Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

NickyYo
StarHug
235
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
and so they have to respawn.. look at this lolz http://i.imgur.com/Zz9Eh.jpg
IB4 tears. .. |

Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
359
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
Although I approve of depleting ice fields, I give you -1 for starting yet another whine thread about high sec ice mining. Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings? |

baltec1
Bat Country
2629
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it
|

NickyYo
StarHug
235
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it 
Yep, awesome sandbox ey? .. |

Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
234
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
They already do deplete - it just takes a really long time. |

Lord LazyGhost
Kadavr Black Guard Shadow Cartel
17
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
**** it jsut stick ice into low sec give low sec somke fun for ones. and we sit and kill all the null bears that com to mien it simles
put ice online in low sec nowhere else |

Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
43
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it 
Why would we have to do anything about it? That security team thing they have for bots has an awesome algorithm for detecting these things....right???
Now, how do they detect prison inmate and sweat shop slaves being used for RMT rings? |

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1819
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 17:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it 
Why?
Did CCP remove weapons from the game since last I logged in?
Or do you mean,"The player base is now scared to do anything about it"? That would be more in line with the general state of 'elite PVP' that I've come to love in this game.
Mr Epeen 
There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks |

James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
1128
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
NickyYo wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Yep, awesome sandbox ey? Well you could always smartbomb them.
OH WAIT YOU CAN'T BECAUSE GSC EVERYWHERE. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem
A simple fix to the local intel problem |

Kult Altol
Republican Industries Epsilon Fleet
189
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Thats alot of miners, this makes me happy. mine on, fight the power. An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded. A narrow mind is a focused mind.
|
|

Azami Nevinyrall
Homeworld Republic Intrepid Crossing
583
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:06:00 -
[11] - Quote
BRB, gotta send a few Smartbombing BS's to an ICE field... Apperently I'm on twitter now... @AzamiNevinyrall |

baltec1
Bat Country
2630
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Why? Did CCP remove weapons from the game since last I logged in? Or do you mean,"The player base is now scared to do anything about it"? That would be more in line with the general state of 'elite PVP' that I've come to love in this game. Mr Epeen  More like its now far too expensive. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5374
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:BRB, gotta send a few Smartbombing BS's to an ICE field...
The dude who took that screenshot probably doesn't have containers on the overview, and if there are GSCs all over the place (ice fields always do) you won't be able to smartbomb them. ~*a-áproud belligerent undesirable*~ |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
10180
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:10:00 -
[14] - Quote
Yup.
Also, fix smartbombs. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|

Jason Xado
Xado Industries
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:12:00 -
[15] - Quote
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Why would we have to do anything about it? That security team thing they have for bots has an awesome algorithm for detecting these things....right??? Now, how do they detect prison inmate and sweat shop slaves being used for RMT rings?
Please do not confue multiboxing with botting. There is no evidence of botting in this screenshot. |

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1819
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Why? Did CCP remove weapons from the game since last I logged in? Or do you mean,"The player base is now scared to do anything about it"? That would be more in line with the general state of 'elite PVP' that I've come to love in this game. Mr Epeen  More like its now far too expensive.
Yup...scared.
So you can do it. You are just scared you might have to pay for your fun. Nothing fun is free, bucko.
Got it.
Mr Epeen 
There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks |

Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
43
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:30:00 -
[17] - Quote
Jason Xado wrote:Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Why would we have to do anything about it? That security team thing they have for bots has an awesome algorithm for detecting these things....right??? Now, how do they detect prison inmate and sweat shop slaves being used for RMT rings? Please do not confue multiboxing with botting. There is no evidence of botting in this screenshot.
I didn't say they were bots. I said they were slaves used in RMT rings to avoid bot detection OR bots.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:40:00 -
[18] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Yup...scared. So you can do it. You are just scared you might have to pay for your fun. Nothing fun is free, bucko. Got it. Mr Epeen 
So what costs do ice miners accept?
Chance of Ganking? Nope. (Or rather, insignificant.) Requirement to be at the Computer? Nope. Fixed cost to run? Nope. Variable output? Nope. Effort? Nope. (A dozen mouse clicks per hour is not effort.)
So, what do the ice miners have to pay for their fun? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
339
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:43:00 -
[19] - Quote
omg someone bump them, BUMP THEM ALL!. |

Azrin Stella Oerndotte
The Nommo
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 18:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Wouldn't limiting ice belts just make it more lucrative for botters to ice mine and make it harder for regular players to cash in? Just imagine ice belts being depleted a few hours after DT, not a good scenario. In my opinion making ice near-worthless is the best way to counter ice-botters, but thats me. |
|

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 19:09:00 -
[21] - Quote
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:Wouldn't limiting ice belts just make it more lucrative for botters to ice mine and make it harder for regular players to cash in? Just imagine ice belts being depleted a few hours after DT, not a good scenario. In my opinion making ice near-worthless is the best way to counter ice-botters, but thats me.
Making ice near worthless has much less impact on bots (the value of whose time is their Sub cost + electricity consumption) than it has on real people (who also have to feed themselves and such).
Ore belts are limited and they don't get depleted quickly at all. Plus, if CCP introduced deplete-able Ice belts, I'd hope they'd add Ice Grav sites as industry upgrades. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
474
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 19:12:00 -
[22] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Yup...scared. So you can do it. You are just scared you might have to pay for your fun. Nothing fun is free, bucko. Got it. Mr Epeen  So what costs do ice miners accept? Chance of Ganking? Nope. (Or rather, insignificant.) Requirement to be at the Computer? Nope. Fixed cost to run? Nope. Variable output? Nope. Effort? Nope. (A dozen mouse clicks per hour is not effort.) So, what do the ice miners have to pay for their fun?
you just implied ice mining was fun. that's your first mistake. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

Kult Altol
Republican Industries Epsilon Fleet
189
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 19:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Yup...scared. So you can do it. You are just scared you might have to pay for your fun. Nothing fun is free, bucko. Got it. Mr Epeen  So what costs do ice miners accept? Chance of Ganking? Nope. (Or rather, insignificant.) Requirement to be at the Computer? Nope. Fixed cost to run? Nope. Variable output? Nope. Effort? Nope. (A dozen mouse clicks per hour is not effort.) So, what do the ice miners have to pay for their fun?
Chance of Ganking? Extremely high Requirement to be at the Computer? Constant vigilance . Fixed cost to run? High start up, skill wise and ship. Variable output? Perfected technology. Effort? Its alot of effort for me, clicking a mouse is tough when you have no hands or feet.
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded. A narrow mind is a focused mind.
|

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:16:00 -
[24] - Quote
Kult Altol wrote:Chance of Ganking? Extremely high Requirement to be at the Computer? Constant vigilance . Fixed cost to run? High start up, skill wise and ship. Variable output? Perfected technology. Effort? Its alot of effort for me, clicking a mouse is tough when you have no hands or feet.
Nope. Stats below. Nope. The Mackinaw lets you wander away for an hour at a time. That's not a fixed cost to run. That's a capital investment. So? The fixed output still removes variability as a possible source of risk. Fair enough. Nose-Based Gaming needs a buff.
So, what significant risk do miners face?
Stats: HAG 5 killed about 14,000 Exhumers (assume each cost 300m), for 3.9T ISK total between the start of May and Today. For argument's sake, let's shoehorn all those kills in before the buff (this has the effect of concentrating the risk) on Aug 28.
That's 14,000 kills in 119 days, or 117 kills per day (5 kills per hour).
Now, let's assume that there are an average of 500 miners in Exhumers mining in all of Highsec (given that I've seen over a hundred exhumers in one Ice belt before, I think that's well beyond conservative) at any given time. So, every hour, each miner has a 1% chance of getting ganked (on average, he'll get ganked once every hundred hours). Getting ganked costs him 300m ISK, so his risk exposure is about 3m ISK/hr.
With a more realistic 2500 Exhumers mining in an average hour (I still think this is low), that drops to 600k ISK/hr of risk.
And properly tanked ships simply were not ganked. I've yet to see a killmail showing a properly tanked (pre-buff) hulk getting ganked.
Dave stark wrote:you just implied ice mining was fun. that's your first mistake.
Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
328
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:20:00 -
[25] - Quote
Ccp should not for anything until tech moons are fixed Selective Pressure [FOVRA] is now recruiting! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1797934#post1797934 |

Talus Veran
Valis Inc
23
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:30:00 -
[26] - Quote
I would support Halving or Quartering Ice Size and Refining output respectively, Reducing Cycle time by the same, and Fuel block material requirement.
This would make Ice mining more engaging, and cause ice to deplete more quickly.
I have always thought that Ice Fields never depleting was odd. "Zee Goggles, Zey Do Nothing!"
Message me on Twitter-á-á @talus_veran I follow -á #eveonline-á &-á #tweetfleet |

Jaison Savrin
Remnants of the Forgotten Seekers of the Unseen
58
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:32:00 -
[27] - Quote
I have only mined ice (in high sec) on my miner like 2 or three times. However, when I did so local was lively and the conversation of all the folks chilling at the belt made it fun. So from a social standpoint I think the non-depleting ice belts are a good thing. From a game play standpoint I am pretty much meh on it. I don't mine as a living nor am I bothered by people who do. So, whatever. |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
538
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:37:00 -
[28] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
Why are people concerned about people paying to play a game they don't enjoy?
What of it?
I care not for the "correctness" of either party tbh but these arguments ON BEHALF of other people are getting kind of tedious.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
1982
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:44:00 -
[29] - Quote
Azrin Stella Oerndotte wrote:Wouldn't limiting ice belts just make it more lucrative for botters to ice mine and make it harder for regular players to cash in? Just imagine ice belts being depleted a few hours after DT, not a good scenario. In my opinion making ice near-worthless is the best way to counter ice-botters, but thats me.
Making ice near-worthless is a great way to ensure that most ice harvesters are botters.
You can have depleting ice belts and put them in grav sites in order to prevent the "rocks are dead two hours after DT syndrome" that afflicts most of hisec.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
538
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 20:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:....in order to prevent the "rocks are dead two hours after DT syndrome" that afflicts most of hisec.
In 3 years of mining, I have only come across this "syndrome" maybe once or twice. The number of roids that are not mined in highsec might surprise you. It's more that miners gather like moths to a flame instead of actually, you, know, looking.
eg: Derelik. Most of the system remains unmined most of the time. I suspect there are many more.
Perhaps making ice useable for something else might increase it's value rather than simply look for even more ways to nerf everything to make something work.
What could ice be used for?
Triple ice needs at a POS? Engine cooling? Explosives stabiliser in production of ammo? Quafe Esky? Snowballs?
There must be more?
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
10185
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 21:13:00 -
[31] - Quote
There you go. Much better.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|

Jason Xado
Xado Industries
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 21:25:00 -
[32] - Quote
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:Jason Xado wrote:Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:baltec1 wrote:And the playerbase is now powerless to do anything about it  Why would we have to do anything about it? That security team thing they have for bots has an awesome algorithm for detecting these things....right??? Now, how do they detect prison inmate and sweat shop slaves being used for RMT rings? Please do not confue multiboxing with botting. There is no evidence of botting in this screenshot. I didn't say they were bots. I said they were slaves used in RMT rings to avoid bot detection OR bots. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam
Or there just some dude with a lot of hardware who just likes to mine Ice. Multiboxing is a great part of Eve Online. |

Bobo Cindekela
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 22:20:00 -
[33] - Quote
ganker tears best tears
honestly i dont care if they do deplete, it will just make ice cost and value similar to ore roid values
good luck fueling towers with a 1.2b monthly fuel bill vs the current 350m for a large You are about to engage in an arguement with a forum alt,-á this is your final warning. |

Destru Kaneda
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
108
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 22:22:00 -
[34] - Quote
Whoa, deja vu of a deja vu of a deja vu of a--- 0/10 Music for robots, geeks, hackers, and nerds. Nerdiest homepage on the internet? |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
474
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 22:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Dave stark wrote:you just implied ice mining was fun. that's your first mistake. Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
you miss the key benefit of mining. the fact you can do it, afk, low risk, etc, is for those players who use it to fund fun times. want to read a book or watch a film? why not earn isk while you do it so when you're done having your out of eve fun, you can use the isk to have some in eve fun.
that's why i mine, i can tab out and browse forums, read books, watch tv, etc while mining.
all games have a portion of it that isn't fun, but you have to do it. in eve, generally speaking, making isk is dull but you gotta do it to fund more interesting ventures. don't get me wrong, i don't think mining is bad enough to open a vein for, but it's hardly the most stimulating activity. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

ACE McFACE
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
842
|
Posted - 2012.10.29 22:47:00 -
[36] - Quote
A few smartbomb battleships + giant blob of miners = time and ISK well spent? "7 pages of people insulting me - aka trolling" - Lady Hofstedar What s/he (probobly he) meant: "7 pages of people disagreeing with my terrible idea - aka trolling" - Lady Hofstedar |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:26:00 -
[37] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
Why are people concerned about people paying to play a game they don't enjoy? What of it? I care not for the "correctness" of either party tbh but these arguments ON BEHALF of other people are getting kind of tedious.
I don't care whether ice miners enjoy what they do. My point is that you cannot claim that the Ice Miner's lack of risk is balanced by their supposed lack of enjoyment.
This is a Multiplayer sandbox. You are free to do whatever you want to do. So is everyone else. Including "Screwing with what you want to do." Miners don't seem to understand the second part.
Nobody's saying mining should be eliminated, but miners are saying that people who mess with them (first it was canflippers, then it was suicide gankers, now it's bumpers) should have their options eliminated. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:26:00 -
[38] - Quote
ACE McFACE wrote:A few smartbomb battleships + giant blob of miners = time and ISK well spent?
= Error. Cannot activate Smartbomb in the presence of GSC. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:30:00 -
[39] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Dave stark wrote:you just implied ice mining was fun. that's your first mistake. Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy? you miss the key benefit of mining. the fact you can do it, afk, low risk, etc, is for those players who use it to fund fun times. want to read a book or watch a film? why not earn isk while you do it so when you're done having your out of eve fun, you can use the isk to have some in eve fun. that's why i mine, i can tab out and browse forums, read books, watch tv, etc while mining. all games have a portion of it that isn't fun, but you have to do it. in eve, generally speaking, making isk is dull but you gotta do it to fund more interesting ventures. don't get me wrong, i don't think mining is bad enough to open a vein for, but it's hardly the most stimulating activity.
The implication of your post was that the risk-and-effort-free profit was balanced by the lack of it being fun.
Risk and Effort free profit can't be balanced by dullness. Effort free profit is fine, so long as it's risky. Risk free profit is fine, as long as it's high effort (mining in a noobship is risk free, but effort intensive). Why should miners have both? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
947
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:31:00 -
[40] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:ACE McFACE wrote:A few smartbomb battleships + giant blob of miners = time and ISK well spent? = Error. Cannot activate Smartbomb in the presence of GSC.
Which really needs to be fixed. There was a thread on it a couple of weeks ago which went in to great detail about how ice miners are setting up shields of GSC's so they can happily mine away with their 10 accounts. Crimewatch 2.0: Protecting stupid people & rewarding lazy people. This hurts the smart & industrious people by making their intelligence & industry provide them with less benefit over the stupid & lazy people. ~ Ruby Porto |
|

Adeleda Adoudel
Welp The Monkey Free Enterprise Treaty Organization
20
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:34:00 -
[41] - Quote
Nerf everything! Leave nothing! |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
539
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
Why are people concerned about people paying to play a game they don't enjoy? What of it? I care not for the "correctness" of either party tbh but these arguments ON BEHALF of other people are getting kind of tedious. I don't care whether ice miners enjoy what they do. My point is that you cannot claim that the Ice Miner's lack of risk is balanced by their supposed lack of enjoyment. This is a Multiplayer sandbox. You are free to do whatever you want to do. So is everyone else. Including "Screwing with what you want to do." Miners don't seem to understand the second part. Nobody's saying mining should be eliminated, but miners are saying that people who mess with them (first it was canflippers, then it was suicide gankers, now it's bumpers) should have their options eliminated. I gather you don't understand what I'm saying.
Yes. Fact. Miners are complaining, whining, ad infinitum.
Fact (as evidenced within) - NON-miners are complaining and whining about miners complaining, whining, ad infinitum.
Nobody is taking a step back and looking at first, the irony, secondly the hyprocrisy and then finally, at the stupidity of it all.
What are we ACTUALLY hoping to achieve in all this? Is there an actual goal?
Perhaps everyone needs to start addressing this from a
THIS IS WHAT WE/I/US WANT DONE - put it up for discussion and debate the MERITS insofar as how to relates to ALL players in this, a single shard cold, dark and harsh universe.
And be cognizant of OTHER players in discussing the merits. Anything else is just accelerating climate change.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|

Hypercake Mix
Magical Rainbow Bakery
63
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:53:00 -
[43] - Quote
O.o That scale of botting/multi-boxing. Pretty impressive. Makes me wonder what kind of setup that person is using.
But, yeah. Infinite static ice is being abused pretty badly. |

Sorlac
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 00:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
Well so much for the New Order being the Saviors of Hi-Sec... |

Skydell
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
328
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 01:02:00 -
[45] - Quote
That's what we need.
Hold everyone to an OCD standard. That will save EVE. Give your head a shake, Nick. |

betoli
Morior Invictus. Ethereal Dawn
48
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 01:06:00 -
[46] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
Why are people concerned about people paying to play a game they don't enjoy? What of it? I care not for the "correctness" of either party tbh but these arguments ON BEHALF of other people are getting kind of tedious. I don't care whether ice miners enjoy what they do. My point is that you cannot claim that the Ice Miner's lack of risk is balanced by their supposed lack of enjoyment. This is a Multiplayer sandbox. You are free to do whatever you want to do. So is everyone else. Including "Screwing with what you want to do." Miners don't seem to understand the second part. Nobody's saying mining should be eliminated, but miners are saying that people who mess with them (first it was canflippers, then it was suicide gankers, now it's bumpers) should have their options eliminated. I gather you don't understand what I'm saying. Yes. Fact. Miners are complaining, whining, ad infinitum. Fact (as evidenced within) - NON-miners are complaining and whining about miners complaining, whining, ad infinitum. Nobody is taking a step back and looking at first, the irony, secondly the hyprocrisy and then finally, at the stupidity of it all. What are we ACTUALLY hoping to achieve in all this? Is there an actual goal? Perhaps everyone needs to start addressing this from a THIS IS WHAT WE/I/US WANT DONE - put it up for discussion and debate the MERITS insofar as how to relates to ALL players in this, a single shard cold, dark and harsh universe. And be cognizant of OTHER players in discussing the merits. Anything else is just accelerating climate change.
Move all ICE into lowsec.
In a risky environment a human outperforms a bot.
The price rise will make protection rackets, er, I mean paying a guarding fleet, a viable profession - which it isn't currently.
Null bears will have to venture outside
general carnage
While we're there, get rid of all meta0 loot, take the nocx out of pyrox, stop all loot refining producing anything isogen or above, and double the megacyte requirements for all blueprints. :-)
This will fix everything.
|

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 01:23:00 -
[47] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy?
Why are people concerned about people paying to play a game they don't enjoy? What of it? I care not for the "correctness" of either party tbh but these arguments ON BEHALF of other people are getting kind of tedious. I don't care whether ice miners enjoy what they do. My point is that you cannot claim that the Ice Miner's lack of risk is balanced by their supposed lack of enjoyment. This is a Multiplayer sandbox. You are free to do whatever you want to do. So is everyone else. Including "Screwing with what you want to do." Miners don't seem to understand the second part. Nobody's saying mining should be eliminated, but miners are saying that people who mess with them (first it was canflippers, then it was suicide gankers, now it's bumpers) should have their options eliminated. I gather you don't understand what I'm saying. Yes. Fact. Miners are complaining, whining, ad infinitum. Fact (as evidenced within) - NON-miners are complaining and whining about miners complaining, whining, ad infinitum. Nobody is taking a step back and looking at first, the irony, secondly the hyprocrisy and then finally, at the stupidity of it all. What are we ACTUALLY hoping to achieve in all this? Is there an actual goal? Perhaps everyone needs to start addressing this from a THIS IS WHAT WE/I/US WANT DONE - put it up for discussion and debate the MERITS insofar as how to relates to ALL players in this, a single shard cold, dark and harsh universe. And be cognizant of OTHER players in discussing the merits. Anything else is just accelerating climate change.
Here's what I want. And I've been saying this since the barge buffs landed on SISI.
There should be a purpose to the Skiff's tank. That means that, the skiff should have the best yield and cargo of any Exhumer that cannot be profitably ganked. This essentially means that it should be the only one that cannot be profitably ganked.
The Mackinaw and Hulk should be very profitable to gank when they're untanked and barely profitable (or breakeven) when fully tanked (though the Skiff should simply be better at that because that's how roles work).
To keep the Mackinaw viable, the Skiff would end up with a smaller cargo hold.
The result is that miners have a real choice between the following: Passive Safety (EHP) Convenience (Cargo) Yield (er... Yield)
Pick one.
Active safety is always an option. Keep a Mackinaw or Hulk aligned or pay attention to your d-Scan, and you can be safe from suicide ganking no matter how few EHP you have.
In the alternative, depleting ice roids would curb some of the more flagrant abuse of the Mackinaw's Safe AFK mining, as would fixing GSC shields.
Right now, the Mack is tied in first for Passive Safety*, has Convenience locked up, and is a strong second for Yield. All at once.
*Once you're unprofitable to gank, you're safe from ganks under normal conditions. Things like Ice Interdictions are not ganking events. They're market manipulation, so the profit/loss of an individual gank isn't particularly relevant.
What's your position? Your post seems to indicate that it is just "people disagreeing is bad." This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
539
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 01:34:00 -
[48] - Quote
To TL:DR you and Betoli
1) Move ice to lowsec 2) (re)balance exhumers 3) remove GSC shields (which is strange when miners are told to "defend" themselves)
What's the objective? Higher ice prices? Is that good for Eve as a whole? It only affects jumpers and POS owners - which by and large is mostly 0.0.
Keep in mind that when exhumers were (more) easily ganked, the bottom line on ice was not much removed from what it is now. Both interdictions were more about manipulating profit temporaily imho.
Quote:What's your position? Your post seems to indicate that it is just "people disagreeing is bad." It is when it serves no purpose. And my position is one of trying to fathom the angst - I think we're making mountains out of molehills and taking our eye off the ball.
You have to ask why all this kerfuffle without a reason to do so. I'm befuddled on it. "I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2208
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 01:59:00 -
[49] - Quote
Touval Lysander wrote:To TL:DR you and Betoli 1) Move ice to lowsec 2) (re)balance exhumers 3) remove GSC shields (which is strange when miners are told to "defend" themselves) What's the objective? Higher ice prices? Is that good for Eve as a whole? It only affects jumpers and POS owners - which by and large is mostly 0.0. Keep in mind that when exhumers were (more) easily ganked, the bottom line on ice was not much removed from what it is now. Both interdictions were more about manipulating profit temporaily imho. Quote:What's your position? Your post seems to indicate that it is just "people disagreeing is bad." It is when it serves no purpose. And my position is one of trying to fathom the angst - I think we're making mountains out of molehills and taking our eye off the ball. You have to ask why all this kerfuffle without a reason to do so. I'm befuddled on it.
First, never said anything about moving Ice. Second, where did anyone say "defend yourself by abusing broken mechanics." We've said defend yourself by making some effort to adapt. The ability to make yourself immune to the consequences of clustering re: Smartbombs is pretty clearly a bug.
What's the objective? Removing sources of Risk and Effort free income. Making the Skiff a viable ship, so that miners have a real choice between 3 Exhumers. Higher Ice/Ore prices are good for the intelligent and/or industrious miners able to take advantage of them (like the many miners who mined all the way through HAG and never got ganked because they did adapt). Most importantly, nowhere and no one in EVE is meant to be safe. Miners are currently safe* without any effort on their part.
*I have math showing that the upper bound of risk is about 1 gank in 100hrs of mining (3m ISK/hr). And that assumes only 500 miners are mining at any given time.
Ice was in fact quite a bit more expensive while there was active ganking going on than there is now.
What ball is it that you think our eyes are off? You have still yet to take a position other than "arguments are bad." This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Jonah Gravenstein
Mahatma Cote Temporal Research
2078
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 02:13:00 -
[50] - Quote
I'm gobsmacked, NickyYo has finally made a post that doesn't make my braincells wish they were extinct 
Infinite resources are bad, even the moon goo farmers agree that they are bad.
Implement depletion on ice, then ask the members of OTEC how to fix tech.
Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum -á-á-á ---CCP can't patch stupid--- |
|

Remiel Pollard
Devlin Security Devlin Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 02:35:00 -
[51] - Quote
Resistance is futile  I am 12 and what is this?? |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2209
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 03:13:00 -
[52] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:I'm gobsmacked, NickyYo has finally made a post that doesn't make my braincells wish they were extinct  Infinite resources are bad, even the moon goo farmers agree that they are bad. Implement depletion on ice, then ask the members of OTEC how to fix tech.
Infinite resources are fine (Good, even. CCP tried a closed economy before, it failed badly). Infinite, Static, Risk-Free resources that can't be significantly disrupted (the latest cry is about bumping, which costs yield equal to how long it takes for you to wander back to your computer) are the problem.
By the way, my favorite answer to fixing tech:
Roll back T2 component material requirements to what the were pre-R64 nerf. (Possibly nerfing R64 Alchemy a little bit, since you do want the moons to be valuable enough to be worth fighting over, and we don't know the true effects of R64 alchemy because CCP radically changed component material requirements at the same time).
Then you have bottleneck materials that are spread out in varying concentrations all over EVE. You would have to be able to take and hold all of EVE to support a strong monopoly. At which point, I think you've earned it.
You'll have regions with very little in the way of R64s that are remote enough that defense isn't super worthwhile, so a small new alliance may be able to take a few moons without drawing the full force of the defending alliance down upon their heads. And now you have a new, independent alliance with a foothold and some alliance-level income. (This part about new alliances and footholds is what I hope will happen, and what happened with R64s in the past. No guarantees, the metagame may have shifted in flight, and YMMV.) This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Remiel Pollard
Devlin Security Devlin Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 03:16:00 -
[53] - Quote
Here's a thought I've been having
Leave ice mining where it is, but make "mid-sec" space out of 0.5
> No CONCORD, but local easier-to-defeat police forces will respond to criminal activity
> No response to criminal presence, any low-security player can be present and will only be responded to if they engage in criminal activity
I'm sure we can mash out some other ideas for a mid-sec style of space, but those are just some basic thoughts I've had. Making it easier to engage in criminal activities in hi-sec space, however, defeats the purpose of having hi-sec space, and while many of you want to think that you should be able to do whatever you want without consequence, I think this belittles the entitlement that all players have to enjoy the game without having to do so at the expense of another player's enjoyment.
I think a mid-sec compromise idea would be worth compromising for. I am 12 and what is this?? |

Jonah Gravenstein
Holistic Materials Research Council
2078
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 03:44:00 -
[54] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
Infinite resources are fine (Good, even. CCP tried a closed economy before, it failed badly). Infinite, Static, Risk-Free resources that can't be significantly disrupted (the latest cry is about bumping, which costs yield equal to how long it takes for you to wander back to your computer) are the problem.
As always Ruby you make a compelling argument, I was unaware that CCP had tried a closed economy in the past and failed, my bad 
I completely agree that resources which are immune to disruption are a problem, especially infinite ones that are in relatively safe space, which encourages afk harvesting. Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum -á-á-á ---CCP can't patch stupid--- |

