Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:20:00 -
[1]
The patch notes say that icefields will be removed from all .8 security and above systems.
This is understandable, risk vs. reward, farmers, macros, yaddah, yaddah.
My question is: Will lower security systems (.5 to .7) that did not contain icefields prior to the patch, now contain new icefields after the patch?
I ask this question because some regions are especially plentiful in regard to icefields in .8 and above security with no lower security alternatives for ice mining in that region. To remove so many icefields without replacing (or moving) them elsewhere, especially in some regions where *all* icefields will be removed by the patch, seems like it would cause a huge shortage of vital fuel and runaway prices. An economic meltdown of sorts may occur, if you will excuse the pun.
|
Dampfschlaghammer
Minmatar Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:24:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 17/03/2007 15:20:40
How about moving these icefields to low-sec and 0.0?
This would be a great thing to accomodate people who feared that new probing/bubbles/wcs-nerf might depopulate low-sec and 0.0!
|
Estel Arador
Minmatar AFK
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:38:00 -
[3]
If there are runaway prices anywhere, traders will jump in and cause prices to lower again. =AFK=
|
Lithalnas
Amarr Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:47:00 -
[4]
Click the second link in my sig and you will know why, macros eat Ice fields in 0.8 and above because there are no rats or rats that cant kill a mach, its one way to start getting rid of the macro ice miners. ------------- Hadean Drive Yards The EvE inflation, 80 Macro miners, 1.5b isk/day |
Reiisha
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:50:00 -
[5]
Why would you need to mine ice in high sec regions? You can't actually put POS in 0.8+, and for 0.5+ you need standings and certificates (or what was it), and then you can't even use all of it's functionality.
Having ice belts in 0.5+ is like having arkonor/mercoxit in 0.5+. It makes no sense...
EVE History Wiki - Help us fill it!
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Estel Arador If there are runaway prices anywhere, traders will jump in and cause prices to lower again.
Possibly.
But traders cannot trade what miners cannot mine. If all icefields are removed from a region (which won't happen everywhere), with nothing available to replace them, it will destabilize the economy of that region.
Basically if there is only 500 tonnes of gold in the world, and overnight you destroy 1/3 of that, it does not matter how much is traded, the price will soar. Given, the icefields in EVE do not deplete, but there is still a static number of icefields and if that number is reduced significantly, it is hard to argue it will not cause some economic turmoil, especially in regions where all icefields will be removed.
What if 1/3 of the Hulk or Cerberus BPOs were destroyed overnight (pre-invention)? Do you still believe that trading would bring the prices down? |
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:56:00 -
[7]
We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
Senior Producer EVE Online
|
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:56:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Lithalnas Click the second link in my sig and you will know why, macros eat Ice fields in 0.8 and above because there are no rats or rats that cant kill a mach, its one way to start getting rid of the macro ice miners.
This is not a discussion as to why the icefields are being removed from .8 and above, I completely understand and support that. What I am asking is if CCP intends to keep the number of icefields in a region consistant. |
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 15:58:00 -
[9]
Originally by: CCP Oveur We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
Thanks Oveur, glad to know you are in fact watching this. |
Snake Doctor
Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 16:03:00 -
[10]
:) I take it Shihuken got the **** petitioned out of it?
When I was told "There's a more permanent solution" in the works, I thought they meant they'd just knock the sec status down. While this makes it harder for me to steal ice from farmers and macros, i think this is a freaking awesome idea.
Your mom goes to college... |
|
scrapbrain
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 16:03:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Damon Ra
Originally by: CCP Oveur We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
Thanks Oveur, glad to know you are in fact watching this.
everyone time someone 'eBays' 100mil isk, that's a GTC ccp don't sell, of course they're watching it
and also nice job, hopefully macro'ers will all leave for WoW, or silk road online or something :D
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 16:04:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Reiisha Why would you need to mine ice in high sec regions? You can't actually put POS in 0.8+, and for 0.5+ you need standings and certificates (or what was it), and then you can't even use all of it's functionality.
Having ice belts in 0.5+ is like having arkonor/mercoxit in 0.5+. It makes no sense...
Because some players choose to live and work in high sec to make their living in EVE, and if they didn't do that you would not have all your toys to do pew-pew-pew with. Not to mention, a lot (perhaps most) ice materials are exported from high sec to low sec and .0 to run the POS, carriers, and dreads you all love to use.
