Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Bermag
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:30:00 -
[211]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi I for one am very happy and hope they take it a step further and reduce ice to 0.4 and below. It may solve several problems of pvp in low sec and alliances not touching or protecting vast ice fields in 0.0 while buying ice in bulk from over saturated markets with NPCing money.
It might make alliances think twice about moving 20 dreads to take down a medium POS in space they don't really own but claim 'just because' 20 jumps from their actual sov space.
Take some of the uber tools out of the alliance hands and restore the markets supply and demand.
It would cause other problems. If ice is only in low-sec prices will get higher. Many POSs will not be worth running.
Also even if you have ice fields in 0.0 (which are many times not mined because it is usually more profit to mine rare ore) they might not be of any use because towers use race specific fuel (and most production oriented POSs use Caldari towers) which might not be in your region.
|
Beldaws
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 14:41:00 -
[212]
With the right skills, ship, and equipment you can get the cycle time down to 5 minutes and you will get a partial pull after 2.5 minutes. Of course, you have to spend a good 200 million isk and lots of training time to get to that point.
I personally would love to see ice fields moved to .5 and below. Allow people to mine ice in .5 systems but make the NPCs tougher (add cruisers to the spawns) to make it more difficult for people to mine while they are away from the computer.
As someone who has spent the time and money to get her ice mining characters the best of the best equipment, ships, skills and implants I'd love to see the price of ice products rise in value. I have a lot invested into mining ice and right now the ice prices are extremely low.
When I can make as much money mining regular ores in a cruiser than I can make mining ice in a 200 million isk setup, then something is wrong and drastic measures are needed.
Originally by: Tachy
Go and mine some ice. It takes up to 10 minutues for a single cycle. There are no partial pulls as in ore mining when you have to leave suddenly. Ice mining in HiSec is roughly as good as Scordite or Kernite, just more relaxed. This leads to the 'I tried to contact the miner and got no answer ...'. Would you stare at the screen when you're needed every 15-20 minutes for moving your ice to the can and hauler?
|
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:10:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Dinique
ICE BELTS ARE NOT BEING REMOVED FROM HIGH SEC EMPIRE ICE BELTS ARE NOT BEING REMOVED FROM HIGH SEC EMPIRE ICE BELTS ARE NOT BEING REMOVED FROM HIGH SEC EMPIRE
Only high traffic systems like Jita are affected by this. Read Kieron and Oveur's posts this time before having a knee-jerk reaction.
Ok the FACTS as read by a dedicated ice miner.
1. This is an attempt to reduce macroicemining. 2. Although they have stated that they are removing ice from high-sec high traffic systems now. They have also stated that other systems will likely follow suit.
What this means to me is this:
When the ice mining macrominers move to the next system CCP will make that's system deplete. So the IMM (Ice macrominers) will move to another. Rinse and repeat until all high-sec ice is now depeted.
Any dedicated miners will tell you that this is standard operations. We have seen it with regular ore now it will happen with ice. So calling it a knee-jerk reaction is very very wrong. We have seen it before and we don't want to see it again.
For all of you Low-Sec and 0.0 folks that think this is a good thing here are some thing for you to think about....
1. As more and more high-sec ice belts are forced to depelete to stop IMM's there will be less and less ice product on the market. 2. Ice product cost will skyrocket. 3. Cost to maintain your PoS will skyrocket. 4. PoS's will have to be shut down due to lack of fuel. 5. Capital ships will have to be retired due to lack of fuel. 6. Price of HAC's will increase as cost of production increases.
See the trend here?
----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
Rachag
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:25:00 -
[214]
about time they were depleted.
|
Tessa Vaako
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:27:00 -
[215]
My comments in BOLD.
