| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
13
   |
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sad Bro wrote:Won't anyone think about the asteroids? One day asteroids are going to stop appearing from thin air and then what will we do? We are a society dependent on minerals and when the asteroids are gone, so too will be the minerals. We must consider alternative energy solutions. Quickly, CCP, implement corn farming in PI so I can refine T2 ethanol.
"In the past, scientists shared their concerns about an overall reduction in the supply of raw resources, but in recent times, the discovery of additional ore in unknown sectors of space has alleviated this anxiety. There are some experts who have maintained all along, however, that the ongoing excavations on the frontiers of nullsec, where new belts are still being uncovered each day, has provided more than enough incoming ore to satisfy the industrialists of New Eden. "
sorry duder, the experts have spoken. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Zkaor wrote:Not afk mining, doing laps around the item being mined does not work and W.O.W.?
My issue is not with the act of bumping but not being able to respond in a way other than pay or leave. To me this has been exploited enough and needs to be fixed. And here is the next demand after they made ganking unprofitable.
Ganking unprofitability has backfired on miners, it's not profitable to gank bumpers, leaving no recourse. I have a new solution.
Let us mine from the hull of bumpers' ships as they bump and grind. low sec ore< null sec ore < high sec ore <<< bumper ore.
|
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Zkaor wrote:Will someone at CCP please allow miners defend (destroy) the bumpers ship without Concord intervention. As it is now all miners hands are tied and MUST submit to their extorsion tactics with no means of defense. Have you considered moving to another system or region? Or using a pair of webifiers? [Industrials work too.] [Scorpion, 2x Quad Webber] Armor Explosive Hardener II Armor Kinetic Hardener II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I
webifiers are exactly the reason why highsec bumping seems like a problem. webifiers and bumping are two main ways to affect the speed of a hostile ship. webifiers get you concorded in highsec...bumping doesn't. So, your post, while failing in its aims, at least brings up this central inconsistency. If ccp made hostile webifying legal in highsec, I'd cease my opposition to hisec bumping, actually. It would simultaneously remove the inconsistency while providing a means of defense. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Zkaor wrote:Will someone at CCP please allow miners defend (destroy) the bumpers ship without Concord intervention. As it is now all miners hands are tied and MUST submit to their extorsion tactics with no means of defense.
P.S. If this should be posted elsewhere please let me know...thanks You can suicide gank them After all there are no consequences for doing this, right?
There's no risk. But there are known consequences,also known as 'costs'.
|
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vanyr Andrard wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:Zkaor wrote:Will someone at CCP please allow miners defend (destroy) the bumpers ship without Concord intervention. As it is now all miners hands are tied and MUST submit to their extorsion tactics with no means of defense. Have you considered moving to another system or region? Or using a pair of webifiers? [Industrials work too.] [Scorpion, 2x Quad Webber] Armor Explosive Hardener II Armor Kinetic Hardener II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I webifiers are exactly the reason why highsec bumping seems like a problem. webifiers and bumping are two main ways to affect the speed of a hostile ship. webifiers get you concorded in highsec...bumping doesn't. So, your post, while failing in its aims, at least brings up this central inconsistency. If ccp made hostile webifying legal in highsec, I'd cease my opposition to hisec bumping, actually. It would simultaneously remove the inconsistency while providing a means of defense. Oh dear well you'd better join a corp then
I'm in a corp?
|
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Well then web away! Aggressing a corpmate isn't a CONCORD offence.
(You knew that, right?)
How do i simultaneously join the corp of every bumper in existence, assuming they agree to it?
(you knew that was impossible already, right?)
((did you miss the specification of 'hostile webifying', or the parellelism between bumping and webifying implying webifying noncorpmates?)) |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
James 315 wrote:In all seriousness though, there are plenty of ways to defend against bumpers. Go mine in low/null and shoot them. 
I tried that a few times, but you guys only bump in high sec  |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Vanyr Andrard wrote:Malcanis wrote:Well then web away! Aggressing a corpmate isn't a CONCORD offence.
(You knew that, right?) How do i simultaneously join the corp of every bumper in existence, assuming they agree to it? (you knew that was impossible already, right?) ((did you miss the specification of 'hostile webifying', or the parellelism between bumping and webifying implying webifying noncorpmates?)) You do realize that you web the mining ships, so they don't move as much, right? And yes, with an in-corp (player) web.
There were multiple people responding so it got a bit mixed up...yes, the situation you initiated this discussion about works that way, but I then expanded it into an entire new discussion in which that isn't relevant. Sorry for the confusion. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 19:23:00 -
[9] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Look, highsec safeties like CONCORD and dec shields and NPC corps are designed to protect players in the middle of PvE from being victim to PVP, right?
Since there is no player behind the keyboard of those being bumped, that means what James is doing is by definition PvE (thanks to his testing), and therefore is entitled to the all the protections that all other forms of highsec PvE currently enjoy. We don't want to increase risk in highsec after all, right?
incorrect, james and his crew bumps at the computer players constantly. not sure why this isn't clear to so many people. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 20:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Allowing miners to defend themselves" has proven to be a gigantic slippery slope in the past. Giving them an inch in any direction is inevitably going to result in highsec having even less player to player interaction in it.
It's rare that someone using the "slippery slope fallacy" will actually stop to destroy their argument by referring to it as such. Perhaps it's a result of being surrounded by so much ice...badabing! |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 23:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
BeanBagKing wrote:Zkaor wrote:Wars do not add risk to high-sec, allowing miners to defend does. I don't get it... "I want to retaliate without concord intervention!" --> wars "I don't wanna war!" Did I miss something?
You sure did! Allow me to explain :)
The bumpers of the new order don't join the same corp, so that it is impossible to wardec them all.
If you decide just to wardec the ones bumping you the most, some are in dreddit and GS, and the cost to wardec those is fairly high for a small corp.
Many of the rest are in 1 man corps, and let it be known that if you pay for a wardec, they'll jump back to an NPC corp, which they can still bump from.
A few are in neither of this conditions, like turborg above; if you're lucky enough to want to wardec only one bumper, and that's the bumper you want to wardec, then you are good to go--except the rest of the bumpers can still bump you, so even in that small % case, it's still only a very partial solution. Your only full solution is to gank the ship of the bumper, which is both cheaper than a mining ship and much more fitting room to fit tank, or work out a nonviolent solution. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
16
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 02:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Zkaor wrote:Maybe not velicoty related but more the distace the bumpee was moved ?? I would assume something can be programmed to only happen (flg bumper) if a mining laser or whatever is active on a given ship. y/n ? idk. Why not just have CCP magic ore into your holds.
Amusingly, this is how mining lasers already work. You shoot the asteroid with an orange laser, and CCP magics ore into your hold. If you use T2 strips, then a little icelandic wizard appears every so often and speeds up the process. You didn't know? |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
18
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 15:53:00 -
[13] - Quote
Sarah Schneider wrote:What next? allow miners to mine spacerocks from station?
mining spaceminerals like technetium from stations? Jeepers, that would ruin the game in minutes!
oh.
~not sure if srs~ |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
18
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:07:00 -
[14] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Vanyr Andrard wrote:Sarah Schneider wrote:What next? allow miners to mine spacerocks from station? mining spaceminerals like technetium from stations? Jeepers, that would ruin the game in minutes! oh. ~not sure if srs~ The stupidity. Because we can blow up NPC stations, right? Go back to your communist center and stop demanding CCP to further push your play style on us.
I don't live in the communist center. Why would you think I do? (and i'm on record as being in favor of all your suggestions about changing highsec and nullsec) Does someone else have a similar name to mine? You seem to be just hurling random senseless accusations about. |
Vanyr Andrard
Foo Holdings
Free 2 Play
18
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
Natsett Amuinn wrote:Vanyr Andrard wrote:Natsett Amuinn wrote:Vanyr Andrard wrote:Sarah Schneider wrote:What next? allow miners to mine spacerocks from station? mining spaceminerals like technetium from stations? Jeepers, that would ruin the game in minutes! oh. ~not sure if srs~ The stupidity. Because we can blow up NPC stations, right? Go back to your communist center and stop demanding CCP to further push your play style on us. I don't live in the communist center. Why would you think I do? (and i'm on record as being in favor of all your suggestions about changing highsec and nullsec) Does someone else have a similar name to mine? You seem to be just hurling random senseless accusations about. Preposterous! Seriously though, the entire thing read very much to me like you were trying to make some point about how moon mining works; so high seccers mining from stations wouldn't break anything anymore than moon mining does. Did I read it wrong, is it clearer than i thought it was?
It was just a little joke, or at least an attempt at one. |
| |
|