FYI, a POS in high sec is in fact very useful and profitable.
|
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 16:12:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Damon Ra on 17/03/2007 16:10:29
Originally by: scrapbrain
everyone time someone 'eBays' 100mil isk, that's a GTC ccp don't sell, of course they're watching it
and also nice job, hopefully macro'ers will all leave for WoW, or silk road online or something :D
Indeed, but this is not a discussion about leaving icefields in .8 and above where macroers and farmers can flourish. This discussion is about keeping the total number of icefields in a region unchanged, and what may happen if an entire region loses all its icefields because none exist currently in systems below .8 security. I know of at least one region where this will occur, and a good majority of the ice miners in that region are in player corps and are not farmers or macroers. |
Sphynix
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 16:43:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Reiisha Why would you need to mine ice in high sec regions? You can't actually put POS in 0.8+, and for 0.5+ you need standings and certificates (or what was it), and then you can't even use all of it's functionality.
Having ice belts in 0.5+ is like having arkonor/mercoxit in 0.5+. It makes no sense...
Because you can mine it unattended with no risk and then sell it to someone that does have a PoS.
Or are you implying that you want all the 0.0 corps to spend 3 days a week mining ice to keep their towers online?
|
Garric Vor'g
Minmatar Re-Awakened Technologies Inc Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 18:33:00 -
[15]
Originally by: CCP Oveur We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
You do realize this won't change a thing right? If you want to eliminate macroers you'll need to remove all ice belts above 0.5 ... and a smart macroer will even be able to handle 0.5 belt rats.
A faction fitted Machinaw can tank 0.0 rats non-stop while mining. I'm sure a non-faction fitted mach will be able to handle all secure system rats if they take the time to fit properly. CRAZED & INSANE |
Damon Ra
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 20:26:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Garric Vor'g
You do realize this won't change a thing right? If you want to eliminate macroers you'll need to remove all ice belts above 0.5 ... and a smart macroer will even be able to handle 0.5 belt rats.
Agreed.
I'd be all for your proposed solution too, as long as CCP didn't remove *all* the ice fields in entire regions because none of them were in .5 systems already.
If a region had 12 icefields total, all in .8 and above systems, why should that whole region now become barren and thus financially and operationally penalized? It would seem more "balanced" in my opinion to move or create at least one icefield in a .5 system in that region so players (and not the farmers) in the area can carry on with their business as usual. This would still increase costs/prices and legitimate players aren't totally shut down in an entire region.
|
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 20:31:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 17/03/2007 15:20:40
How about moving these icefields to low-sec and 0.0?
This would be a great thing to accomodate people who feared that new probing/bubbles/wcs-nerf might depopulate low-sec and 0.0!
From my view, I dont really care if they do. Icemining aint pro*****ble at all in empire. I am Ice mining in a Mackinaw in .5 sec zone, but compared to ordinary mining I earn aprox 50% less on ice mining then on ordinary mining. So now Im now back on ordinary mining.
Originally by: Eldo Davip PORTRAITS OMFG WOOT. WE R GONIG FOR MROE BREEE!!!!11
|
Gindar
Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 20:40:00 -
[18]
yahoo!!!!!!! take that, macros! i am swimming in glee. Sig removed does not contain your name, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Stamm
Amarr Three Holdings Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 20:49:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Originally by: Dampfschlaghammer Edited by: Dampfschlaghammer on 17/03/2007 15:20:40
How about moving these icefields to low-sec and 0.0?
This would be a great thing to accomodate people who feared that new probing/bubbles/wcs-nerf might depopulate low-sec and 0.0!
From my view, I dont really care if they do. Icemining aint pro*****ble at all in empire. I am Ice mining in a Mackinaw in .5 sec zone, but compared to ordinary mining I earn aprox 50% less on ice mining then on ordinary mining. So now Im now back on ordinary mining.
Because of the macro miners. Once the highsec belts are out then ice -should- be better than other minerals.
The price for ice is completely set by what players will pay for it, and as the supply of ice goes down, the price will go up, and it will become more profitable, so eventually people will start mining it in lower high sec.
And since anybody can mine omber, but not everybody can mine ice, then ice will be slighly more profitible (probably).
Galaxian Recruitment Info |
Maldus NiKunni
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 21:18:00 -
[20]
I have been playing this game since the beta, and have never been a PVP player....just mine and manufacture and run missions....
I personally don't see the reason for moving ice fields from .5 to .8 areas as I dont see much macroing going on in Otela ice field where I mine a lot. Seems to me ya just don't want to do your own policing of macro players. I moved here to Otela when the last ice move happened. I don't mine in under .5 space as I don't want to lose my ships, I am a 4 man corp and it is hard to replace my ships. I don't PVP for the same reason.
We all know who the Macro Guys are so why don't you devs do something to just get rid of them....Why keep screwing us normal guys around instead of dealing with the problem properly?
I have my own computer shop and when we have lan parties that last for days I police and get rid of the people who cheat and pull scams or such.
This can be done here just as easy....or have the player community police and dump people who accumulate a certain amount of "Macro Points" on their record?