Sentamon
200
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 03:56:00 -
[55] - Quote
Why would you complain about this? That setup is a dream for smartbomb gankers.
RubyPorto wrote: = Error. Cannot activate Smartbomb in the presence of GSC.
Well that's pretty lame. Lets fix this first. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2209
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 04:15:00 -
[56] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Here's a thought I've been having
Leave ice mining where it is, but make "mid-sec" space out of 0.5
> No CONCORD, but local easier-to-defeat police forces will respond to criminal activity
> No response to criminal presence, any low-security player can be present and will only be responded to if they engage in criminal activity
I'm sure we can mash out some other ideas for a mid-sec style of space, but those are just some basic thoughts I've had. Making it easier to engage in criminal activities in hi-sec space, however, defeats the purpose of having hi-sec space, and while many of you want to think that you should be able to do whatever you want without consequence, I think this belittles the entitlement that all players have to enjoy the game without having to do so at the expense of another player's enjoyment.
I think a mid-sec compromise idea would be worth compromising for.
There is a middle-sec. It's called Low Sec.
HighSec without Concord is largely Low Sec. If your "middle sec" has tankable/beatble semi-Concord, it's low sec with mandatory Logi.
Also, the issue is that Ice mining is an income source that cannot be effectively disrupted. How does your proposal do anything to solve the problem? There are Ice belts in systems of .6-.7(.8?) security. Your proposal doesn't affect those. This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Obsidian Hawk
Aliastra Gallente Federation
845
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 05:02:00 -
[57] - Quote
After seeing that photo i have the sudden urge to mount an abbadon with full smartbombs... just saying. |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
542
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 05:16:00 -
[58] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Also, the issue is that Ice mining is an income source that cannot be effectively disrupted.
Ice is cheap. So what? Risk / reward ratio is probably commensurate with the price.
The people selling it direct pay the price for their greed. Those that mine it for jump fuel or POS's don't care what the price is. Those that buy it outright for jump fuel or POS's would be happy with the price.
Now if you want to make heads roll because you won't gank then you need to CONVINCE someone that ganking ice miners is actually NECCESSARY to require change.
That's the bit missing. "I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1821
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 06:20:00 -
[59] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Infinite resources are fine (Good, even. CCP tried a closed economy before, it failed badly). Infinite, Static, Risk-Free resources that can't be significantly disrupted (the latest cry is about bumping, which costs yield equal to how long it takes for you to wander back to your computer) are the problem.
As always Ruby you make a compelling argument, I was unaware that CCP had tried a closed economy in the past and failed, my bad  I completely agree that resources which are immune to disruption are a problem, especially infinite ones that are in relatively safe space, which encourages afk harvesting.
I agree that nothing should be immune to disruption. And nothing is.
Ice mining is, however, now immune to risk averse gankers popping Exhumers at next to no cost to themselves.
And I'm fine with that. It keeps the forum lively, don't you think?
Mr Epeen 
There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks |

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
542
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 06:33:00 -
[60] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
Infinite resources are fine (Good, even. CCP tried a closed economy before, it failed badly). Infinite, Static, Risk-Free resources that can't be significantly disrupted (the latest cry is about bumping, which costs yield equal to how long it takes for you to wander back to your computer) are the problem.
As always Ruby you make a compelling argument, I was unaware that CCP had tried a closed economy in the past and failed, my bad  I completely agree that resources which are immune to disruption are a problem, especially infinite ones that are in relatively safe space, which encourages afk harvesting. I agree that nothing should be immune to disruption. And nothing is. Ice mining is, however, now immune to risk averse gankers popping Exhumers at next to no cost to themselves. And I'm fine with that. It keeps the forum lively, don't you think? Mr Epeen  Yes. If only we could move onto something, you know, important? "I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
|
|

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
810
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 06:39:00 -
[61] - Quote
But its not hot in space. I'm not shitposting. |

pussnheels
The Fiction Factory
678
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 07:28:00 -
[62] - Quote
bet the op will think different if he flew a capital or has a pos to fuel I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |

Takeda Kashada
WH ORE Exploration
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 07:30:00 -
[63] - Quote
he's a multiboxer not a botter.
and totally agree, smartbombs need to be fixed to provide a more final solution rather than bumping |

Peter Tjordenskiold
25
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 07:41:00 -
[64] - Quote
No, we need more ice interdiction! Calling for CCP isn't a solution. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4992
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 07:44:00 -
[65] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Yup...scared. So you can do it. You are just scared you might have to pay for your fun. Nothing fun is free, bucko. Got it. Mr Epeen  So what costs do ice miners accept? Chance of Ganking? Nope. (Or rather, insignificant.) Requirement to be at the Computer? Nope. Fixed cost to run? Nope. Variable output? Nope. Effort? Nope. (A dozen mouse clicks per hour is not effort.) So, what do the ice miners have to pay for their fun?
Well, they have to mine ice, I suppose. MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |

baltec1
Bat Country
2632
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 07:46:00 -
[66] - Quote
rodyas wrote:But its not hot in space.
depends. |

TuonelanOrja
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
195
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 08:13:00 -
[67] - Quote
All hail THE WIS!!! Not a veteran, just bitter.. |

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
1982
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 08:14:00 -
[68] - Quote
Tippia wrote:There you go. Much better.
My favourite haunts in Genesis have been stripped clean very quickly lately. I've even been mining in hisec islands, only to find ravenous fleets of hulks stripping the belts every other week.
Go out and have a look these days, Tippia and Touval. The recent mining nerf means that there are more people out there looking for ore, so they're spreading further afield to get their stocks. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
475
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 08:49:00 -
[69] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Tippia wrote:There you go. Much better. My favourite haunts in Genesis have been stripped clean very quickly lately. I've even been mining in hisec islands, only to find ravenous fleets of hulks stripping the belts every other week. Go out and have a look these days, Tippia and Touval. The recent mining nerf means that there are more people out there looking for ore, so they're spreading further afield to get their stocks.
i'm a couple of jumps out from jita and the belts are fairly quiet. pick a better system. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |

Corvus Idolon
Royal Alans Photonautics Engineers
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 09:36:00 -
[70] - Quote
Dave stark wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Tippia wrote:There you go. Much better. My favourite haunts in Genesis have been stripped clean very quickly lately. I've even been mining in hisec islands, only to find ravenous fleets of hulks stripping the belts every other week. Go out and have a look these days, Tippia and Touval. The recent mining nerf means that there are more people out there looking for ore, so they're spreading further afield to get their stocks. i'm a couple of jumps out from jita and the belts are fairly quiet. pick a better system.
I'm only 2 jumps from Amarr one or two more jumps and there's no else around and I have all the belts to my self. |
|

Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
304
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 09:47:00 -
[71] - Quote
Ice Fields in High Sec Deplete.
Put non depleting Ice Fields in Low Sec (not Null though, I think you'd just get botting activity in Null instead).
Solved "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli |
|

ISD TYPE40
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2502

|
Posted - 2012.10.30 09:50:00 -
[72] - Quote
Thread moved from GD to F&I - ISD Type40. ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
811
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 10:08:00 -
[73] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:rodyas wrote:But its not hot in space. depends.
Well take your handsome mug out of the picture. Its freezing up there. We should just mine ice off our windshields. I'm not shitposting. |

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
811
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 10:09:00 -
[74] - Quote
ISD TYPE40 wrote:Thread moved from GD to F&I - ISD Type40.
ISD, Are you guys capable of moderating a ice field so hard, it would finally deplete its ice? I'm not shitposting. |

Chaotic Mind
Rennfeuer Curatores Veritatis Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 10:15:00 -
[75] - Quote
change NPC Corp bonuses to: - 50% Income Tax - 75% Mining Yield Penalty on Ore Mining Modules - 75% Mining Duration Penalty on Ice Mining Modules
Eve was always about risk vs reward, NPC corps have it too easy atm |

TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
455
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 11:34:00 -
[76] - Quote
Depleting ice fields, and move them to only null/lowsec/wormholes (as anoms?)
It's utterly absurd that they're all over high sec and are absolutely infinite. |

RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2209
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 13:53:00 -
[77] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:I agree that nothing should be immune to disruption. And nothing is. Ice mining is, however, now immune to risk averse gankers popping Exhumers at next to no cost to themselves. And I'm fine with that. It keeps the forum lively, don't you think? Mr Epeen 
First: What other significant form of disruption do ice miners face?
Second: The only exhumers that could ever be profitably ganked were the untanked (or shittanked) exhumers. What is the point in having fitting slots for tank on an exhumer when the base ship hull has enough EHP to keep you safe even after you fit expensive modules on it? Any untanked HAC can be profitably ganked for its guns. In fact, most untanked, fitted Cruisers can be profitably ganked for their guns. Why should Exhumers be safe from profitable ganks without fitting a tank? This is EVE. -á Everybody Versus Everybody.
Guess Who's Back. |

Dave stark
Black Nova Corp. R O G U E
476
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 17:16:00 -
[78] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Dave stark wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Dave stark wrote:you just implied ice mining was fun. that's your first mistake. Why would people play a game to do something they didn't enjoy? you miss the key benefit of mining. the fact you can do it, afk, low risk, etc, is for those players who use it to fund fun times. want to read a book or watch a film? why not earn isk while you do it so when you're done having your out of eve fun, you can use the isk to have some in eve fun. that's why i mine, i can tab out and browse forums, read books, watch tv, etc while mining. all games have a portion of it that isn't fun, but you have to do it. in eve, generally speaking, making isk is dull but you gotta do it to fund more interesting ventures. don't get me wrong, i don't think mining is bad enough to open a vein for, but it's hardly the most stimulating activity. The implication of your post was that the risk-and-effort-free profit was balanced by the lack of it being fun. Risk and Effort free profit can't be balanced by dullness. Effort free profit is fine, so long as it's risky. Risk free profit is fine, as long as it's high effort (mining in a noobship is risk free, but effort intensive). Why should miners have both?
it is.
if it's dull and boring, then people won't do it no matter how much profit is in it, because as you said. why would people do something that isn't fun? they wouldn't. hence, people don't "do" mining. they mine while doing other things. personally i'm also glad it's so risk free and afkable due to it's **** poor isk/hour ratio. Reading my posts is like panning for gold; most it will be useless, but occasionally you'll find a nugget of gold. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |