|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1711
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 04:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
I guess FA doesnt keep you busy enough with nullsec pew pew if your running around trying to change the way miners play their game. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1711
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 06:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thor Kerrigan wrote:Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:The sad fact of the matter is if all of EVE were created for the PVP player by the PVP player...EVE would die. There is such a thing as a non-PVP character in EVE? Must have missed the button in the character creation screen. If only I could go back and select it, I too would enjoy the advantages of risk-free income and complete immunity. My buddies would love me as I would provide them with accurate intel on the enemy without risking my ship. I too would enjoy not playing the 0.01 isk game in trade hubs. I too would be able to haul 200 plexes in an ibis on autopilot from Jita to Amarr. I too would be perfectly immune to bumping. I too would not see scams in Jita local. I too would be able to fly a fully Estamel-Fit Tengu and leave it 23/7 AFK for all to see. I too could enjoy playing a game that could as well be playable offline.
I lolled.
Truth is, you can choose to be a non PvP toon that can do all of that.... or if your too lazy not to bother and all you want to do is blow people up... well then... one can easily see why toons like you are the way you are... |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1711
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 06:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Highsec mining definatly needs some sort of risk injected into it. As it stands right now there is no real threat to them.
Wardecs.
You aint using them.
Jihadding with bigger ships that push out more DPS (but you'd make a loss dying to concord)... you aint using that either.
Infact, I see plenty of risk..... but I see more nullsec whiners avoiding risk and the costs involved and crying about it... |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1711
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 14:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
I'm still waiting for an actual justification for the introduction of risk for hi-sec miners from the "would love nothing more than to gank the miners for lolz" crowd in this topic.
If they AFK mine enough... they will have 0 risk with 0 profit/reward to match..... I don't see the issue here.... |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1712
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 17:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:I'm still waiting for an actual justification for the introduction of risk for hi-sec miners from the "would love nothing more than to gank the miners for lolz" crowd in this topic.
If they AFK mine enough... they will have 0 risk with 0 profit/reward to match..... I don't see the issue here.... Well when they were getting ganked miners also enjoyed the best profits they have ever seen which is a rather nice thing. It also removed a great deal of bots which is also great for everyone. But risk for miners doesnt have to be only from pvp.
I'm touched.
In a topic hoping to come up with solid ideas to add risk to and ruin a profession many of the participants in here shun or wouldn't be caught dead doing anyway... we have gems who care about the profit of said profession.
/sarcasm.
And all the bots was actually grand... more minerals on the supply side of the market, lower prices... cheaper ships, cheaper pew pew... so again.... I'm not seeing the bright side of changing that.... |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1712
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 18:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:baltec1 wrote:Asuka Solo wrote:I'm still waiting for an actual justification for the introduction of risk for hi-sec miners from the "would love nothing more than to gank the miners for lolz" crowd in this topic.
If they AFK mine enough... they will have 0 risk with 0 profit/reward to match..... I don't see the issue here.... Well when they were getting ganked miners also enjoyed the best profits they have ever seen which is a rather nice thing. It also removed a great deal of bots which is also great for everyone. But risk for miners doesnt have to be only from pvp. I'm touched. In a topic hoping to come up with solid ideas to add risk to and ruin a profession many of the participants in here shun or wouldn't be caught dead doing anyway... always demanding that hi-sec mining profits get nerfed in accordance with its lack of risk... we have gems who care about the profit of said profession. /sarcasm. And all the bots was actually grand... more minerals on the supply side of the market, lower prices... cheaper ships, cheaper pew pew... so again.... I'm not seeing the bright side of changing that.... I'm not sure it would be conducive to your cause to continue along this line of reasoning. You don't want miners to be directly associated with actually supporting botting, do you? Besides, you must realize the havoc bots wreak on the economy. Value = Demand / Supply. As supply goes up, value goes down. Bots relentlessly contribute to supply in a way designed specifically to mininimize demand. Give that some thought, please.
My views are my own. Miners can speak for themselves if they are so inclined. Fools would take one opinion and try to extrapolate it to a population.
I'm not going to argue the de-merrits of bots. Why not? From a price perspective, I fully support the proliferation of minerals on the market by any and all means necessary. From a profit perspective, I object wholeheartedly to my previous statement. Then again, I'm a profiteering ho. So I will support both the reduction of costs of goods and the maximization of profit in the same breath.
Therefore I think you need to differentiate between your compulsion to remove the bot from mining that will in itself, to some extent, balance out your value = demand / supply equation by basing the equation on true player capacity instead of automated capacity with actual people supplimenting...... from your compulsion to ruin the mining game in the hope that the perceived solutions of a predominantly pro-ganking clique will make everyone happy.
If your entire justification for this whole debate is that bots devalue mining... then clearly adding risks will not solve the problem (As it didn't in the past when risk was abundant... in fact, I recall botting at its worst when you had soo much risk to play with in hi-sec, that you could agress somebody and profit from the gank or even prevent concord from getting sum back just for getting looked at the wrong way or minding their own business).
How bots are removed from Eve without touching risk, is a different animal all together... one I think this topic doesn't cover at all. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1712
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 18:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: So you dedicate half your post to atacking me most likely because I am an "evil ganker" and then say you love miners earning less. My irony gland is tingling.
Yup.
Any man who doesn't claim to have double standards is either a liar or trying to sell you something. |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1712
|
Posted - 2012.10.09 18:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote: All well and good. However, your arguments cannot be resolved logically or mathematically. Either you want low prices, or you want high prices.
Either you want successful miners to earn peanuts, or you want successful miners to earn reasonable income.
There really isn't a middle of the road here.
Also, I have it on good authority that bot authors hated Hulkageddon. Which is interesting, considering prices earned at market by successful miners during Hulkageddon were among the highest ever earned in Eve.
Thanks for your replies.
Granted, I made awesome isk during hulkageddons. Loved the profits, hated the faggotry.
But this is Eve. If you can't cut costs via industrial scale supply and maximize profits by adding additional value at the same time, given Eve's complexities, then your doing it wrong.
I want miners to do either, or both as their local environments and personal capacities will allow them to.
Thanks for the engagement ;) |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1719
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 15:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Before this forever train continues I would just like to point out the the biggest crash has been in the ice markets which were not impacted by gun mining in any way. The low end mineral markets have so far only dropped slightly but because of the large quantities required it has had an impact and the prices will continue to fall but at a slower pace than ice has. Already we are seeing high sec systems utterly stripped clean within hours of the sever shutdown by bot fleets which is something I have never seen in the seven or eight years I have been playing.
Then I don't know where you've been playing.....
Because in the 6 years I've been playing (<- obvious forum alt is obvious)... I've not only seen it... I've logged in my alt fleets and multiboxed those belts myself.
1,5 hours per belt on average before the patch..... |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1722
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 17:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:Kitty Bear wrote:La Nariz wrote:It costs the miner nothing to mine asteroids/ice. By your own argument, it follows that the below statements equally apply It costs the Mission runner nothing to run missions It costs the Nulsec Belt Ratter nothing to clear belts It costs Explorers nothing to salvage/hack or gas/oremine It costs FW pilots nothing to plex It costs Incursion runners nothing to deal with sansha hoards You're taking that out of context. All of those aside from FW cannot be done AFK, except for maybe mission running in a drone boat. They all require invested time aside from FW.
With the exception of Incursions, it seems in context to me.
Eve is about Capital ships, Boobs, PI and Isk! |
|
|
|
|