Maldus
|
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 21:38:00 -
[21]
I wish there was a way for players to do something about macro miners other than bug them, steal from them, or petition them...
Like...maybe let us shoot them?
Change CONCORD from autospawn to 'need to be called unless actually present in the grid already'. When aggressed in a CONCORDOKKENable scenario, you would get a popup window that asked if you want to call the police, you get 30 seconds to hit yes (only way to not hit yes is to wait out the timer). If you run the timer out, CONCORD will not respond even in subsequent attacks (without a session change) as you have 'permitted' the aggression. For the duration the attacker will see you as a war target...
Random idea...yes, no? _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Star Commander
Got Corp? |
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.17 22:52:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Thor Xian Random idea...yes, no?
No.
When mining, because it is so boring, I am often surfing the net or reading a book or watching TV and just look back now and again to move ore and what not. Further, I'll get up and go the the bathroom or get a snack or answer the phone or whatever. If in these moments you strike I am toast?
No thanks.
|
Dominique Vasilkovsky
Techmart Industries
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 00:09:00 -
[23]
I heard it's a very nice and empty ice belt in Ardallabier (0.7), just move your operations there.
|
Ashira Twilight
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 00:15:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Garric Vor'g
Originally by: CCP Oveur We're monitoring the situation. If we feel that taking Ice out of these few systems affects the bigger scheme of things we'll consider doing something. Note though, this will affect the prices to some extent, but that's mainly in the regions where there is a lot of Ice macroing going on.
You do realize this won't change a thing right? If you want to eliminate macroers you'll need to remove all ice belts above 0.5 ... and a smart macroer will even be able to handle 0.5 belt rats.
A faction fitted Machinaw can tank 0.0 rats non-stop while mining. I'm sure a non-faction fitted mach will be able to handle all secure system rats if they take the time to fit properly.
Correct. I used to afk in a mackinaw on my industrial account. Ice Harvester IIs require very little cap and have long cycle times, so a mackinaw can support ANY small shield booster forever. I had a Small Shield Booster II on that mackinaw, and maybe some resistance amps, and I once alt-tabbed over to see that a .5 dread spawn had been beating on it without breaking the tank. ------------------------------- The opinions reflected in this post DO reflect the opinions of my corp...of one guy and a bunch of alts. |
Vito Parabellum
Fivrelde Corp
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 01:15:00 -
[25]
In the begining there was ICE. And the farmers saw that it was good. They clustered up in little bargeballs around a can that was serviced by a hauler or two. People stole and blew them to little pieces with smartbombs, petitioned and so on. Evolution.
They stopped mining in big balls and went to smaller balls, 3-4 barges and one hauler. They lost ore and ships again. Evolution.
The pingpong was invented, no hauler needed. Now the macro takes them to the belt, mines a cycle or two and warps them back to station. However, as many of them still used the same bookmarks, they ended up close to eachother and were smartbombed anyway. Evolution + hp patch.
This is where we are now, the macros are now outside smartbomb range from eachother, have passive shield hardners and t2 shield extenders making a single smartbomb attack that takes more than two smartbomb cycles impossible. And ping ponging.
Now this patch is aimed against them? I'd like to know how, because although they are going to log in after patchday and go ? they probably need 1-2 days to relocate and start pingponging again. I'm quite sure that the beltrats in 0.7 can't take an non-hardened mackinaws shield down to even half before the macro pongs the barge back from whence it came. Not to mention a rat-specific hardened shield.
So who gets hit by this? Well, people that use a hauler to mine, and that aint 99.5% of the macro/farmers anymore. So this change blatantly misses it's intended audience by a mile and a half and hits someone else. Surprised? Har har.
Check Lithalnas link up there, thats how it looks like in most highsec icebelts, and thats what it's going to look like in every 0.7 after this patch. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that all of those barges are macrofarmers, why change the game around them when you can just kick them out, pffff.
------ When you say "no one's perfect", Chuck Norris takes this as a personal insult.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 01:33:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Garric Vor'g
You do realize this won't change a thing right? If you want to eliminate macroers you'll need to remove all ice belts above 0.5 ... and a smart macroer will even be able to handle 0.5 belt rats.
Garric is right. It won't reduce the macro population, they'll just follow the ice. Also, to remove ice from all of high sec hurts everyone. There are quite a few 0.0 Alliances with research corps in high sec, they mine ice too. Adding more ice related logistics to the already over burdened POS framework would not be good.
What might work is tougher rats. Perhaps crusier and BS sized rats in high sec. Give them low bounties and crappy loot but decent tanks and decent DPS. Players will shoot them just for fun or avoid them and be able to handle them, where as macros won't be able to run five accounts with one person with out having to spend a lot of time dealing with the rats. This will cut into the profits of the isk farmers.
From time to time, drop "Zor-Minor" into a belt. Force him to have a slow lock time by giving him a poor scan resolution, players will take off and go get a combat ship, and noobs will think twice then bolt, where as the dumb macro will sit there and be Zor's plaything.
-AS |
Humwawa
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 02:53:00 -
[27]
This is a difficult problem: Removing icefields from 0,8+ didnt help a bit. I tried mining in 0,7 and could tank the rats indefinatley (never went below 98% shield)
I also dont sit infront of the screen the whole time when mining like another poster said. Are you joking??
The problem is how to get rid of the macro-miners.As someone else said one can fairly easily distinguish them.
This is only hurting normal players - I had to move my whole icemining-stuff. (I mine for my corp - pos and carrier-fuel)
Best way to see if a barge is NOT a macrominer: After a certain time the barge stoppes mining and just stands there and if a convo is sent the person answers about 36 mins later at the latest.
macromining is a big problem and ruins the economy and the game but I sadly have no solution at hand :(
All tries sofar only hurt normal players....
|
Bienurdau Hywoaf
Minmatar Matari Holo News Network
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 04:15:00 -
[28]
This won't work in getting rid of the macroers.
You removed all the belts in certain systems before for the same purpose.
They just moved to new systems, they didn't leave.
If you continue this you'll eventually remove all the belts in Empire which means new players will not be able to mine or get experience in it.
As that happens the system that supports the POSs of the alliances will begin to collapse.
I know folks have petitioned many macroers, it wouldn't be to hard to assign a GM or two to macro duty. Investigate reports quickly and efficiently.
This isn't going to work though, your only going to disrupt the game economy further by the continual removal of belts.
It also won't help to push folks into low sec and 0.0. Many casual players do not feel they can venture into those areas due to the investment needed compared to what they can earn.
Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs |
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 04:36:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf This won't work in getting rid of the macroers.
You removed all the belts in certain systems before for the same purpose.
They just moved to new systems, they didn't leave.
If you continue this you'll eventually remove all the belts in Empire which means new players will not be able to mine or get experience in it.
As that happens the system that supports the POSs of the alliances will begin to collapse.
I know folks have petitioned many macroers, it wouldn't be to hard to assign a GM or two to macro duty. Investigate reports quickly and efficiently.
This isn't going to work though, your only going to disrupt the game economy further by the continual removal of belts.
It also won't help to push folks into low sec and 0.0. Many casual players do not feel they can venture into those areas due to the investment needed compared to what they can earn.
I agree with all of this (and what others have said).
I am all for trying to stop macroers. I have seen my share but never seen the like of the one posted in the sig earlier (that is just obnoxious).
Mining Ice in 0.5 is trivially easy and macroers will easily move down to whatever they need to in order to mine with little problems. Mining Ice in 0.8 allowed them some measure of safety that they wouldn't have in 0.5 so that is where they went but in the end the differences are trivial to all but a newb.
This really seems more a slow stealth nerf at miners to push them into low sec. Ice fields were removed before and are being removed again. It didn't hamper macroers the first time and it won't this time.
FWIW I cannot even remember the last time I mined Ice. Not even sure where my Mac is anymore so I am not complaining because I think this somehow affects me. This will just end up squishing people into fewer systems to little effect except to increase lag in what is left.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.03.18 04:59:00 -
[30]
I have a radical idea to deal with this problem: make mining ice not suck, and then remove all the high-sec belts.
What is not suck? Currently I'm thinking let's remove the fact it takes hours just to mine enough fuel to keep a POS up for even 1 day.
I say, let's consider how the real world fuel economy actually works - we need comparatively few suppliers selling a cheap fuel to make the whole thing work.
I say let's make it so ice miners pull in week's worth of POS fuel in a few hours, nerf down strontium yields to keep seige warfare at about the costs it's at now.
Let's make it so ice mining is a pure transport chain rather then a massive relocator of ISK into the pockets of macro'ers, so flying in and nuking an alliance's ice field usage is actually a serious hit because you then wipe out a massive source of fuel rather then a piddlng one.
Do it CCP. Give ice mining very high yields compared to POS fuel need. Will it wreck that market? Absolutely and it should! But then we restrict supply to low-sec and 0.0, and then all of a sudden protecting your ability to mine ice is pretty important since if someone knocks out your ability to exploit your fields then they cut off a HUGE portion of the supply even if you only technically need the fields for an hour or 2 a week to power many many systems worth of POS's.
Because *gasp* not everything need's to be a mindless painful grind and OH SNAP finally we'd have a set of targets which a small gang IS worth sending after and can make a huge difference by attacking.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |