, with half the cycle time, are you sure ice mining in null won't increase to more than fill the gap? |
|
Kharamete
Feral Solutions Inc
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:06:00 -
[161] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote:Kharamete wrote:If the OP would just calm down a bit and think about it, he will understand that what CCP is doing is restricting supply of ice. Ice mining changes is a buff, not a nerf
But, with half the cycle time, are you sure ice mining in null won't increase to more than fill the gap?
Does cycle time matter if people don't undock due to the perma-cloaked camper in the system? :D |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:07:00 -
[162] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:If the OP would just calm down a bit and think about it, he will understand that what CCP is doing is restricting supply of ice. Ice mining changes is a buff, not a nerf
That supply is provided in large part by high-sec today. There are vast networks of POS:es in null, all those Tech-moon mining poses for instance, that require a constant supply of fuel. In addition the whole of the cap ship fleets depend on ice products that are imported from high sec today, and which will be imported from high sec in two months time still - except at a higher price.
The pressure on High Sec ice will continue to be high. Except now there is a restricted supply. Prices will go up and up and up. There won't be that many more ice-miners in null-sec either if you think about what is also coming; the change to how the ice belts are placed coupled with the change to 'warp to zero on ice miners'. CCP has just given a new method to screw with alliances. If their ice systems are camped, they won't mine.
If they are desensitised to afk cloakers in the minings systems and start to mine, they will die horribly. If I wanted to shut an alliance down, I would certainly perma cloak in their ice systems and have black ops ships on standby. This time the afk cloaking wouldn't just deny individual members isk, it would also be a strategic warfare thing to deny the target alliance their capital ship fuel and their POS fuel. Oh yes. To prevent this, many members would be tied down in watching over the miners. There are so many sweet things going that I'm dizzy.
So, this is why high sec will still supply the vast bulk of ice. But at a much higher price. So, it is a buff. Not a nerf. And if you would think beyond your immediate agenda, you would see this. It's like always with CCP. Be careful what you ask for, you may very well get it.
Oh, and buy Amarr towers and Amarr caps. There's a pro-market tip for you.
Oh, I'm not worried about ice prices. It's just there is no more ice mining and a new process of ice camping is introduced. Should ice prices rise and ore prices drop, we will get enough ice miners in hisec to cover every spawn 23/7, so that nobody gets the ice, unless he can camp it. That is what I'm worried about.
|
Kharamete
Feral Solutions Inc
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:13:00 -
[163] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote: Oh, I'm not worried about ice prices. It's just there is no more ice mining and a new process of ice camping is introduced. Should ice prices rise and ore prices drop, we will get enough ice miners in hisec to cover every spawn 23/7, so that nobody gets the ice, unless he can camp it. That is what I'm worried about.
But you are forgetting that there will ALSO be a cap on the amount of ice in High Sec to 80 percent of consumption. There will be a permanent shortage. Shortages leads to increased prices. People in High Sec will mine ice, all the ice, every gram of ice, and there will still be a large shortage. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:16:00 -
[164] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote: Oh, I'm not worried about ice prices. It's just there is no more ice mining and a new process of ice camping is introduced. Should ice prices rise and ore prices drop, we will get enough ice miners in hisec to cover every spawn 23/7, so that nobody gets the ice, unless he can camp it. That is what I'm worried about.
But you are forgetting that there will ALSO be a cap on the amount of ice in High Sec to 80 percent of consumption. There will be a permanent shortage. Shortages leads to increased prices. People in High Sec will mine ice, all the ice, every gram of ice, and there will still be a large shortage.
And more people in hisec mining ice means less ice per person, means nerf to our profits. |
Kharamete
Feral Solutions Inc
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:18:00 -
[165] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Kharamete wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote: Oh, I'm not worried about ice prices. It's just there is no more ice mining and a new process of ice camping is introduced. Should ice prices rise and ore prices drop, we will get enough ice miners in hisec to cover every spawn 23/7, so that nobody gets the ice, unless he can camp it. That is what I'm worried about.
But you are forgetting that there will ALSO be a cap on the amount of ice in High Sec to 80 percent of consumption. There will be a permanent shortage. Shortages leads to increased prices. People in High Sec will mine ice, all the ice, every gram of ice, and there will still be a large shortage. And more people in hisec mining ice means less ice per person, means nerf to our profits.
Just shoot the other miners. All it takes is a couple of catalysts and some blasters. Now you get it all for yourself. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:19:00 -
[166] - Quote
Kharamete wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:Kharamete wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote: Oh, I'm not worried about ice prices. It's just there is no more ice mining and a new process of ice camping is introduced. Should ice prices rise and ore prices drop, we will get enough ice miners in hisec to cover every spawn 23/7, so that nobody gets the ice, unless he can camp it. That is what I'm worried about.
But you are forgetting that there will ALSO be a cap on the amount of ice in High Sec to 80 percent of consumption. There will be a permanent shortage. Shortages leads to increased prices. People in High Sec will mine ice, all the ice, every gram of ice, and there will still be a large shortage. And more people in hisec mining ice means less ice per person, means nerf to our profits. Just shoot the other miners. All it takes is a couple of catalysts and some blasters. Now you get it all for yourself.
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping. |
FlamesOfHeaven
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:25:00 -
[167] - Quote
Oh come on, you guys knew it comining since forever. Harden up and adapt to the new changes. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:27:00 -
[168] - Quote
FlamesOfHeaven wrote:Oh come on, you guys knew it comining since forever. Harden up and adapt to the new changes.
"Nullsec or Die" dilemma is hardly adaption. |
Bolow Santosi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:31:00 -
[169] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping.
War Dec them or start bringing logistics to ice belts to prevent ganks. |
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:37:00 -
[170] - Quote
Bolow Santosi wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping.
War Dec them or start bringing logistics to ice belts to prevent ganks.
War Dec is the greatest idea ever. Now they can gank you with battleships instead of catalysts, and get to keep them! I can't express how unthoughtful this idea is.
So now I have to bring a logi for every mining ship. What's next? logi for every logi? logi for every logi for every logi?
Neither of your suggestions fix Ice Camping. |
|
sci0gon
Tech X Blue Print Creations Superior Eve Engineering
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:25:00 -
[171] - Quote
Ari Laveran wrote:*Having trouble discerning if OP is trolling or not. I doubt its a troll theres been several ppl complaining in the minerals trade chan about this
Singulis Pacifica wrote:Except of course....the fact that you're now never safe as a miner and need to... dare I say it... tank your mining vessel?
that really depends on where people are mining tbh, miners aren't safe in caldari space as it is lol
at the end of the day mins always change and if they go back to the old days where trit used to be around 2.43 p/u I wouldn't mind however as the price changes so does the price of the things you can build with them. so bare that in mind guys especially if you want to keep getting cheap gear |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:26:00 -
[172] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Bolow Santosi wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping.
War Dec them or start bringing logistics to ice belts to prevent ganks. War Dec is the greatest idea ever. Now they can gank you with battleships instead of catalysts, and get to keep them! I can't express how unthoughtful this idea is. So now I have to bring a logi for every mining ship. What's next? logi for every logi? logi for every logi for every logi? Neither of your suggestions fix Ice Camping.
And words cannot express how much of an unthoughtful sad sack you are.
You don't want to team up with other players. You don't want to mine anything that requires you to move so much as 1m for hours on end. And ice is already crap because it is so easy that some one has already posted in this very forum that they mine the stuff with 100 accounts at the same time, while at work.
You are worried that ice belts will get camped? You can't mine any of the ore in the belts? Move on the production?
You are just happy being the lowest of the low, mining stuff with a price that has been driven into the ground by being the single most ridiculous handout in all of eve? |
WTFAMILOOKINGAT
Horizon Research Group
36
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:32:00 -
[173] - Quote
This is an outrage. |
Bolow Santosi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:51:00 -
[174] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Bolow Santosi wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping.
War Dec them or start bringing logistics to ice belts to prevent ganks. War Dec is the greatest idea ever. Now they can gank you with battleships instead of catalysts, and get to keep them! I can't express how unthoughtful this idea is. So now I have to bring a logi for every mining ship. What's next? logi for every logi? logi for every logi for every logi? Neither of your suggestions fix Ice Camping.
Do you know how logistics ships even work? You could lock up a decent sized mining fleet sit 70k away in an orbit with an AB or MWD on and be nearly untouchable. Have your dudes mining broadcast when they get yellow boxed and your solid.
Unfortunately this requires the people participating to pay attention, or rather 1 dude paying attention so he can alert everyone.
|
Arronicus
Shadows of Vorlon The Marmite Collective
582
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:51:00 -
[175] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:LHA Tarawa wrote:Dave Stark wrote: some body in null sec is mining them, or the industry index of the system would decay and they'd have no grav sites to mine in. trust me, asteroids aren't just "left there".
They cycle the large to get at the ark, Kern, Hs, etc. That is enough to keep industry up. A lot of the B and C in the other clusters are left to pop on auto recycle. Again, the beauty is, we'll see. no it isn't. 6m m3 per day to keep an index of 3. over 4 days, that's 24m m3 the sum total of small, med, and large grav sites is... 23940050 as we can see. you're a liar because you're already running a deficit before we remove the BC ores from the calculation. please, stop lying or stop posting. i don't mind which.
It's pretty blatantly clear to me, that you have no idea how sites respawn. As soon as you mine out a site, completely, of all its minerals, it respawns in about 5 minutes. Thus, you can mine out the large site repeatedly, over and over and over, 3 or 5 or 6 times a day if you have enough miners going. Only takes 10 hulks and a rorq something like 3 or 4 hours, and I've run into a lot of people with 6-12 hulk accounts.
Since the small and med have tons of worthless or near worthless minerals, yes indeed, you do just cycle the large and it IS enough to keep the industry up. Perhaps you should try actually mining in 0.0 |
Corey Fumimasa
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
321
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 01:04:00 -
[176] - Quote
I read this whole damned thread and I still don't know if I can finally mine or not. Slavery is self choosen, only the unclaimed are not free.
...Book of Reclaiming: Hall of the Goat
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
235
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 01:21:00 -
[177] - Quote
Corey Fumimasa wrote:I read this whole damned thread and I still don't know if I can finally mine or not. You can. |
ACE McFACE
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve
1237
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 01:23:00 -
[178] - Quote
RIP long and RIP hard, except that it wont be dead. You should be notified if someone quotes your post so you can continue the argument! |
Isonda
suspended animations DOT None Of The Above
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 01:50:00 -
[179] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:inb4 nullbears happy tears hotdrop, how long do you think tritanium/pyerite prices would stay above 0.5 ISK after Odyssey?
Given that I am in control of 6 accounts, with something like 700 000 000 SP amongst them... That it finaly will be worth mining with the mains in NULL and not the 3-4 mill SP alts in Empire is just GOLD.
|
lumberguy5
Stop Sneezing Glitter
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 02:03:00 -
[180] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:Bolow Santosi wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:
Except they have more catalysts. Now nobody has it. Hence Ice Camping.
War Dec them or start bringing logistics to ice belts to prevent ganks. War Dec is the greatest idea ever. Now they can gank you with battleships instead of catalysts, and get to keep them! I can't express how unthoughtful this idea is. So now I have to bring a logi for every mining ship. What's next? logi for every logi? logi for every logi for every logi? Neither of your suggestions fix Ice Camping.
Its funny how like a year ago CCP made changes to the game, that allow a 25 million isk ship (FITTED) to mine with "effectively" 3 strip miners and field a small tank of about 51k ehp, with a yield of 567m3/min, (Without any skills and a MLU1). Or maybe if you played this game a little bit longer, a moderate tank of 79k ehp and a yield of 920m3/min (LVL 5 Skills MLU2). Even worse if you drop the MLU and the Survey Scanner and get a mindlinked orca and tengu, you can fly a barge that has a very gankable, light tank of 120k ehp and a unnoticable 1434m3/min yield. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |