Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
edvinb
Eve Engineering Authority Eve Engineering
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:08:00 -
[61] - Quote
. |
Jita Bloodtear
Bloodtear Labs
264
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:10:00 -
[62] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:We have pushed hard for bottom-up income for years. This isn't new. And we've mulled over many options for increasing income because that's the sensible thing to do, and I hardly see what the point of going "i know all your secrets!!! your evil plans to raise money!!!" when they're hardly secret and they were ideas almost certainly shared with your alliance to try and ameliorate your alliance's loss of income from tech. None of them are final and the cynojammer idea, in particular, we think we can shelve thanks to the rorqual being bad at ice compression and was more a 'what if we did this' idea.
The real issue here isn't at all that this is going to hurt "miners". It's that it's going to hurt your specific type of massive multiboxing mining. What we are interested in cultivating is mining as a thing regular people do, rather than just massive operations here or there. Currently the only people who mine in null are people massively multiboxing, because mining is the only thing that scales well to that. But that doesn't make the massive multiboxer a representative of what mining should be. And nothing proposed is actually destroying ice mining: it's revitalizing it as a common profession at the expense of the 50-man mack fleets.
Also your math on where ice is demanded is hilariously off. It's just that everyone uses jita because it's jita. Highsec easily supplies its own demand through its ice with highsec ozone. I expect we'll be buying our ozone locally once mining it becomes a thing, rather than (as we've done in the past) buy compressed DG off jita markets. You asked me to give specifics on why your motives weren't the same as the public, I did. You don't get to be upset now that they make you look greedy and petty. I have listed time and again why this is going to hurt the ice mining profession, for both the casual and hardcore players. Making false sweeping generalizations does not disprove anything I have said.
- Please explain how casual highsec players are going to be able to get into ice mining when no ice belts will exist during primetime?
- Please explain how they'll be able to shift to mining ore in ore belts that are stripped clean within hours of DT every day?
- Please explain why it makes sense to artificially add ice restrictions to low/nullsec when the intended goal is to increase supply out there
- Please explain why removing Dark Glitter from lowsec entirely is going to increase the amount of ozone that's being supplied (DG currently exists in .1 systems, after the patch it won't)
- Please explain why the rorqual should not be able to compress ice at a decent rate
- Please explain where all the ozone in the galaxy is going to come from once nullsec supply is nerfed
Once again you, a non-industrialist, are trying to control the mining profession. This is like a council of men voting that abortion should be illegal. You claim my math is hilariously off, but give no numbers. My numbers are accurate. You say highsec easily supplies its own demand of ozone, but that is OBVIOUSLY not true. This only highlights how little you understand the intricate details of the profession. Highsec ice produces ozone:HW at a 1:2 ratio, there is never enough ozone to match demand.
Perhaps you'd care to take a look at our old galaxy wide ozone analysis or our galaxy wide heavy water analysis. Please explain where highsec is getting their ozone from? Please explain how they will get enough ozone now that you can consider their supply of ice cut to 80% production of what that is. Please explain how if right now nullsec is only mass multiboxing miners... that if we take away their ability to function that the ozone supply in the galaxy will still be sufficient? It won't.
You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
|
Covert0ne
Sons Of 0din The Unthinkables
45
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:18:00 -
[63] - Quote
As far as tears go, it doesn't get much better than this. I don't know what that means. |
Blawrf McTaggart
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1526
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:37:00 -
[64] - Quote
Covert0ne wrote:As far as tears go, it doesn't get much better than this.
no because they're bloodtears |
Blawrf McTaggart
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1526
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:37:00 -
[65] - Quote
i think ice mining becoming untenable would be hilarious |
Atrum Veneficus
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
90
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:44:00 -
[66] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:You asked me to give specifics on why your motives weren't the same as the public, I did. You don't get to be upset now that they make you look greedy and petty. I have listed time and again why this is going to hurt the ice mining profession, for both the casual and hardcore players. Making false sweeping generalizations does not disprove anything I have said.
- Please explain how casual highsec players are going to be able to get into ice mining when no ice belts will exist during primetime?
- Please explain how they'll be able to shift to mining ore in ore belts that are stripped clean within hours of DT every day?
- Please explain why it makes sense to artificially add ice restrictions to low/nullsec when the intended goal is to increase supply out there
- Please explain why removing Dark Glitter from lowsec entirely is going to increase the amount of ozone that's being supplied (DG currently exists in .1 systems, after the patch it won't)
- Please explain why the rorqual should not be able to compress ice at a decent rate
- Please explain where all the ozone in the galaxy is going to come from once nullsec supply is nerfed
Once again you, a non-industrialist, are trying to control the mining profession. This is like a council of men voting that abortion should be illegal. You claim my math is hilariously off, but give no numbers. My numbers are accurate. You say highsec easily supplies its own demand of ozone, but that is OBVIOUSLY not true. This only highlights how little you understand the intricate details of the profession. Highsec ice produces ozone:HW at a 1:2 ratio, there is never enough ozone to match demand. Perhaps you'd care to take a look at our old galaxy wide ozone analysis or our galaxy wide heavy water analysis. Please explain where highsec is getting their ozone from? Please explain how they will get enough ozone now that you can consider their supply of ice cut to 80% production of what that is. Please explain how if right now nullsec is only mass multiboxing miners... that if we take away their ability to function that the ozone supply in the galaxy will still be sufficient? It won't. You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
You fear to go into those mines. The EvilWeaselSA delved too greedily and too deep. You know what he awoke in the darkness of Vale of the Silent... an autistic sperglord. |
Speedkermit Damo
Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance
65
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:48:00 -
[67] - Quote
CCP wants there to be more low/nullsec ice miners, but there won't be.
Low-sec mining will always be too risky to attract more than a few huys who enyoy being blown up. All it takes to shut down any null-sec mining operation is one AFK cloaky-camper.
Don't Panic.
|
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
172
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:52:00 -
[68] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote: You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
Abloobloobloo, its always been untenable which is why it takes multiboxing spergs to even make it worthwhile.
|
Ereshgikal
The Forgotten Navy Gentlemen's Agreement
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:58:00 -
[69] - Quote
digi wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote: You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
Abloobloobloo, its always been untenable which is why it takes multiboxing spergs to even make it worthwhile.
I see that some in GSF have quite interesting definition of "sperg". I would've thought the cultural revolution would've eradicated badposters like you. :) |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:58:00 -
[70] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Soft Insanity wrote:Fozzie, can we get ice miners on the Venture Pwwwwease? I've wanted that for a while, but to do it right we'd need to allow faster cycling ice miners that create smaller blocks. And I have no idea how we would go about implementing that. What if the venture, or a T2 venture was able to equip a single or dual strip miner. Adjust bonuses so that at best it would yield half what the Procurer can. Currently all the mining barges and exhummers have been balanced for a base yield equal to 3 strips. If a T2 venture could equip a strip miner with yield equal to 1/2 that, or 1.5 strips, or 2 strips with a 25% penalty to mix it up a bit and still hit the 1.5 yield mark. It would still fill the same role while being able to equip a single ICE miner. And only be slightly better than the T1 venture for normal ore mining. |
|
Blawrf McTaggart
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1526
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 15:59:00 -
[71] - Quote
Ereshgikal wrote:digi wrote:Jita Bloodtear wrote: You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
Abloobloobloo, its always been untenable which is why it takes multiboxing spergs to even make it worthwhile. I see that some in GSF have quite interesting definition of "sperg". I would've thought the cultural revolution would've eradicated badposters like you. :)
he's got you there digi |
digi
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
172
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:04:00 -
[72] - Quote
Ereshgikal wrote:
I see that some in GSF have quite interesting definition of "sperg". I would've thought the cultural revolution would've eradicated badposters like you. :)
I can see that you took my use of sperg as a personal slur towards the Bloodtear. I've met them, IRL. I like them. They are often very correct in their assessments. This is not one they are correct in. Furthermore, I'm disappointed in this thread.
I'm going to start having 10th birthdays at the end of this month. I've mined for a long time. These are good changes. They are taking the game in a great direction.
As far as me being purged, I'm useful. Which more than I can say for many pubbie allies.
|
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:20:00 -
[73] - Quote
Ice mining will again become the province of the common man, freed from the villainy of conglomerates and oligarchs. bring back images |
Draekas Darkwater
Frank Exchange of Views
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:27:00 -
[74] - Quote
Add ice harvesting to the Venture?
Seems pretty simple. Create a new ice mining module (and T2 version) that only the Venture can fit. Use the same insanely high CPU method that full size ice harvesters use, and only give the 99% CPU reduction to the Venture. Balance the cycle time however you want.
The ship already has a 5k ore hold so it can hold 5 blocks, so no adjustment needed there. |
pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
470
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:30:00 -
[75] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:This is like a council of men voting that abortion should be illegal.
It's more like a bunch of white guys in Congress voting for the Civil Rights Act, freeing thousands of highsec ice miners everywhere from the shackles of 23/7 slavery for their wages. Empowering thousands more non-ISBoxing Minmatar in lowsec and nullsec to have new opportunities where doors were closed before. TEARING DOWN THAT WALL, MISTER GORBACHEV.
Also, jesus your numbers are wrong there will be plenty of ozone and ice belts will respawn in primetime. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:33:00 -
[76] - Quote
If I knew the trouble it was going to cause I'd of told the Amarr to mine their own damn ice bring back images |
Kismeteer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
262
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:33:00 -
[77] - Quote
Draekas Darkwater wrote:Add ice harvesting to the Venture?
Seems pretty simple. Create a new ice mining module (and T2 version) that only the Venture can fit. Use the same insanely high CPU method that full size ice harvesters use, and only give the 99% CPU reduction to the Venture. Balance the cycle time however you want.
The ship already has a 5k ore hold so it can hold 5 blocks, so no adjustment needed there.
Er, why not just change ice harvesters to fit on Ventures, with a minor PG reduction. Boom. done. Or allow it anyway, and they have to fit a RCU.
The rest of the thread, laffo, someone sounds pretty mad about having to pay taxes. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
728
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:35:00 -
[78] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote: You asked me to give specifics on why your motives weren't the same as the public, I did. You don't get to be upset now that they make you look greedy and petty. I have listed time and again why this is going to hurt the ice mining profession, for both the casual and hardcore players. Making false sweeping generalizations does not disprove anything I have said.
I actually asked you to give specifics on why my ideas were wrong. I can, of course, be irritated that information we shared to attempt to help your alliance with the same problem we are going through - a massive adjustment in how alliances fund themselves - is being spread around eveo and used to try and attack us and protect the private profits of your personal mining operation. Our motives are to continue to fund our alliance, which generates a vast amount of content for our players, our allies, and the entire game, as well as make eve a better game because the better it is, the more our players have fun and the more we can recruit new players. But motives are fairly irrelevant: I could easily simply argue that you should be ignored because you're just trying to protect your massive multiboxing ice fleet, but I don't consider that a good way to argue over design changes. To the extent you're right or wrong, you're right or wrong on the merits. Though I will point out to the extent you're saying "I am a miner listen to me", you're both not the type of miner this change is aimed at encouraging, and you are a very rare breed of miner with different interests from other miners.
Jita Bloodtear wrote:
- Please explain how casual highsec players are going to be able to get into ice mining when no ice belts will exist during primetime?
- Please explain how they'll be able to shift to mining ore in ore belts that are stripped clean within hours of DT every day?
- Please explain why it makes sense to artificially add ice restrictions to low/nullsec when the intended goal is to increase supply out there
- Please explain why removing Dark Glitter from lowsec entirely is going to increase the amount of ozone that's being supplied (DG currently exists in .1 systems, after the patch it won't)
- Please explain why the rorqual should not be able to compress ice at a decent rate
- Please explain where all the ozone in the galaxy is going to come from once nullsec supply is nerfed
The fear of null being unable to supply DG are overblown: even at moderate LO price increases it becomes hilariously profitable and there is more than enough supply in null with these anoms to meet galactic demand. I dislike tax evasion being easy because I believe, as a game design, funding alliances through bottom-up taxation makes a more interesting game, more interesting 0.0, incentivizes alliances to care about economic activity, and a whole host of other reasons. My job is much easier if we are just moonlords but the game is less interesting (which is why we keep advocating for change in direct opposition to our interests).
As for the highsec stuff: I am fully aware that no change that leaves ice infinite in highsec will actually create the necessary increase in null mining so the idea "keep it infinite just nerf it a tad" is a non-starter.
Jita Bloodtear wrote: Once again you, a non-industrialist, are trying to control the mining profession. This is like a council of men voting that abortion should be illegal. You claim my math is hilariously off, but give no numbers. My numbers are accurate. You say highsec easily supplies its own demand of ozone, but that is OBVIOUSLY not true. This only highlights how little you understand the intricate details of the profession. Highsec ice produces ozone:HW at a 1:2 ratio, there is never enough ozone to match demand. ... You see, we've run the numbers. We've been miners from the start. We know the system. I'm telling you, these changes are going to make ice mining untenable.
I am an industrialist. I am a very, very successful and good industrialist. I also make my money on knowing how every bit of the game works and what effect changes will have. When we discuss macro effects of changes, we are on my territory, not yours, and I'm one of the best in the game at it. I hope we can end trying to simply argue "listen to me because I am X" rather than "listen to me because of these specific reasons that we can discuss".
Your numbers on LO do not take into account where the LO is used. Highsec doesn't come close to supplying enough LO for the galaxy. But it doesn't use very much, and it can easily supply itself. People export LO from null, trade it in jita, and export it back to null for the convenience. LO use in high is limited to pos, and you can find from CCP posts how many pos are in empire vs. null.
Ultimately the problem is that what this change seeks to create is a massive increase in casual miners, which I view as vital to revitalizing 0.0. That will, of course, hurt the existing mega-miners who currently monopolize the market. But the casual miner crowd produces a vast amount of content (local minerals, pvp, interdictable alliance income, local industry) that the mega-miner does not. That's not to say the mega-miner should be driven out: grav anoms are basically perfect for that style of gameplay and requires only a relatively minor change in playstyle. This is good for the game, and it's the health of the game that matters most. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
608
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:35:00 -
[79] - Quote
Lexar Mundi wrote:Abyss Wyrm wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Soft Insanity wrote:Fozzie, can we get ice miners on the Venture Pwwwwease? I've wanted that for a while, but to do it right we'd need to allow faster cycling ice miners that create smaller blocks. And I have no idea how we would go about implementing that. Such ice miners definitely needed for lowsec. Otherwise no one gonna mine ice there - too risky. tbh making the venture not only a frig, but with built in warp stabs was a big mistake. I still don't know what they were thinking. Look at it this way. Low sec ice will give the Procurer a job. No one uses it atm. Nope, Procurer is still useless in low sec. What good does more tank do you if CONCORD is not on the way to save you?
Tank means nothing to a ship so easily tackled in space where CONCORD does not spawn.
In high sec you tank your barge or exhummer to last long enough for CONCORD to show up and kill your attackers before you die. This have driven ganking doctrines for ships that can kill you in 30 seconds or less. A Properly fit Talos can kill a HULK before CONCORD arrives, but if that HULK is tanked they can survive long enough for CONCORD to save the day. A procurer or Skiff in high sec would take more ships than it is worth to gank in that 30 second window.
In low sec there is no window, CONCORD will never come. Lasting more than 30 seconds is irrelevant. It does not matter how much tank you have, once tackled you are dead. The ship is still slow and easy to catch. It has no defense other than a few drones that might be able to kill a bad frigate or cruiser pilot, but basically even a heavily tanked Skiff is a sitting duck in Low sec. If it had its +2 warp strength back that would help a lot, but as it is, the procurer and skiff are not any more useful in low sec than they are in high sec. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
390
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:40:00 -
[80] - Quote
FYI next time you want to pull the 'Goons are just looking out for themselves!' card remember that we've been the ones not only planning for, but advocating a tech nerf and moon rebalance because ultimately it was the best thing for EVE. bring back images |
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
733
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:58:00 -
[81] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote: Nope, Procurer is still useless in low sec. What good does more tank do you if CONCORD is not on the way to save you?
Tank means nothing to a ship so easily tackled in space where CONCORD does not spawn.
it aligns much faster so it can be landing on station when the attacker lands in the belt instead of still aligning, so it survives |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
887
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:05:00 -
[82] - Quote
A lot of tinfoil in this thread. I skimmed mostly, but some highlights.
Goons Stacked CSM with null - Yes, of course we did, after loudly warning we would do so if they changed the system. We had never previously done so, and didn't care before. But this new system forces you to care. So we do now. SHOCKING!
Goons want to Tax - Uhh, yes, we have been pushing for individual bottom up income that is taxable for years. It results in a healthier game, and more vibrant null. Nothing hidden about this agenda at all. CCP hasn't given us any new taxation mechanics since POCOs so we theory craft ways to tax the coming spike in mining. I don't see how this is relevant at all to the discussion about the changes themselves. This conversation is occurring in every competent alliance out there. I understand it probably wasn't occurring in GENTS until we brought it up. NOT SHOCKING!
We pushed for the Tech nerf, while on the CSM. We then spiked that crap to 180k to prove a point, we ate a nerf. This is how pushing for change works in EVE. You see something broken, you highlight just how broken it is, it gets fixed. Nothing magical here.
People invoking the "think of the newbies/casuals" argument. I would direct you to CCP Soundwave's (I think it was him) previous comments that this automatically means the person is not genuine. I tend to agree, anyone invoking this in their argument is only using it to serve their own interests. It is the EVE equivalent of "Because ******!" Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
460
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:06:00 -
[83] - Quote
OK Fozzie, but it still don't give any help to small alliances.
Any chance that we get random spawns of this sites in systems without previous existing ice belts including Wormholes?
The lack of possibility to make POS fuel have always being one crucial factor on why small alliances have hard time trying to live far from hi-sec.... Give us a hand! The big alliances can keep their static spawns!!! We just need to get one of this once in a while! This will improve allot the game-play!!! Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
Ereshgikal
The Forgotten Navy Gentlemen's Agreement
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:15:00 -
[84] - Quote
digi wrote:Ereshgikal wrote:
I see that some in GSF have quite interesting definition of "sperg". I would've thought the cultural revolution would've eradicated badposters like you. :)
I can see that you took my use of sperg as a personal slur towards the Bloodtear. I've met them, IRL. I like them. They are often very correct in their assessments. This is not one they are correct in. Furthermore, I'm disappointed in this thread. I'm going to start having 10th birthdays at the end of this month. I've mined for a long time. These are good changes. They are taking the game in a great direction. As far as me being purged, I'm useful. Which is more than I can say for many pubbie allies.
"Abluuu, abluuu, abluuuu" ain't that useful to me. Can you kindly explain why the changes are great in your opinion? Explain as though you were to explain it to a allied useless pubbie. |
Morgoth Xep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:15:00 -
[85] - Quote
Dramaticus wrote:FYI next time you want to pull the 'Goons are just looking out for themselves!' card remember that we've been the ones not only planning for, but advocating a tech nerf and moon rebalance because ultimately it was the best thing for EVE.
I cannot reconcile this idea and the one that I am told to have where Goons are diabolical, selfish, cunning all while being incompetent, lazy and stupid so I will simply ignore it. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
460
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:18:00 -
[86] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Soft Insanity wrote:Fozzie, can we get ice miners on the Venture Pwwwwease? I've wanted that for a while, but to do it right we'd need to allow faster cycling ice miners that create smaller blocks. And I have no idea how we would go about implementing that.
It would be interesting, even if you put a small mining laser that take ages to cut a block... Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
Kismeteer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
262
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:19:00 -
[87] - Quote
Alx Warlord wrote:OK Fozzie, but it still don't give any help to small alliances.
Any chance that we get random spawns of this sites in systems without previous existing ice belts including Wormholes?
The lack of possibility to make POS fuel have always being one crucial factor on why small alliances have hard time trying to live far from hi-sec.... Give us a hand! The big alliances can keep their static spawns!!! We just need to get one of this once in a while! This will improve allot the game-play!!!
It's pretty easy to find an ice belt in null sec. Your killboard doesn't seem to indicate a ton of combat for your corp, other than a little activity in your wormhole, but you apparently visit jita and syndicate from time to time. And there are 20 systems in syndicate with ice belts for instance.
I would imagine you have some exit hole that would be near an ice belt from time to time. Just chain collapse till you get near an ice belt.
I don't think disappearing into a wormhole forever without a reason to leave is 'good game play' either. |
Morgoth Xep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:19:00 -
[88] - Quote
Aryth wrote: People invoking the "think of the newbies/casuals" argument. I would direct you to CCP Soundwave's (I think it was him) previous comments that this automatically means the person is not genuine. I tend to agree, anyone invoking this in their argument is only using it to serve their own interests. It is the EVE equivalent of "Because ******!"
I'm sorry, Aryth, but you're the one being disingenuous here. Without easy access to safe, highsec ice mining how will newbies learn that playing Eve is all about not playing Eve? And how will they fuel massive networks of jump bridges, jump freighters and capital operations? With highsec ice gone, newbies will be forced to actually click buttons while they run missions, probe for sites to run or trade Caracals on the open market.
It is the newbies that suffer the most. |
Kismeteer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
262
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:23:00 -
[89] - Quote
Morgoth Xep wrote:It is the newbies that suffer the most.
Won't someone cry for my 20 newbie Mackinaw pilots? They get confused when forced to warp to another system.
|
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
460
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 17:24:00 -
[90] - Quote
Kismeteer wrote:Alx Warlord wrote:OK Fozzie, but it still don't give any help to small alliances.
Any chance that we get random spawns of this sites in systems without previous existing ice belts including Wormholes?
The lack of possibility to make POS fuel have always being one crucial factor on why small alliances have hard time trying to live far from hi-sec.... Give us a hand! The big alliances can keep their static spawns!!! We just need to get one of this once in a while! This will improve allot the game-play!!! It's pretty easy to find an ice belt in null sec. Your killboard doesn't seem to indicate a ton of combat for your corp, other than a little activity in your wormhole, but you apparently visit jita and syndicate from time to time. And there are 20 systems in syndicate with ice belts for instance. I would imagine you have some exit hole that would be near an ice belt from time to time. Just chain collapse till you get near an ice belt. I don't think disappearing into a wormhole forever without a reason to leave is 'good game play' either.
We quit nullsec last year, this was one of the reasons, we was in one of the last independent alliances of scalding pass at the time, i bet that now every alliance there is part of a block.... Now we are in Hi-sec, mostly running incursions. We have some WH Ops too... Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
|
|
|
|
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 |