When the ice mining macrominers move to the next system CCP will make that's system deplete. So the IMM (Ice macrominers) will move to another. Rinse and repeat until all high-sec ice is now depeted. This is PURE conjecture. Give us reason, backed up with RESEARCH AND FACTS to belive that the sky is falling. According to Ombey's 2d maps, there are (were?) 860 Ice Belts in the game. So CCP shuts down a few highsec ones, whoop de do, that still leaves a LOT of places to harvest ICE. I really don't see where you're coming from thinking that CCP is going to stop banning MMers and just pull all the highsec ICE fields from the game. Either adapt or die.
For all of you Low-Sec and 0.0 folks that think this is a good thing here are some thing for you to think about....
1. As more and more high-sec ice belts are forced to depelete to stop IMM's there will be less and less ice product on the market. You mean that all the 0.0 alliances can't mine ICE for themselves? Also did you miss the comment about this was ALSO an effort to loadbalance the nodes, and NOT a directed MM only attack?
2. Ice product cost will skyrocket. 3. Cost to maintain your PoS will skyrocket. 4. PoS's will have to be shut down due to lack of fuel. 6. Price of HAC's will increase as cost of production increases. I don't buy it. Those that need POSs can start to source their own ICE operations. The specter of HAC prices is just a FUD attack.
5. Capital ships will have to be retired due to lack of fuel. Are you serious? You mean that all the 0.0 alliances can't mine ICE for themselves? Can you see a large 0.0 alliance say... BoB (for pure example) RETIRING any of their considerable Cap ship fleet? Hell no, they'll just take over some vassel alliance and make them mine ICE in the deep safety of their own space. -- The Future is Exciting.
|
Einheriar Ulrich
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:27:00 -
[216]
Have Ice systems, prestine, nice plot overlooking a red star, a little backwaterish, but hey if you have the tools, we can make a deal, contact me
|
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:40:00 -
[217]
OK First off stop thinking so short sighted.. YES only a few ice belts have been removed in THIS ROUNND. But they have stated
Originally by: Kieron There are other fields that will suffer the same fate in the near future.
There is no reason to mention this if they do not have plans to change other ice fields. These other ice fields are not in high-traffic systems. Therefore the only possible reason to do this would be to reduce the number of IMM's.
I am not a complete idiot. I know that alliances mine ice as well but a very large portion of the ice product that is available today is comming from high-sec space. With the reduction of this supply wars will become very very expensive and lets face it you folks in 0.0 space would rather be shooting one another than sitting at an ice field mining ice. ----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
Tsual
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:51:00 -
[218]
Edited by: Tsual on 30/06/2006 15:52:23 Edited by: Tsual on 30/06/2006 15:52:10
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Why is it a bad idea to remove all ice in safe space? If anything, low sec mining should be made alot more rewarding so teamwork mining there is really worth it.
For the ones with mining barges, you would take it into low sec if there was some really big money to be made there. If you could replace it in a hour of mining for example. Maybe you already can, im not a miner.
But expecting to be able to sit in empire, while afk, and letting the iskies flow, is lame. You have normal ore there for that sort of thing.
It's hard to tell how that will impact economy except a strong increase in ice prices. However I think that is is very safe to assume it would push empire low sec to develop alliance like structures to effectivly and safely harvest ice or force 0.0 alliances to engage in low sec controlling which would create an economical rift between high sec dwellers and low sec dwellers.
Additionally you have pos in high sec that need fuel ... so maybe it would be best to introduce a sort of traveling ice fields system in which ice fields in med sec (0.7 down to 0.5) respawn in a different and random low frequented medium security sector every month.
They would get depleted by mining. After having been depleted they would disappear and respawn in another medium security sector in the next month.
Additionally pilots could only find them with ice searching probes, they would not appear in solar system information so pilots had to manually probe for them - and by this you suddenly had a way to make dedicated exploration usefull.
******************** Moral is only usefull so far as society demands it from one to accept his presence.
|
Savage Lee
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 15:58:00 -
[219]
Less belts ice becomming more expensive, any real ice miner will love this.
Now we can make even more money. I don't see this as a bad thing. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mmmmm scordite....... |
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:04:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Tachy
Originally by: Vincent Gaines it's a shame that it won't stop this from happening.
What? It doesn't stop icemining for POS and CapShip fuel? You must be joking!
those are ISK farmers... most are banned now.
|
|
Tessa Vaako
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:35:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Mysticaa These other ice fields are not in high-traffic systems. Therefore the only possible reason to do this would be to reduce the number of IMM's.
Ok, so they are going to do a phased rollout of this AFTER they analize the changes in the traffic patterns in this the first stage. You are ignoring the load balancing angle and are arguing this as if CCP is going to gank the ICE from EVERY system IMMs show up in. CCP isn't that daft.
Quote: lets face it you folks in 0.0 space would rather be shooting one another than sitting at an ice field mining ice.
Once again your stereotyping and generalizing. Sure PvP is a part of 0.0 life, but that doesn't change the fact that it is ONLY a PART. There are a large number of logistical and industrial hurdles as well. Our corp has the capacity to supply ICE for ourselves. Sure it's currently cheaper to buy from empire and import, but the moment it becomes prohibitive we stop buying and start providing for ourselves. Heck we have members that are totally industrial mining carebears that live for POS, logistics and ICE mining. -- The Future is Exciting.
|
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 16:46:00 -
[222]
Some of the posters in this thread need to just stop and re-read their posts before hitting the 'Post Reply' button. Put away the tin-foil hats, grab a cup of coffee and take some time to read the Dev posts in this thread, then hit the Post Reply button. There are so many half-baked assumptions, half-truths and rumor mongering posts in this thread it isn't even funny.
There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime. For those that cannot grasp the use of the word 'resources' with the context of the news item and dev posts, only Ice Fields were removed. No roid belts, deadspace complexes, market items, etc. were removed.
Future depletions are under discussion and most likely not going to happen for a number of weeks.
kieron Community Manager, EVE Online |
|
Kuolematon
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:14:00 -
[223]
Sorry kieron I jumped "Bhaal" bandwagon and said some nasty stuff. Good that you actually have manpower to deal with cheaters. Fight the power man
Unnerf Amarr! "Just because you can utterly ruin another player's game doesn't mean that you must."
|
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:25:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Kuolematon Sorry kieron I jumped "Bhaal" bandwagon and said some nasty stuff. Good that you actually have manpower to deal with cheaters. Fight the power man
Kuolematon, don't get me wrong. I'm not pointing any fingers nor am I after apologies and you were not one of the people I had in mind when I wrote the last post. I know EVE is a game that provokes emotional responses. I'd like some members of the community to read, think, and wait before posting.
Heck, at this point, I don't even know how far the ice removal is going to go, that is still being discussed by the game design team. For someone to post, "OMG, CCP IS GOING TO REMOVE ALL ICE FIELDS FROM 0.1 SPACE AND HIGHER!!!111elevenone" when the Devs haven't figured it out yet, that is where the annoyance comes from.
kieron Community Manager, EVE Online |
|
Red Ochre
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:28:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Galk
Originally by: kieron they were not intended to be in these areas. There are other fields that will suffer the same fate in the near future.
This isn't roleplaying.
It realy bugs me when you anounce a game change in this manner, it's a balancing issue... these things have what.. been with us for a year and a half now....
Never intended.....
Why not just come clean and anounce that you got it wrong, instead of insulting peoples inteligence with the 'never intended' line.
Galk hey! some news friend, dont quote parts of posts, makes you looked stupid, and if you need to re-read the op's original post, do so at this time. "never intended" in the context of that paragraph is saying just that, they were wrong. and they are removing it. buh-by |
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:32:00 -
[226]
Originally by: kieron Some of the posters in this thread need to just stop and re-read their posts before hitting the 'Post Reply' button. Put away the tin-foil hats, grab a cup of coffee and take some time to read the Dev posts in this thread, then hit the Post Reply button. There are so many half-baked assumptions, half-truths and rumor mongering posts in this thread it isn't even funny.
There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime. For those that cannot grasp the use of the word 'resources' with the context of the news item and dev posts, only Ice Fields were removed. No roid belts, deadspace complexes, market items, etc. were affected.
Future depletions are under discussion and most likely not going to happen for a number of weeks.
Bhaal asked a very important question, one that was sadly overlooked earlier.
Quote: What problem are you guys actually trying to solve here? 1) Lag? 2) MM's? 3) MM's ruining the market for the honest miner who doesn't cheat? All of the above?
To answer to that question, yes. All of the above.
Kieron,
Can you explain how CCP thinks this action will effect #2 and #3? ----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 17:39:00 -
[227]
Edited by: Bhaal on 30/06/2006 17:42:47
Originally by: Mysticaa
Originally by: kieron Some of the posters in this thread need to just stop and re-read their posts before hitting the 'Post Reply' button. Put away the tin-foil hats, grab a cup of coffee and take some time to read the Dev posts in this thread, then hit the Post Reply button. There are so many half-baked assumptions, half-truths and rumor mongering posts in this thread it isn't even funny.
There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime. For those that cannot grasp the use of the word 'resources' with the context of the news item and dev posts, only Ice Fields were removed. No roid belts, deadspace complexes, market items, etc. were affected.
Future depletions are under discussion and most likely not going to happen for a number of weeks.
Bhaal asked a very important question, one that was sadly overlooked earlier.
Quote: What problem are you guys actually trying to solve here? 1) Lag? 2) MM's? 3) MM's ruining the market for the honest miner who doesn't cheat? All of the above?
To answer to that question, yes. All of the above.
Kieron,
Can you explain how CCP thinks this action will effect #2 and #3?
Originally by: Oveur You are actually forgetting the keywords "high-traffic". There are more than 1000 systems to mine Ice in, there is no reason for them to be in the systems which already have high traffic. Incidentally, it so happens that macro miners tend to use those systems, close to market etc.
Thus, number 1, remove from high-traffic systems. The macro miners having a more difficult time is a pleasant side-effect. I wouldn't close out removing asteroid belts either in systems like that.
That's the theory...
MM's will have to do more work to get their spoils to market... ------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE
My Hero
|
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:03:00 -
[228]
Originally by: Bhaal
Originally by: Oveur You are actually forgetting the keywords "high-traffic". There are more than 1000 systems to mine Ice in, there is no reason for them to be in the systems which already have high traffic. Incidentally, it so happens that macro miners tend to use those systems, close to market etc.
Thus, number 1, remove from high-traffic systems. The macro miners having a more difficult time is a pleasant side-effect. I wouldn't close out removing asteroid belts either in systems like that.
That's the theory...
MM's will have to do more work to get their spoils to market...
Ok so they will have to do a little more work. But that doesn't explain how this will change the number of MM's the game presently has. ----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:09:00 -
[229]
Edited by: Bhaal on 30/06/2006 18:13:21
Quote: Ok so they will have to do a little more work. But that doesn't explain how this will change the number of MM's the game presently has.
I mistakenly thought this change was specifically to deal with macro miners, it's not...
The main issue is one of traffic. Making it harder for MM's is a side affect. (for a while, we'll have to see if any other systems become like the ones they changed)
Some macro miners may give up due to these changes, and maybe it will help flush out others so they can be banned...
I just think the initial press release "fooled" me into thinking it was all about MM's...
------------------------------------------------ Current Hobby other than EVE
My Hero
|
Nymos
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:15:00 -
[230]
Originally by: kieron There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime.
lol you gotta be kidding me... 3 ice belts in jita which is certainly the highest traffic system and allows ice mining AT the marketplace and these are not affected? sorry if i sound offensive, but i would ask the dev team for one thing: if you start something (good or bad) always finish thinking and implementing it. that begins with combat changes that are half-way implemented and currently stops at ice fields. i cant belive an ice field in scrolluzer (where is that anyways?) is as much a problem as 3 belts in jita. of course i dont see server load data etc, but i'm either too retarded to understand or jita truly has the heaviest load of all systems. and yes, i read more are being considered (not in the near future).
|
|
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:16:00 -
[231]
Originally by: Bhaal
I mistakenly thought this change was specifically to deal with macro miners, it's not...
The main issue is one of traffic. Making it harder for MM's is a side affect. (for a while, we'll have to see if any other systems become like the ones they changed)
Some macro miners may give up due to these changes, and maybe it will help flush out others so they can be banned...
I just think the initial press release "fooled" me into thinking it was all about MM's...
Aye alot of us though (and still do) this was about MM's. ----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
Anglyson
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:46:00 -
[232]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Oveur OK, I'm getting mildly offended by you now, Bhaal. That's just ridiculous. In june, close to 1000 paying accounts were banned. You do the math on how much that costs us financially. Then go bark up some other tree.
Oh yeah, and I find it mildly offending that youd even place a $$$$ value on lost income when talking about banning cheaters!!!!!!
my first thought also
|
Kitty O'Shay
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:47:00 -
[233]
Originally by: kieron There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime.
ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT JITA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE. --
|
Kurt Damon
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:48:00 -
[234]
Why not just take all roids out of empire except Veld and maybe scordite and make it just a noob training center and force all but noobs into low security....
|
Mysticaa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 18:52:00 -
[235]
Originally by: Kurt Damon Why not just take all roids out of empire except Veld and maybe scordite and make it just a noob training center and force all but noobs into low security....
/sarcasm on And while your implementing Kurts suggestion take out all NPC rewards and missions from low-sec and 0.0 space as it should only be PvP. /sarcasm off ----------------------------------------------- Why do I post here? Sig snatched by Xorus
|
SweetMelissa
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 19:41:00 -
[236]
Well, I think this means that more macrominers need to be killed becuase they are ruining it for legitamate players. This change will only effect the asteroid belts now. All the macro-losers will be mining in Apocs....is there a way to insta-pop an Apoc before you get Concordokken?
|
Cmdr Sy
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 19:45:00 -
[237]
Originally by: Kitty O'Shay
Originally by: kieron There were five systems affected by the depletion, Sobaseki, Scolluzer, Inoue, Kakakela and Tash-Murkon Prime.
ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT JITA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.
For that shameless 2010 reference, you win this thread.
Though you know...the epilogue said that humans continued to make landing attempts. None ever reached their destination.
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 19:55:00 -
[238]
Originally by: Vincent Gaines it's a shame that it won't stop this from happening.
Ice mining at its finest :D
Image 1 Image 2
|
Anarlina
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 21:34:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Tsual Edited by: Tsual on 30/06/2006 15:52:23 Additionally you have pos in high sec that need fuel ... so maybe it would be best to introduce a sort of traveling ice fields system in which ice fields in med sec (0.7 down to 0.5) respawn in a different and random low frequented medium security sector every month.
They would get depleted by mining. After having been depleted they would disappear and respawn in another medium security sector in the next month.
Additionally pilots could only find them with ice searching probes, they would not appear in solar system information so pilots had to manually probe for them - and by this you suddenly had a way to make dedicated exploration usefull.
I actually kinda like this. Having them move every so often, having them be part of exploration, etc... all makes it a little more engaging to mine things, and it will throw a wrench in MMs (for awhile). ;)
|
Dutarro
|
Posted - 2006.06.30 21:40:00 -
[240]
Removing ice fields from Jita and similar systems is a good move. Our corp prefers not to mine in high traffic systems anyway -- too many griefers and what not buzzing around the belts.
As for hints that high sec ice may become scarce or vanish altogether, this would be inconvenient, but we could adapt even though we are mostly carebear, empire-hugging types.
To my fellow carebears who have posted in this thread, I would say don't be so afraid of low sec. It's true there are low sec systems where you'll get ganked twice a day trying to mine, but there are others where such attacks are rare, particularly where anti-pirate corps are active. Get to know the neighborhood and who lives there, and you can do well in low sec, even if you're not a professional PvPer.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |