Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
684
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 08:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
Gotta like how the spacerich NULLbears try to paint SOV as too tuff while amassing TECH fortunes that'll last for years.... Every future expansion that doesn't address the moon goo bottle neck that lead to this ThunderdomeGäó is another expansion that in IMHO will lead to NULL's stagnation.... While I understand Shaddooo's tactical desire to have TECH funded gudfights for his owns everlasting tech funded wars the rest of Eve will suffer... Instead of misdirecting all Eve's ills on HI SEC lets point it at were its due: its time to break the near TECH monoploy CCP Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Acac Sunflyier
Burning Star L.L.C.
542
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
It's hard when you're not big. Some of the null people who are talking about how hard things are aren't goonswarm. the small businesses of eve do fail within a year. CCP don't make us wait another decade for a drone overhaul; DRONE OVERHAUL NOW! |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2239
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
You are linking to some hopeless nerds terrible blog, like it was some kind of source of relevant information?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7082
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:05:00 -
[5] - Quote
hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2663
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Acac Sunflyier wrote:It's hard when you're not big. Some of the null people who are talking about how hard things are aren't goonswarm. the small businesses of eve do fail within a year.
You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them. A TMC guy pointed this out not long ago but all the highsec people **** him down because "Abloobloobloo Tech moons". Even those of us (for the most part) realise the bad state that nullsec is in & would like to see it fixed.
CCP made a crappy sov system then made it worse by not listening to the playerbase, but we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's still available. It was the same deal with highsec incursion payouts. It was far too profitable, but we still took advantage of it. DarthNefarius like to overlook that. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
684
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them.
BoB politics/paradigm at its peak, no? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7082
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them.
BoB politics/paradigm at its peak, no?
no, just the way the world works ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8175
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them.
BoB politics/paradigm at its peak, no? no, just the way the world works
Unless you live in NPC space, in which case you can solo around (or just be in a corp) quite happily. Plenty of people live like that in Stain and Curse. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
684
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them.
BoB politics/paradigm at its peak, no? no, just the way the world works
While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
|
Balthisus Filtch
RISE Inc.
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:01:00 -
[11] - Quote
So here is the problem with moon goo.
New player base comes from 2 main places.
1 - random people pulled in by marketing, PR and advertising
2. - the 2 big nullsec blocks which feed players into the game from the IRL websites they are linked to
The majority of people want to play games casually (if you don't believe that then just look at the dumbing down of any major franchise). Unsurprisingly then a significant portion of new players that arrive in EVE also want to play casually. If developers don't cater to them then the game suffers significantly financially.
The random ppl joining in hi-sec get relative safety and a mission system/ship progression to suit their needs.
Those joining major power block get free ships and modules paid for by Moon goo. Their game consists of no hassle /hard work major fleet fights.
Turn off the moon goo and free stuff alliance programs and you might just turn off a significant route by which new players are attracted into and retained in the game. Clearly Moon Goo is totally game unbalancing and totally unfair..... BUT having implemented it, how do they get themselves out of it without damaging themselves financially.
IMO this is why the most obvious fix in the game hasn't appeared to gather any momentum to being fixed. CCP aren't stupid, they see the problem - but there is no win win solution right now.
Final killer - its the new players that pay for subscriptions - the older player base are in the main paying for plex - so financially new players are the lifeblood of the game. So that moon goo led gameplay driven by the IRL websites is really key to CCP, constant stream of new players joining and leaving is good for them.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7082
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson )
several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist
of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7082
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
Balthisus Filtch wrote:So here is the problem with moon goo.
New player base comes from 2 main places.
1 - random people pulled in by marketing, PR and advertising
2. - the 2 big nullsec blocks which feed players into the game from the IRL websites they are linked to
The majority of people want to play games casually (if you don't believe that then just look at the dumbing down of any major franchise). Unsurprisingly then a significant portion of new players that arrive in EVE also want to play casually. If developers don't cater to them then the game suffers significantly financially.
The random ppl joining in hi-sec get relative safety and a mission system/ship progression to suit their needs.
Those joining major power block get free ships and modules paid for by Moon goo. Their game consists of no hassle /hard work major fleet fights.
Turn off the moon goo and free stuff alliance programs and you might just turn off a significant route by which new players are attracted into and retained in the game. Clearly Moon Goo is totally game unbalancing and totally unfair..... BUT having implemented it, how do they get themselves out of it without damaging themselves financially.
IMO this is why the most obvious fix in the game hasn't appeared to gather any momentum to being fixed. CCP aren't stupid, they see the problem - but there is no win win solution right now.
Final killer - its the new players that pay for subscriptions - the older player base are in the main paying for plex - so financially new players are the lifeblood of the game. So that moon goo led gameplay driven by the IRL websites is really key to CCP, constant stream of new players joining and leaving is good for them.
yeah no that's not how it works ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
684
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:06:00 -
[14] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle
EVEneeds ALOT more ******* jumgles like there where in Viet NAM to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:09:00 -
[15] - Quote
Welcome to the jumgle. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
684
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:11:00 -
[16] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Welcome to the jumgle.
Where's my canniester of agent orange? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle Tactical Narcotics Team
729
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:16:00 -
[17] - Quote
Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
Yes we know that they're using the SOV grind as an excuse while only saying "fix it" and giving no ideas on how to.
I strongly believe that CCP is scared to make "Big changes" to the game after the Incarna incident. Which throughly explains why they've been releasing overglorified patches instead of actual expansions. I can see CCP pushing work on other games (Dust and maybe that Vampire game....whatever it's called.) Before thay make big changes to EVE, ESP "Broken SOV mechanics."
OR, I could go on the Tinfoil hat route and **** off devs. (One word, it's a mix of A job title that we call employees that work for CCP and a certain large powerbloc. Say that one word, BAM, instant vacation from forums.) I'm not entirely clear on the point of this, but I do have a sudden urge to jump in a catalyst and blow up a miner. Twitter! - @AzamiNevinyrall I'm half expecting a ban for this post. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8176
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:26:00 -
[18] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle EVEneeds ALOT more ******* jumgles like there where in Viet NAM to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them
You mean like 2500 W-space systems? Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8176
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:27:00 -
[19] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
If by "happy" you mean "have been begging, pleading, yelling and just plain asking for CCP to fix them" then sure I guess.
Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
685
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:29:00 -
[20] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle EVEneeds ALOT more ******* jumgles like there where in Viet NAM to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them You mean like 2500 W-space systems?
NAAAH more like current gold mines should run dry eventually some faster then others and stale systems should get some embarrassing overgrowth that threatens SOV Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
|
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2666
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:33:00 -
[21] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know that they're using the SOV grind as an excuse while only saying "fix it" and giving no ideas on how to.
Great ideas have been put forward, but CCP doesn't listen. Does it surprise you when I say that CCP doesn't listen? Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
685
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:33:00 -
[22] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
If by "happy" you mean "have been begging, pleading, yelling and just plain asking for CCP to fix them" then sure I guess.
butt Goons/CFC/HBC/PL/big bluwedoughnut doth protests toooooo much Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle Tactical Narcotics Team
730
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:34:00 -
[23] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
If by "happy" you mean "have been begging, pleading, yelling and just plain asking for CCP to fix them" then sure I guess. What ideas have been put forth by these people, and how to change it?
And if you say "Borders" then I hope you mean "Remove all timers." I'm not entirely clear on the point of this, but I do have a sudden urge to jump in a catalyst and blow up a miner. Twitter! - @AzamiNevinyrall I'm half expecting a ban for this post. |
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle Tactical Narcotics Team
731
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:37:00 -
[24] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know that they're using the SOV grind as an excuse while only saying "fix it" and giving no ideas on how to. Great ideas have been put forward, but CCP doesn't listen. Does it surprise you when I say that CCP doesn't listen? I've been playing this game long enough to realize that.
-edit-
I agree with both arguments here, yes SOV needs to change, if not for it "being broken," but to change things. But I personally don't think its broken, just boring as ****. I also agree with Powerblocs being happy with their current positions. Because, after all, Greed is good, right? I'm not entirely clear on the point of this, but I do have a sudden urge to jump in a catalyst and blow up a miner. Twitter! - @AzamiNevinyrall I'm half expecting a ban for this post. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7085
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:44:00 -
[25] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Malcanis wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
If by "happy" you mean "have been begging, pleading, yelling and just plain asking for CCP to fix them" then sure I guess. butt Goons/CFC/HBC/PL/big bluwedoughnut doth protests toooooo much
lmao "blue donut"
you spend too much time reading en24 trash and then accepting it as truth without verifying things that are trivial to verify like, "are the CFC and HBC actually blue" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8178
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:46:00 -
[26] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Malcanis wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Yes we know Powerblocs are fat and happy with broken "ATMs" that CCP promised to fix..........2 years ago
If by "happy" you mean "have been begging, pleading, yelling and just plain asking for CCP to fix them" then sure I guess. butt Goons/CFC/HBC/PL/big bluwedoughnut doth protests toooooo much lmao "blue donut" you spend too much time reading en24 trash and then accepting it as truth without verifying things that are trivial to verify like, "are the CFC and HBC actually blue"
Remember: reality is just nullbear propaganda. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1063
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:48:00 -
[27] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:What ideas have been put forth by these people, and how to change it? "
There's the rub. Solutions have been provided, but none of them are easy, hence they're ignored. I can't believe I even have to say "farms and fields" to someone else in the CFC but here we are. "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
685
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:48:00 -
[28] - Quote
delete Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
685
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:49:00 -
[29] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead Acrually I think Andski you are corrcet in that many HISEC incursioners are siting on multi billions of ISK.... but not next to the trillions of TECH ISK NULL sec coalitions are sittng on. That isprobably the biggest imbalance Eve is looking at at the moment
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7087
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:49:00 -
[30] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead Acrually I think Andski you are corrcet in that many HISEC incursioners are siting on billion of ISK but not next to the trillions of TECH ISK NULL sec coalitions are sittng on. That isprobably the biggest imbalance Eve is looking at at the moment
entire alliances having more assets and isk than individual players is an imbalance
pubbie logic, everyone ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7087
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:52:00 -
[31] - Quote
"this massive alliance that controls massive amounts of resources via the power it can project with hundreds of individual players at a time is more wealthy than I am, this is clearly unfair CCP" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
685
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:52:00 -
[32] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead Acrually I think Andski you are corrcet in that many HISEC incursioners are siting on billion of ISK but not next to the trillions of TECH ISK NULL sec coalitions are sittng on. That isprobably the biggest imbalance Eve is looking at at the moment entire alliances having more assets and isk than individual players is an imbalance pubbie logic, everyone
this imbalance is making NULL too safe in many's eyes' watch out b4 logic pokes ya blind to reality Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7087
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:55:00 -
[33] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:this imbalance is making NULL to safe in many's eyes' watch out b4 logic pokes ya blind to reality
0.0 is only as safe as players can make it, whether it's us smashing the **** out of anyone who tries to take our stuff or others simply not feeling inclined to poke the lion
hisec is as safe as CCP makes it, because they can't stand the thought of wretched hisec pubbies complaining about having to do any work towards an end other than their wallets and cashout potential growing ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1063
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:56:00 -
[34] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:this imbalance is making NULL too safe in many's eyes
Ask SOLAR and friends how safe null is these days.
Or IRC.
Or -A-.
Or Nulli
Or NCdotte (they and Nulli would be interesting as they've been on both the giving and recieving end of large invasions in the past year)
Or Raiden.
Shall I go on? "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13259
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:56:00 -
[35] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Acrually I think Andski you are corrcet in that many HISEC incursioners are siting on multi billions of ISK.... but not next to the trillions of TECH ISK NULL sec coalitions are sittng on. That isprobably the biggest imbalance Eve is looking at at the moment Seeing as how that's not an imbalance to begin with, it's probably not the biggest imbalance at allGǪ Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7088
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
"CCP please nerf wardecs and suicide ganking even further, I can't stand the thought of having to defend myself since that doesn't result in wallet++" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Tora Bushido
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
265
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:13:00 -
[37] - Quote
We re trying to make high sec a bit less safe....in most cases for the bigger alliances. Problem is, we don't have the nul sec isk flow. In the end its all about isks....... Psychotic Monk for CSM |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8178
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:14:00 -
[38] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:this imbalance is making NULL too safe in many's eyes Ask SOLAR and friends how safe null is these days. Or IRC. Or -A-. Or Nulli Or NCdotte (they and Nulli would be interesting as they've been on both the giving and recieving end of large invasions in the past year) Or Raiden. Shall I go on?
Listen, how many times do I have to tell you this:
Reality is just nullbear propaganda.
Your "facts" are just dust in the wind before THE TRUTH.
Darth knows THE TRUTH, and if your stupid facts or your pointless reality contradict THE TRUTH then they're in error and THE TRUTH is still THE TRUTH. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8178
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:15:00 -
[39] - Quote
Tora Bushido wrote:We re trying to make high sec a bit less safe....in most cases for the bigger alliances. Problem is, we don't have the nul sec isk flow. In the end its all about isks.......
Do you honestly believe that there is less ISK in hi-sec than there is in 0.0?
There are individuals in hisec with more ISK than Pandemic Legion. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Dave Stark
2005
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:15:00 -
[40] - Quote
how safe high sec is, is irrelevant. it's what you can do within such a safe environment which is the issue.
i assume this is another "nerf high sec" thread? Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
|
Apocryphal Noise
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:21:00 -
[41] - Quote
The whole idea of the wargames was a big **** you to CCP so they would stand up and notice how absolutely godawful the sov grind is and how it burns out entire alliances |
Athena Maldoran
Special Nymphs On A Mission
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:29:00 -
[42] - Quote
These statements represent a hint of truth.. But Op seems drunk.. |
Velicitia
Arma Artificer
1243
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:30:00 -
[43] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Welcome to the jumgle.
wanna bring you to your nananananananananananana knees! One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia Malcanis for CSM8 |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2667
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:45:00 -
[44] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:how safe high sec is, is irrelevant. it's what you can do within such a safe environment which is the issue.
i assume this is another "nerf high sec" thread?
Yes, DarthNefarius wants highsec to be nerfed because he feels he makes too much isk safely killing Sansha's all day. Also something unimportant about nullsec & tech. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Dave Stark
2006
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Dave Stark wrote:how safe high sec is, is irrelevant. it's what you can do within such a safe environment which is the issue.
i assume this is another "nerf high sec" thread? Yes, DarthNefarius wants highsec to be nerfed because he feels he makes too much isk safely killing Sansha's all day. Also something unimportant about nullsec & tech.
so i was close enough with my assumption, and there's very little point in actually reading most of the posts?
right-o, thanks. Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Sentamon
758
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:39:00 -
[46] - Quote
Oh the pains of empire and trying for absolute control over everything.
Here I come with the water barge, to collect the tears. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:49:00 -
[47] - Quote
Apocryphal Noise wrote:The whole idea of the wargames was a big **** you to CCP so they would stand up and notice how absolutely godawful the sov grind is and how it burns out entire alliances Pretty much, yeah. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8183
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:53:00 -
[48] - Quote
Apocryphal Noise wrote:The whole idea of the wargames was a big **** you to CCP so they would stand up and notice how absolutely godawful the sov grind is and how it burns out entire alliances
It's also a bad idea in terms of its stated goal. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
1123
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:53:00 -
[49] - Quote
Having actually read the linked article it looks to me like Shadoo is trying to recreate his own version of CCP's own FW system over in Cloud Ring.
So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut.
Regardless of my own feelings, if I place myself in their shoes for a minute I can see that I would be enjoying the comfort & security of living in a place that is as profitable as sov claimed blue nullsec combined with even greater effective safety than even half of hisec could offer. Moon goo faucets for infinite PLEX and infinite goodies would certainly be a load off my mind, to be sure, and if I had that I certainly would not want it going away. I'd actively fight to protect it. In this instance "fight" actually means CSM block voting for special interest candidates and political manipulations to make sure that nothing ever changes.
And that's pretty much what has happened and frankly I don't blame them for it. Blue Doughnut is good, especially if you happen to be part of it. They've got the moons and the "T2 BPOs for Nespotic Brown-nosing" arrangement that makes T2 stuff so absurdly cheap that actual T2 invention is completely & utterly pointless - which I'm fine with because it saves me both time & ISK that I'd otherwise be wasting on it. So yeah, at the end of the day I like Blue Doughnut even though I'm not a part of it.
In fact, the only time I give a rat's arse about it when those bored null bittervets come here and whine about highsec. Redirecting their own personal problems & angst at us because the alternative would be shaking things up at home and they're just not comfortable with anything that might interrupt the flow of their ISK faucets.
So if creating a "Thunderdome" gives those guys something to do besides vomit out another "nerf hisec" thread approximately every 16 hours then more power to Thunderdome! Yes, if Thunderdome makes nullbears happy enough to keep cranking out cheapo T2 goods for my hisec carebear pleasure without endless whining then I'm totally behind that. Now quit whining and get back to work, pubbies. We're running low on Scorch crystals over in 1.0 EvE is like prison.-á It's a place when bad people go to learn how to become even worse people. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 13:08:00 -
[50] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut. GǪtoo bad that the blue doughnut doesn't actually exist. If it did, those things might have actually been real problems..
Quote:Moon goo faucets for infinite PLEX and infinite goodies would certainly be a load off my mind, to be sure, and if I had that I certainly would not want it going away. I'd actively fight to protect it. In this instance "fight" actually means CSM block voting for special interest candidates and political manipulations to make sure that nothing ever changes. GǪand that would have been a good way of doing it. It's rather strange that the CSM has a long history of doing the exact opposite, isn't it? Actually, it's rather suggest that it's a good thing that we have a good representation on the CSM rather than the likes of you.
Quote:And that's pretty much what has happened and frankly I don't blame them for it. Blue Doughnut is good, especially if you happen to be part of it. They've got the moons and the "T2 BPOs for Nespotic Brown-nosing" arrangement that makes T2 stuff so absurdly cheap that actual T2 invention is completely & utterly pointless GǪexcept that T2 invention is very ridiculously profitable and there's a very good point in doing it: you earn oodles of ISK. The existence of BPOs, for one, does not make it any less profitable GÇö quite the opposite, invention has rather made BPO holding pointless.
Quote:In fact, the only time I give a rat's arse about it when those bored null bittervets come here and whine about highsec. GǪin other words, the only time you gives a rat's arse about it is when people don't come and ask CCP to balance the game. It's a bit odd behaviour, but following the pattern of your previous GǣfactsGǥ, I can only conclude that this is the case, no matter how weird it ends up sounding. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
1125
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 16:04:00 -
[51] - Quote
I want some of what you're smoking. EvE is like prison.-á It's a place when bad people go to learn how to become even worse people. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 16:07:00 -
[52] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:I want some of what you're smoking. Ham? Well, sure. It'd be a far healthier substitute to the hallucinogens you've been breathing. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
345
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 16:25:00 -
[53] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle
How do you "fix" the "problem" about any entity ever trying to set a foot inside SOV Null where they basicly know by now that everything will fall appart no amtter what unless they ally themself with X, Y or Z? CUrrently, it looks like any entity not allied with one of the major powerblock is either in a place deemed woprthless or on borrowed time untill one of the block decide they are bored and actaully will start a war. The projection of power then do it's job and remove that entity.
I underswtand there is a shitload of work behind all the inner working of Goonswarm for example to enable that kind of power projection but isn't this partly making the game more stale because of the feeling people get that it's not worth the hassle to go there if you are not part of it or another powerblock? To me it seems like going through the effort of building a large sandcastle at low tide on a beach... |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1060
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 16:39:00 -
[54] - Quote
Balthisus Filtch wrote:So here is the problem with fixing moon goo.
New player base comes from 2 main places.
1 - random people pulled in by marketing, PR and advertising
2. - the 2 big nullsec blocks which feed players into the game from the IRL websites they are linked to
The majority of people want to play games casually (if you don't believe that then just look at the dumbing down of any major franchise). Unsurprisingly then a significant portion of new players that arrive in EVE also want to play casually. If developers don't cater to them then the game suffers significantly financially.
The random ppl joining in hi-sec get relative safety and a mission system/ship progression to suit their needs.
Those joining major power block get free ships and modules paid for by Moon goo. Their game consists of no hassle /hard work major fleet fights.
Turn off the moon goo and free stuff alliance programs and you might just turn off a significant route by which new players are attracted into and retained in the game. Clearly Moon Goo is totally game unbalancing and totally unfair..... BUT having implemented it, how do they get themselves out of it without damaging themselves financially.
IMO this is why the most obvious fix in the game hasn't appeared to gather any momentum to being fixed. CCP aren't stupid, they see the problem - but there is no win win solution right now.
Final killer - its the new players that pay for subscriptions - the older player base are in the main buying plex from new players - so financially new players are the lifeblood of the game. So that moon goo led gameplay driven by the IRL websites is really key to CCP, that constant stream of new players joining and leaving is good for them.
Free-stuff alliance programs only work because those alliances are impoverishing their playerbase to do it. Implement ring mining, make moon-goo acquisition a player-level activity and you rest the chains from the alliances who make free-stuff programs attractive because you, as a player, can't make enough to fund your own game play. Trickle-down economics only works to enrich those in control which is basically what moon-goo is doing.
I guess that's why a lot of nullsec-ers are moving to w-space?
HTFU!...for the children! |
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
490
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:10:00 -
[55] - Quote
Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead
You seem confused about the balance of isk.
Here's some homework for you....
How many incursion runners does it take to balance out one tech moon?
How many man hours does it take to run incursions, and compared to maintaining a single pos?
Let us know when you have some real numbers....
Besides, don't all your grunts have alts run incursions since they are safer than 0.0? The single biggest danger to EVE is the proliferation of ALTS! Kill an alt today!
Petition for a Minimum bounty of 10 mil. Prevent useless bounties!
|
Dave Stark
2006
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:11:00 -
[56] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead You seem confused about the balance of isk. Here's some homework for you.... How many incursion runners does it take to balance out one tech moon? How many man hours does it take to run incursions, and compared to maintaining a single pos? Let us know when you have some real numbers.... Besides, don't all your grunts have alts run incursions since they are safer than 0.0?
i fail to see how that changes the point that instead of doing something about it, they come on the forums and roll their face across the keyboard then hit post. Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:14:00 -
[57] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Gotta like how the spacerich NULLbears try to paint SOV as too tuff while amassing TECH fortunes that'll last for years.... Every future expansion that doesn't address the moon goo bottle neck that lead to this ThunderdomeGäó is another expansion that in IMHO will lead to NULL's stagnation.... While I understand Shaddooo's tactical desire to have TECH funded gudfights for his owns everlasting tech funded wars the rest of Eve will suffer... Instead of misdirecting all Eve's ills on HI SEC lets point it at were its due: its time to break the near TECH monoploy CCP
It isn't just Tech my friend, there is also Neo now as well.
The only people who don't want Moon Goo fixed are those with high-end Moon Goo. I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:27:00 -
[58] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:It isn't just Tech my friend, there is also Neo now as well.
The only people who don't want Moon Goo fixed are those with high-end Moon Goo. Fixed. At least they're the only ones trying to do something about it. For some reason, people without moon goo seem adamant that things must absolutely not change in any wayGǪ wonder why that is.
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Here's some homework for you.... How many incursion runners does it take to balance out one tech moon? Zero. The two have nothing to do with each other since they operate on completely different scales. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
1092
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:33:00 -
[59] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is.
sov grind is half the problem
the other half is that some big alliances and even individuals like shadoo want to keep the space and riches they have without having to continue to keep up the effort. "but we'll burn out or get bored!" they protest - well, good. Then some new fresh faces will get to shine, and grab a piece of the pie.
The wargames stuff is just the latest step towards total stagnation in null |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:36:00 -
[60] - Quote
So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely.
Those who have it want to keep it, most of those who don't have it and want it are too lazy to take it.
I had it once, gave it up by choice and hope for the day it is removed.
It doesn't create the conflict CCP hoped it would anymore, it only helps to suppress it. It serves no purpose other than to print ISK for those who have it.
|
|
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle Tactical Narcotics Team
731
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:48:00 -
[61] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely. If CCP even thinks about that, all the Powerbloc owners will tell their "drones" to unsub all their alts and shoot a statue in protest.
And CCP knows this... I'm not entirely clear on the point of this, but I do have a sudden urge to jump in a catalyst and blow up a miner. Twitter! - @AzamiNevinyrall I'm half expecting a ban for this post. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:50:00 -
[62] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely. If CCP even thinks about that, all the Powerbloc owners will tell their "drones" to unsub all their alts and shoot a statue in protest. And CCP knows this...
So you're saying that the "only those who have it want it fixed" is a blatant lie? |
Felicity Love
STARKRAFT
334
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:57:00 -
[63] - Quote
... puts on overpriced "Tech-foilhat"... with monocle and chinstrap.
Proud Beta Tester for "Bumping Uglies for Dummies" |
Azami Nevinyrall
Carbon Circle Tactical Narcotics Team
731
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:57:00 -
[64] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely. If CCP even thinks about that, all the Powerbloc owners will tell their "drones" to unsub all their alts and shoot a statue in protest. And CCP knows this... So you're saying that the "only those who have it want it fixed" is a blatant lie? If you had a broken "ATM" (for lack of a better word.) Would you want it fixed? I'm not entirely clear on the point of this, but I do have a sudden urge to jump in a catalyst and blow up a miner. Twitter! - @AzamiNevinyrall I'm half expecting a ban for this post. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:00:00 -
[65] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely. If CCP even thinks about that, all the Powerbloc owners will tell their "drones" to unsub all their alts and shoot a statue in protest. And CCP knows this... So you're saying that the "only those who have it want it fixed" is a blatant lie? If you had a broken "ATM" (for lack of a better word.) Would you want it fixed?
Call me crazy or stupid or whatever, but I had several broken ATMs, realized they were broken ATMs and walked away from them. |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:00:00 -
[66] - Quote
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:So you're saying that I don't want moon goo fixed? Hell, I'd probably log in immediately and reactivate the inactive accounts I have if I were shown proof that moon goo had been shut off completely. If CCP even thinks about that, all the Powerbloc owners will tell their "drones" to unsub all their alts and shoot a statue in protest. And CCP knows this... Except that's not true at all... Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Pantiy
Corporate Scum Test Friends Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:25:00 -
[67] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Gotta like how the spacerich NULLbears try to paint SOV as too tuff while amassing TECH fortunes that'll last for years.... Every future expansion that doesn't address the moon goo bottle neck that lead to this ThunderdomeGäó is another expansion that in IMHO will lead to NULL's stagnation.... While I understand Shaddooo's tactical desire to have TECH funded gudfights for his owns everlasting tech funded wars the rest of Eve will suffer... Instead of misdirecting all Eve's ills on HI SEC lets point it at were its due: its time to break the near TECH monoploy CCP
Not really sure where you get your info from but let me tell you where im at. i live in null, i pvp in null, i die in null. i have around 30m isk, 2 ships and no implants, where you get the idea we are all rich is beyond me. do the leaders of these alliances need to start making the members rich? hell yes its time we all get a cut. As far as the expansions lets just wait and see. the Gm's/dev,s always have a vision but we as the players always tend to dement it to our own. I fly what shadoo very often and let me tell you that the fights we get while a lot are booked in advance are fun for the sake of it. win or lose, thats what its about FUN<---- and to that end it shows the point of how bad the system of sov actually is. even the OLD system was better then this one. High sec has nothing wrong with it in my opinion. leave it be, its where all the washed up players go or where the new ones start, i think of high sec like a hospital, its where your born and its where youll die. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2671
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:30:00 -
[68] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you?
Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Tom Gerard
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
967
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:30:00 -
[69] - Quote
The solution is already determined: Ring Mining
it just is not being implemented.
One of the oldest mission players in EVE designed a chart that explains stat priority in regards to mission running, compared Alpha, DPS, Ship Speed and Sig Radius and scores them. http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m24dbrfuWn1r86ax8o1_1280.jpg |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
690
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:30:00 -
[70] - Quote
Andski wrote:"CCP please nerf wardecs and suicide ganking even further, I can't stand the thought of having to defend myself since that doesn't result in wallet++"
CCP please nerf dogpiling.... well thnx CCP Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
690
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:43:00 -
[71] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Having actually read the linked article it looks to me like Shadoo is trying to recreate his own version of CCP's own FW system over in Cloud Ring.
^^ +1
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:04:00 -
[72] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed
I call bullshit.
You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it.
It is easy to say you want it changed on the forums; to actually do something about it, not so much.
I bet if it were an attempt to nerf high-sec or anything that didn't remove the source of your wealth, we'd have whole regions of monuments being shot to ****.
You say you want it changed, how about you actually put action to your words, otherwise you're just posturing on the forums and blowing smoke up our collective asses. |
Dave Stark
2007
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:08:00 -
[73] - Quote
and what exactly can players do, to change the situation?
until ccp has something to replace it with the system will stay there regardless of how many unsubs happen and however many monuments get shot.
Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:14:00 -
[74] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I call bullshit.
You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like GǪconsistently badgering CCP about how it's broken and then put on a freeze on the activities that catch the big headlines in media.
Quote:You say you want it changed, how about you actually put action to your words You mean exactly like they're doing? Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:18:00 -
[75] - Quote
Shooting monuments and unsubbing seemed to work in the past. Besides that, there doesn't need to be a replacement for them to turn off the moons.
There's more than likely enough T2 Materials stockpiled to hold the industry over until they can seed asteroids with moon goo or whatever they choose to do to give us a non-passive replacement.
They could also seed markets with set amounts per day in the interim, less than ideal though still better than just printing ISK for everyone who has moon harvesters.
Can't forget that the unsubbing and shooting monuments does seem to light a fire under CCP's ass.
If it is the income you're worried about they could always just increase rat bounties by 10% or so, oh wait, ratting is work. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:21:00 -
[76] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I call bullshit.
You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like GǪconsistently badgering CCP about how it's broken and then put on a freeze on the activities that catch the big headlines in media. Quote:You say you want it changed, how about you actually put action to your words You mean exactly like they're doing?
What exactly are they doing? I don't see the forums flooded with "CHANGE MOON GOO NAO!!!!!!", "**** MOON GOO" or any other threads similar to what happened with Incarna and WiS.
That'd be a nice start. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:24:00 -
[77] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:How many incursion runners does it take to balance out one tech moon?
less than one ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:25:00 -
[78] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:What exactly are they doing? See OP.
Quote:I don't see the forums flooded with "CHANGE MOON GOO NAO!!!!!!", "**** MOON GOO" or any other threads similar to what happened with Incarna and WiS.
That'd be a nice start. GǪyou're about three years late.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:30:00 -
[79] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:What exactly are they doing? See OP. Quote:I don't see the forums flooded with "CHANGE MOON GOO NAO!!!!!!", "**** MOON GOO" or any other threads similar to what happened with Incarna and WiS.
That'd be a nice start. GǪyou're about three years late.
Then the people who made those threads need to stop being lazy and keep them alive or did they just go take some moons for themselves and join the club?
We need to change moon goo, wait, no, let's get some moon goo and hope everyone forgets about it, let those threads die.....
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:31:00 -
[80] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed I call bullshit. You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it. It is easy to say you want it changed on the forums; to actually do something about it, not so much. I bet if it were an attempt to nerf high-sec or anything that didn't remove the source of your wealth, we'd have whole regions of monuments being shot to ****. You say you want it changed, how about you actually put action to your words, otherwise you're just posturing on the forums and blowing smoke up our collective asses.
it's not like we've shown everyone how tech is broken, the scale at which it's broken, what we can do with our broken tech income and how CCP could actually balance moons instead of sitting around making useless crap like pants
no, we've been very subtle about our massive income and how other alliances make peanuts in contrast, even with renter empires, we definitely didn't spend a couple hundred billion ISK burning jita and proceeding to pay hisec to destroy itself ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:36:00 -
[81] - Quote
ever notice that whenever pubbies complain about technetium, they suddenly get very tight-lipped if not defensive when we bring up the zero-risk, zero-effort, zero-cost isk faucets that are incursions and l4s ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:36:00 -
[82] - Quote
Andski wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed I call bullshit. You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it. It is easy to say you want it changed on the forums; to actually do something about it, not so much. I bet if it were an attempt to nerf high-sec or anything that didn't remove the source of your wealth, we'd have whole regions of monuments being shot to ****. You say you want it changed, how about you actually put action to your words, otherwise you're just posturing on the forums and blowing smoke up our collective asses. it's not like we've shown everyone how tech is broken, the scale at which it's broken, what we can do with our broken tech income and how CCP could actually balance moons instead of sitting around making useless crap like pants no, we've been very subtle about our massive income and how other alliances make peanuts in contrast, even with renter empires, we definitely didn't spend a couple hundred billion ISK burning jita and proceeding to pay hisec to destroy itself
Well, all that is obviously not working so looks like it is time to start shooting monuments in the name of removing moon goo and unsubbing until moon goo is removed, remember, those two things light a fire under CCPs ass, everything else just seems to amuse them. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7095
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:39:00 -
[83] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Well, all that is obviously not working so looks like it is time to start shooting monuments in the name of removing moon goo and unsubbing until moon goo is removed, remember, those two things light a fire under CCPs ass, everything else just seems to amuse them.
Why don't you do that? ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5590
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:
I call bullshit.
You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it.
We have been calling for a moon nerf for years including at fan fest, the CSM and general chats to Devs on the forums. Its a very well known fact that many people seem to want to ignore because goons are evil ect. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:44:00 -
[85] - Quote
Andski wrote:ever notice that whenever pubbies complain about technetium, they suddenly get very tight-lipped if not defensive when we bring up the zero-risk, zero-effort, zero-cost isk faucets that are incursions and l4s
TBH, I'd like to see Incursions changed too, never really ran l4's except for when I was first starting out (I flew a Noctis mopping up behind a Rattlesnake/Tengu pair who blitzed the missions).
I really couldn't care less what happened to either of those, maybe incursions but that'd only be because in my experience they don't get run in 0.0 since they apparently OMGWTFPWN everything and I could never get a group together more than myself and maybe two or three corpies.
I've never run high-sec incursions, never run any incursions at all actually. Go ahead and nerf them into the ground for all I care, though the primary problem I have with Moon Goo is that it is 100% passive, once you set up the tower, it is all ISK printing from there.
Incursions and Level 4's actually require some form of work more than just finding ISK fountain, anchoring on ISK fountain and then sitting in the blue donut swimming in your ISK fountain. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:46:00 -
[86] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:
I call bullshit.
You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it.
We have been calling for a moon nerf for years including at fan fest, the CSM and general chats to Devs on the forums. Its a very well known fact that many people seem to want to ignore because goons are evil ect.
Calling for a moon nerf sounds to me like so very much less than the outcry that was heard over incarna. If you're so up in arms about moon goo, give the fight to have it nerfed into the ground or removed the same fire that was given to the whole WiS debacle. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7096
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:47:00 -
[87] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:100% passive, once you set up the tower, it is all ISK printing from there.
Manufacturing and PI are both very passive as well. What about those? ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:49:00 -
[88] - Quote
Andski wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:100% passive, once you set up the tower, it is all ISK printing from there. Manufacturing and PI are both very passive as well. What about those?
PI sure could use a rework though I don't see a problem with manufacturing. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1061
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:56:00 -
[89] - Quote
Andski wrote:ever notice that whenever goons read a legitimate argument about technetium, they suddenly point to HS players to undermine it when they bring up the zero-risk, zero-effort, zero-cost isk faucets that are incursions and l4s which have nothing to do with moon-goo monopolies
fixed that for you.
As a w-space dweller with ex-nullsecer's in his corp, I find these arguments to be legitimate about the old system of enriching the alliance leaders and impoverishing the null players to have merit. HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:00:00 -
[90] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Calling for a moon nerf sounds to me like so very much less than the outcry that was heard over incarna. GǪyou mean that perfect shitstorm of developer ignorance on no less than five different issues, all coming together at once, directly affecting pretty much every last player in the game in one way or another, handled in the most incompetent manner imaginable, putting it wa-a-ay up on the list of developer fuckups?
I would suggest that you look up the punctured-equilibrium theory of policy change and contrast it against both advocacy coalition and incrementalism as forces of change and why they pack different GÇ£punchGÇ¥.
You're not really making a reasonable comparison by setting the summer of rage as your benchmark. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:10:00 -
[91] - Quote
Tippia, you can say what you want, but after this post, I'll not be addressing you again.
You're a liar and little more, you've chosen to not refute the proof in this very thread.
Besides, if those who say that they are all for the nerf/removal of moon goo really were as up in arms as they'd have us believe, it would be sufficient enough of a reason to behave the same way, especially given CCP's non-action on the topic for so long (assuming you're not also lying about the three year old "FIX MOON GOO NAO!!!!!" threads). |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:17:00 -
[92] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Tippia, you can say what you want, but after this post, I'll not be addressing you again. So you can't come up with any kind of counter-argument, I take it seeing as how you have to resort to personal attacks.
Oh, and top tip if you ever want to actually address any point I make rather than just dismiss it without any reason other than your inability to do so, quote the part you're responding to GÇö it helps your posts look less like irrational lashings out atGǪ god-knows-what.
Quote:you've chosen to not refute the proof in this very thread. What proof? All I've seen so far is nonsensical fantasies, a complete ignorance of history, and baseless accusations that go contrary to recorded history.
Quote:Besides, if those who say that they are all for the nerf/removal of moon goo really were as up in arms as they'd have us believe, it would be sufficient enough of a reason to behave the same way GǪor maybe you should read up on those theories I presented to you since they offer a framework for you to understand the way these things work. You should probably also read up on that history you've been ignoring to see the context, history and complete inventory of the actions taken to give this problem the salience needed to bump it up on CCP's agenda. Oh, and you should probably have a look at what CCP's plans for null. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5590
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:25:00 -
[93] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:
Calling for a moon nerf sounds to me like so very much less than the outcry that was heard over incarna. If you're so up in arms about moon goo, give the fight to have it nerfed into the ground or removed the same fire that was given to the whole WiS debacle.
Its slated for work after the ship rebalancing is done. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
692
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:28:00 -
[94] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:
Calling for a moon nerf sounds to me like so very much less than the outcry that was heard over incarna. If you're so up in arms about moon goo, give the fight to have it nerfed into the ground or removed the same fire that was given to the whole WiS debacle.
Its slated for work after the ship rebalancing is done.
what 2-4 years from now? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5590
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:30:00 -
[95] - Quote
Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:34:00 -
[96] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo.
Well if moon goo isn't important, why doesn't CCP just shut it off? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:36:00 -
[97] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Well if moon goo isn't important, why doesn't CCP just shut it off? Because there's no reason to, and because there are many reasons not to.
Oh, and something else being more important doesn't mean goo isn't important. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5590
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:39:00 -
[98] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo. Well if moon goo isn't important, why doesn't CCP just shut it off?
Did I say it wasnt important? |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
638
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:52:00 -
[99] - Quote
I cannot believe that people this stupid actually exist. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
692
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:54:00 -
[100] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo.
No it isn't Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
|
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
347
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:59:00 -
[101] - Quote
Let's say we remove all moon products and replace it in Null with something else bringning in just as much isk but not based on something automated. The players would need to do something or the ISK stops flowing in. What could it be?
It sadly can't really be based on PvP because you can't force it to happen...
Industry unless it's majorly changed would still happen in high instead of null.
Not sure if people would be "ok" with ratting with an alliance level taxe.
Mission are hard to implement without more stations to put agents in.
PI? Yes let's change passive for passive...
Trading taxes? Go to high sec.
We are at least knee deep in mud by now... |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
347
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:00:00 -
[102] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo. No it isn't now
Why? Ship balance affect the whole EvE population. Moon goo affect null people and people bitching about moon goo. Pretty sure there are more people in "the whole eve population". |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:04:00 -
[103] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo. No it isn't now Moon goo is imbalanced and needs to be addressed. Nobody said otherwise. Ship balancing however takes priority. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
692
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:20:00 -
[104] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Whenever its done. Ship balance is more important than moon goo. No it isn't now Why? Ship balance affect the whole EvE population. Moon goo affect null people and people bitching about moon goo. Pretty sure there are more people in "the whole eve population".
The economy affects EVERY1 in the Sandbox... ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5591
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:23:00 -
[105] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:
The economy affects EVERY1 in the Sandbox... ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID
Where moon goo supply comes from means squat to most people while ship balance impacts everyone. |
Gnoshia
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:27:00 -
[106] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:hisec incursion runners are upset over how things are done, refuse to do anything about it despite having hundreds of billions of isk to play with, opt to run more incursions instead Atcually I think Andski you are corrcet in that many HISEC incursioners are siting on multi billions of ISK.... but not next to the multi trillions of TECH ISK NULL sec coalitions are sittng on.... That isprobably the biggest imbalance Eve is looking at, at the moment
INB4 we are the 99%
GTFO with that socialism garbage
You don't see capitals being popped and replaced in hisec do you? Those moons are needed to replace big ship losses. Now if you want to reduce it from trillions to one or two trillion then fine. Whatever. People will just have to manage their finances and losses a little better to compensate. |
Cyprus Black
The Learning Curve.
706
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:45:00 -
[107] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is. No I'm pretty sure tech plays a big part as one of the many problems.
Trolling is like art. Anyone can finger paint, but it takes true talent to create a masterpiece. |
General Nusense
Not Posting With My Main
57
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:46:00 -
[108] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is.
and why is the sov grind a problem?
i shall answer this for you.
everyone is blue to each other. get rid of the mile long blue lists and sov grinding wont be a problem. but that would require balls. which no sov holding alliance, except solar, have.
|
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
347
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:47:00 -
[109] - Quote
General Nusense wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is. and why is the sov grind a problem? i shall answer this for you. everyone is blue to each other. get rid of the mile long blue lists and sov grinding wont be a problem. but that would require balls. which no sov holding alliance, except solar, have.
HBC and CFC are blue to each other. Confirm/deny? |
baltec1
Bat Country
5591
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:50:00 -
[110] - Quote
General Nusense wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is. and why is the sov grind a problem? i shall answer this for you. everyone is blue to each other. get rid of the mile long blue lists and sov grinding wont be a problem. but that would require balls. which no sov holding alliance, except solar, have.
Might want to catch up on current events, your picture of null is out of date be well over a month. |
|
Zenos Ebeth
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:29:00 -
[111] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:General Nusense wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Tech isn't the problem. The sov grind is. and why is the sov grind a problem? i shall answer this for you. everyone is blue to each other. get rid of the mile long blue lists and sov grinding wont be a problem. but that would require balls. which no sov holding alliance, except solar, have. HBC and CFC are blue to each other. Confirm/deny?
Well , what are coalitions ? Oh yeah , a bunch of alliances blue to each other. And even if these coalitions aren't blue to other coalitions they have become so big that they can't even be bothered to kill each other anymore and instead start playing Total war: Cloud ring. |
Rhavin Kha'siere
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:00:00 -
[112] - Quote
Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. While that may be true, that doesn't mean those selfsame nullbears aren't risk averse either. Case in point, this idea of Cloud Ring (which is really just a player organized version of a PVP Arena, complete with rules and judges). If a Great War (which, it could be argued, previous incarnations created the massive coalitions that now dominate nullsec) is deemed to be something that would take too long, and be too destructive, and the only alternative is to fabricate fake fights for the sake of good fights (which are in truth only good because of the RISK and the surprise inherent in their emergent creation) while eliminating all potential vectors of risk...then you are risk-averse, and are just as terrible as the pubbies you love to hate. I'm sure your going to say something about how you earned the right to be top dog (which you did, because those who fought against BoB TOOK RISKS), and if someone else wants your space then they should come and take it; but that's like America, Russia and China telling Somalia to come at 'em. There is no potential threat to the blue doughnut, and there will never be a potential threat as long as all three coalitions are too damn scared to actually RISK something against each other.
If the only solution to the stagnation of Nullsec is to create a completely risk-averse PVP Arena, which somehow proves to CCP that null is borked (which, in and of itself is absurd, considering that is exactly what nullbears complain hisec is turning into); then your doing it wrong. If a Great War would be so costly, and take so long, that people who have played this awesome game for the past ten years would quit...you have your priorities backwards.
Yes, y'all fought your way to the top, and did such an excellent job of destroying any potential threat to your existence. Now, the very thought of having to risk said position as top dog would cause ten year vets to quit...that is the very definition of risk averse. I mean, those theoretical bittervets would quit because of the amount of risk inherent in a three-way Great War? Even discounting the idea of risk, YOU SPENT TEN YEARS PLAYING THIS GAME, AND A WAR THAT MAY LAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR IS TOO LONG? Are you serious?
And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13262
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:31:00 -
[113] - Quote
General Nusense wrote:and why is the sov grind a problem?
i shall answer this for you.
everyone is blue to each other. No. So why is sov grind a problem? You never really answered that question.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5591
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:39:00 -
[114] - Quote
Rhavin Kha'siere wrote:Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. While that may be true, that doesn't mean those selfsame nullbears aren't risk averse either. Case in point, this idea of Cloud Ring (which is really just a player organized version of a PVP Arena, complete with rules and judges). If a Great War (which, it could be argued, previous incarnations created the massive coalitions that now dominate nullsec) is deemed to be something that would take too long, and be too destructive, and the only alternative is to fabricate fake fights for the sake of good fights (which are in truth only good because of the RISK and the surprise inherent in their emergent creation) while eliminating all potential vectors of risk...then you are risk-averse, and are just as terrible as the pubbies you love to hate. I'm sure your going to say something about how you earned the right to be top dog (which you did, because those who fought against BoB TOOK RISKS), and if someone else wants your space then they should come and take it; but that's like America, Russia and China telling Somalia to come at 'em. There is no potential threat to the blue doughnut, and there will never be a potential threat as long as all three coalitions are too damn scared to actually RISK something against each other.
If the only solution to the stagnation of Nullsec is to create a completely risk-averse PVP Arena, which somehow proves to CCP that null is borked (which, in and of itself is absurd, considering that is exactly what nullbears complain hisec is turning into); then your doing it wrong. If a Great War would be so costly, and take so long, that people who have played this awesome game for the past ten years would quit...you have your priorities backwards.
Yes, y'all fought your way to the top, and did such an excellent job of destroying any potential threat to your existence. Now, the very thought of having to risk said position as top dog would cause ten year vets to quit...that is the very definition of risk averse. I mean, those theoretical bittervets would quit because of the amount of risk inherent in a three-way Great War? Even discounting the idea of risk, YOU SPENT TEN YEARS PLAYING THIS GAME, AND A WAR THAT MAY LAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR IS TOO LONG? Are you serious?
And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
Not only do we have no need for even more space but we don't have the manpower to secure it if we do capture it. |
destiny2
Abh Empire Unclaimed.
124
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 02:04:00 -
[115] - Quote
Apocryphal Noise wrote:The whole idea of the wargames was a big **** you to CCP so they would stand up and notice how absolutely godawful the sov grind is and how it burns out entire alliances
if everything was soo simple then eve would be as pointless as world of warcraft. |
Tom Gerard
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
969
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 02:49:00 -
[116] - Quote
destiny2 wrote:Apocryphal Noise wrote:The whole idea of the wargames was a big **** you to CCP so they would stand up and notice how absolutely godawful the sov grind is and how it burns out entire alliances if everything was soo simple then eve would be as pointless as world of warcraft.
Nothing pointless about my Undead Half werewolf death knight. One of the oldest mission players in EVE designed a chart that explains stat priority in regards to mission running, compared Alpha, DPS, Ship Speed and Sig Radius and scores them. http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m24dbrfuWn1r86ax8o1_1280.jpg |
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
1025
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 05:25:00 -
[117] - Quote
Always with you it's gotta be Thunderdome(TM).Thunderdome this, and Tunderdome that... Blah, blah, blah.
Quit using a fairly entertaining movie as your archetype -Tina deserves more respect. Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.
Malcanis for CSM8 |
Apocryphal Noise
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 05:33:00 -
[118] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Having actually read the linked article it looks to me like Shadoo is trying to recreate his own version of CCP's own FW system over in Cloud Ring.
So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut.
Solar burns in the east and the slow boiling hatred of northern coalition dot for goons turns their gaze northward and Gorga would be all too happy to oblige them. Delve wasn't so long ago. TEST is narrowly talked off the ledge by a contrite Shadoo but the HBC grows restless and all it takes is one diplomatic incident to start the firestorm. However I'm glad you showed us your intimate knowledge of the nullsec politik and you're not just parroting what other ill-informed forum-goers have been saying for months with this talk of blue donuts. |
Cyprus Black
The Learning Curve.
708
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 06:22:00 -
[119] - Quote
I heard about Thunderdome and immediately thought of Money Fight! Trolling is like art. Anyone can finger paint, but it takes true talent to create a masterpiece. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
695
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:21:00 -
[120] - Quote
Rhavin Kha'siere wrote: Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. (snip) And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
^^ Damn I wish I had written you posts first & last sentences above in my OP. +1
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
|
Sentamon
762
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:21:00 -
[121] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Not only do we have no need for even more space but we don't have the manpower to secure it if we do capture it.
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7100
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:32:00 -
[122] - Quote
Rhavin Kha'siere wrote:Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. While that may be true, that doesn't mean those selfsame nullbears aren't risk averse either. Case in point, this idea of Cloud Ring (which is really just a player organized version of a PVP Arena, complete with rules and judges). If a Great War (which, it could be argued, previous incarnations created the massive coalitions that now dominate nullsec) is deemed to be something that would take too long, and be too destructive, and the only alternative is to fabricate fake fights for the sake of good fights (which are in truth only good because of the RISK and the surprise inherent in their emergent creation) while eliminating all potential vectors of risk...then you are risk-averse, and are just as terrible as the pubbies you love to hate. I'm sure your going to say something about how you earned the right to be top dog (which you did, because those who fought against BoB TOOK RISKS), and if someone else wants your space then they should come and take it; but that's like America, Russia and China telling Somalia to come at 'em. There is no potential threat to the blue doughnut, and there will never be a potential threat as long as all three coalitions are too damn scared to actually RISK something against each other.
If the only solution to the stagnation of Nullsec is to create a completely risk-averse PVP Arena, which somehow proves to CCP that null is borked (which, in and of itself is absurd, considering that is exactly what nullbears complain hisec is turning into); then your doing it wrong. If a Great War would be so costly, and take so long, that people who have played this awesome game for the past ten years would quit...you have your priorities backwards.
Yes, y'all fought your way to the top, and did such an excellent job of destroying any potential threat to your existence. Now, the very thought of having to risk said position as top dog would cause ten year vets to quit...that is the very definition of risk averse. I mean, those theoretical bittervets would quit because of the amount of risk inherent in a three-way Great War? Even discounting the idea of risk, YOU SPENT TEN YEARS PLAYING THIS GAME, AND A WAR THAT MAY LAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR IS TOO LONG? Are you serious?
And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
let's not talk about people being hypocrites when you're slamming your ******* fist on the table demanding that CCP removes suicide ganking, wardecs and ninja salvaging after having successfully demanded that they remove ninja looting, can baiting and give worthless mining botters a gigantic buff to their ships which they never bothered trying to fit in a way that would counter the suicide gank attempt, because the entitled wretches could not fathom sacrificing yield
hiseccers are only useful for two things: giving revenue to CCP and being scourged. unfortunately, a good number of them are no longer even useful for the former, since their bot-like behavior and the near-perfect safety of hisec (which is still not enough for you) means they have absolutely not issue funding their gametime with PLEX. thanks to these wretched botters and quasi-botters, the price of a GTC is close to a billion ISK.
hisec is the part of the game that goes against its original conception in every goddamned way. the difference is that we've crafted the political landscape of 0.0 while the hiseccers have demanded that CCP do all the work for them through their lil tantrums and threats of unsubbing.
and you wretches always talk about how you're playing the game the way you want it to
well, as it turns out, we're playing the game the way we want, get 0wned ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7100
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:35:00 -
[123] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: Not only do we have no need for even more space but we don't have the manpower to secure it if we do capture it.
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds. Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
hey look sentamon's being wrong as always
we've been engaging in random fun combat with the HBC for months, i'm sorry that you choose to read riverini's rag where he claims that we have blue standings or something ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7103
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:37:00 -
[124] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Rhavin Kha'siere wrote: Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. (snip) And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
^^ Damn I wish I had written you posts first & last sentences above in my OP. +1
you are risk-averse, though
you should look at your own posting history, where you demand things like outlaws being unable to enter hisec, the removal of ninja looting, ninja salvaging and wardecs, and more nerfs to suicide ganking, because they affect your own quasi-botting gameplay and coming up with ways to counter those things is too much work, so CCP must hold your hand because thinking is hard :(
you have no idea what you're talking about, since you have never left hisec and you most likely never will ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7106
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:50:00 -
[125] - Quote
the other fact is that in these months, rather than banding together and making a war against one of the "two coalitions that controls all of 0.0" the wretches choose to complain
of course, they use "we don't have tech moons" as an excuse, despite the fact that many alliances like pizza and black legion fight to great effect without substantial alliance-level income, even reimbursing some ships. the fact of the matter is that they don't wish to play our game, yet the worthless wretches complain that we don't play how they envision us playing, and rather than doing anything about it in-game, they'll just whine endlessly to no effect ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2678
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 07:51:00 -
[126] - Quote
Rhavin Kha'siere wrote:Nullbears love to rant about how hisec is all risk-averse. While that may be true, that doesn't mean those selfsame nullbears aren't risk averse either. Case in point, this idea of Cloud Ring (which is really just a player organized version of a PVP Arena, complete with rules and judges). If a Great War (which, it could be argued, previous incarnations created the massive coalitions that now dominate nullsec) is deemed to be something that would take too long, and be too destructive, and the only alternative is to fabricate fake fights for the sake of good fights (which are in truth only good because of the RISK and the surprise inherent in their emergent creation) while eliminating all potential vectors of risk...then you are risk-averse, and are just as terrible as the pubbies you love to hate. I'm sure your going to say something about how you earned the right to be top dog (which you did, because those who fought against BoB TOOK RISKS), and if someone else wants your space then they should come and take it; but that's like America, Russia and China telling Somalia to come at 'em. There is no potential threat to the blue doughnut, and there will never be a potential threat as long as all three coalitions are too damn scared to actually RISK something against each other.
If the only solution to the stagnation of Nullsec is to create a completely risk-averse PVP Arena, which somehow proves to CCP that null is borked (which, in and of itself is absurd, considering that is exactly what nullbears complain hisec is turning into); then your doing it wrong. If a Great War would be so costly, and take so long, that people who have played this awesome game for the past ten years would quit...you have your priorities backwards.
Yes, y'all fought your way to the top, and did such an excellent job of destroying any potential threat to your existence. Now, the very thought of having to risk said position as top dog would cause ten year vets to quit...that is the very definition of risk averse. I mean, those theoretical bittervets would quit because of the amount of risk inherent in a three-way Great War? Even discounting the idea of risk, YOU SPENT TEN YEARS PLAYING THIS GAME, AND A WAR THAT MAY LAST SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR IS TOO LONG? Are you serious?
And you claim us pubbies are risk-averse idiots who want all the things now, in perfect safety. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking.
If it was up to me, we'd just kill TEST, but I don't make the decisions. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
iskflakes
355
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:10:00 -
[127] - Quote
EVE Online: ThumderdomeGäó
Coming summer 2013. - |
baltec1
Bat Country
5592
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:52:00 -
[128] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
We have random fun combat. Ripping down thousands of towers, POCO and TCU is not fun.
|
Pantiy
Corporate Scum Test Friends Please Ignore
33
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 11:32:00 -
[129] - Quote
all this thread is bullshit really. let the high sec players have what ever they have in fact increase isk/mineral/rewards etc 100%. let null/low have the same thing. you guys forget none of this is breaking the game. besides it soulds like your not having fun in that case its time to move on. ~|~(~-á (~~|~-á-á -á |-á-á (__)-á-á-á |
|
Dave Stark
2013
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 11:35:00 -
[130] - Quote
Pantiy wrote:all this thread is bullshit really. let the high sec players have what ever they have in fact increase isk/mineral/rewards etc 100%. let null/low have the same thing. you guys forget none of this is breaking the game. besides it soulds like your not having fun in that case its time to move on.
doubling everything just means that instead of there being a gap of x between place a and b, there's now a gap of 2x. in essence, you've just made everything worse and fixed nothing. Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
|
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
589
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 11:47:00 -
[131] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed yea, every sinner has saint inside... they deserve the best because of it independent of their behavior :D |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2678
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 11:54:00 -
[132] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:they deserve the best because of it independent of their behavior :D
Translation? Readable English please. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Sentamon
762
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:05:00 -
[133] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
We have random fun combat. Ripping down thousands of towers, POCO and TCU is not fun.
That was your choice. Nobody forced you to zerg it up , making sure in advance that no fights happen from your overwhelming numbers.
Too late to complain about it now.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Dave Stark
2016
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:09:00 -
[134] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
We have random fun combat. Ripping down thousands of towers, POCO and TCU is not fun. That was your choice. Nobody forced you to zerg it up , making sure in advance that no fights happen from your overwhelming numbers. Too late to complain about it now.
yeah because structure bashing magically vanishes and stops existing if people undock and fight, right? Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5592
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:35:00 -
[135] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
We have random fun combat. Ripping down thousands of towers, POCO and TCU is not fun. That was your choice. Nobody forced you to zerg it up , making sure in advance that no fights happen from your overwhelming numbers. Too late to complain about it now.
What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month? |
Dave Stark
2017
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:37:00 -
[136] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:
You all sure do have a lot of excuses to avoid just random fun combat. So keep making them and pretend people are fleeing null for reasons other then boring and risk averse leadership that won't do anything unless it has overwhelming odds.
Pure geniuses, the whole lot of you.
We have random fun combat. Ripping down thousands of towers, POCO and TCU is not fun. That was your choice. Nobody forced you to zerg it up , making sure in advance that no fights happen from your overwhelming numbers. Too late to complain about it now. What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
because obviously, structure shooting magically goes away if you shoot ships instead.
don't you know anything? Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:56:00 -
[137] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:because obviously, structure shooting magically goes away if you shoot ships instead.
don't you know anything? Well isn't that tautologically obvious? Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Sentamon
764
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:25:00 -
[138] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
Because when you have all the numbers and your goal is to conquer and divide up the whole universe, all that you get is a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures, and you deserve it. You'd think this is obvious.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Dave Stark
2028
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:37:00 -
[139] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
Because when you have all the numbers and your goal is to conquer and divide up the whole universe, all that you get is a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures, and you deserve it. You'd think this is obvious.
and if you don't have the numbers you have to win all the fights then have a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures anyway, except it takes you longer due to all the battles you didn't win by them undocking.
i fail to see how not outnumbering your opponent in anyway removes the issue of structure grinding being ****? Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
fukier
863
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:42:00 -
[140] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Snow Axe wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:this imbalance is making NULL too safe in many's eyes Ask SOLAR and friends how safe null is these days. Or IRC. Or -A-. Or Nulli Or NCdotte (they and Nulli would be interesting as they've been on both the giving and recieving end of large invasions in the past year) Or Raiden. Shall I go on? Listen, how many times do I have to tell you this: Reality is just nullbear propaganda. Your "facts" are just dust in the wind before THE TRUTH. Darth knows THE TRUTH, and if your stupid facts or your pointless reality contradict THE TRUTH then they're in error and THE TRUTH is still THE TRUTH.
the truth?
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
700
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:38:00 -
[141] - Quote
Welcome to ThunderdomeGäó Two neck beards enter, no dignity leaves Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5595
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:18:00 -
[142] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
Because when you have all the numbers and your goal is to conquer and divide up the whole universe, all that you get is a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures, and you deserve it. You'd think this is obvious.
So the trillions of hitpoints you have to burn through in a sov war simply go away if we have smaller powerblocks?
You do realise that it will take even longer with smaller fleets right? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2977
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:30:00 -
[143] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:While some say the World works in hyprocrisy i still think it fumbles over itself & ends up worse off for it... guess there is only 1 way to learn ( & yet still ignore the lesson ) several smaller alliances occupying some sov space can certainly form a defensive bloc that only sets standings when one of them faces a larger external threat, and such blocs exist of course they'd probably get mopped away by a more organized bloc if it came to that but, again, that's just the law of the jungle EVEneeds ALOT more ******* jumgles like there where in Viet NAM to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them
So... places where a small group can only survive against a superpower when propped up by another superpower?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#People.27s_Republic_of_China
Because that sounds like the current nullsec situation. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
349
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:30:00 -
[144] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
Because when you have all the numbers and your goal is to conquer and divide up the whole universe, all that you get is a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures, and you deserve it. You'd think this is obvious. So the trillions of hitpoints you have to burn through in a sov war simply go away if we have smaller powerblocks? You do realise that it will take even longer with smaller fleets right?
For that, the entire system needs to change but people prefer blaming GOONS for everything. It's much easyer than coming up with a good idea to change SOV warfare. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
705
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 00:47:00 -
[145] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
EVEneeds ALOT more ******* jumgles like there where in Viet NAM to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them
So... places where a small group can only survive against a superpower when propped up by another superpower?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#People.27s_Republic_of_China
Because that sounds like the current nullsec situation.[/quote]
I was thinking more like HI/LO/NULL systems with MAGnitar/Blackhole/etc effects in wormholes that'd be less vanilla & more jungle like TBH Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Tesal
238
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 00:56:00 -
[146] - Quote
Lots of "NAP aspirants" in this thread. How amusing.
A simple solution to structure grinding, outsource it to people you sell the space to. |
Alara IonStorm
4641
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 00:59:00 -
[147] - Quote
What is with the Small Force Vietnam comparisons. Didn't they heavily outnumber the Americans and die like 5-1, not really a small Guerrilla Force taking on a Superpower, more like a massive Force using Guerrilla Tactics taking on a smaller technologically advanced army and wearing them down until they left.
I don't see how that equates to taking on a Nullpire with a small force because most of these Guerrilla Tactics costs a lot more lives lost on their side then the entrenched American's. |
Hannah Flex
laissez-faire economics
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 01:01:00 -
[148] - Quote
The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders |
Spurty
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
829
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 02:08:00 -
[149] - Quote
Hannah Flex wrote:The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders
sigh, really ..
85 Ships killed (2.39B ISK) 29 Ships lost (1.12B ISK)
Come back with a battlereport that has a 'T' in the number before the word 'ISK'.
Seen single ship losses that are many times that much in value from people that don't have any renters or tech moons.
You have the ISK, splash it! Destroying probably 'free' ships doesn't make for an interesting landscape.
:) --- GÇ£If you think this Universe is bad, you should see some of the others.GÇ¥ GÇò Philip K. **** |
Trendon Evenstar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
144
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 02:41:00 -
[150] - Quote
Spurty wrote:Hannah Flex wrote:The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders sigh, really .. 85 Ships killed (2.39B ISK) 29 Ships lost (1.12B ISK) Come back with a battlereport that has a 'T' in the number before the word 'ISK'. Seen single ship losses that are many times that much in value from people that don't have any renters or tech moons. You have the ISK, splash it! Destroying probably 'free' ships doesn't make for an interesting landscape. :)
Is this VOLTA volunteering to bring a blinged out T3 fleet to VFK? |
|
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
349
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 03:17:00 -
[151] - Quote
Hannah Flex wrote:The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders
Kinda wondering why there are some GSF on GSF pod kill now... |
No More Heroes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2274
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 04:00:00 -
[152] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Hannah Flex wrote:The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders Kinda wondering why there are some GSF on GSF pod kill now...
We pod each other in 0.0 as a means of med-cloning around the universe
Shocking isnt it, all that missed sp/hr from no implants . |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
1145
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 04:24:00 -
[153] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:For that, the entire system needs to change but people prefer blaming GOONS for everything.
I don't blame the Goons. I blame their parents. EvE is like prison.-á It's a place when bad people go to learn how to become even worse people. |
Tesal
238
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 05:15:00 -
[154] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Hannah Flex wrote:The Blue DonutThunderdomeGäó is alive and kickin thanks for your concern highsec guys and NPC corp duders Kinda wondering why there are some GSF on GSF pod kill now...
They are sacrifices to the Great Goon God.
|
dark heartt
I Own Four Sheep Silent Requiem
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 05:43:00 -
[155] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:this imbalance is making NULL too safe in many's eyes
I read this post, and apart from the format and grammar making me want to poke my eyes out with a Caracal, it makes me laugh. I have no affiliation with any current null sec bloc, alliance or even corp and even I know that to make an area of 0.0 safe the players need to patrol and do something to make sure it's safe. In high sec players think it is safe because of Concord (who are judge, jury and executioner to those who commit crimes, not a prevention of violence so that argument is invalid), but null is so much more safe because players do things.
Intel channels, roaming gangs, keeping an eye on local, structures and basic player awareness all help keep 0.0 safe, not the ISK from tech moons. Sure the tech helps to hold the space in paying for sov bills and structures, but it's not like they can pay to not have an enemy come into the system. Why do people think that a bloc like the CFC having so much more money than anyone else is imbalanced? They worked hard to have the sov to do so.
Just because Shadoo wants to recreate RvB in null (don't deny it, that's what you want), doesn't mean that there is an imbalance of safety. It just means that they want to have good fights without worrying about using the terrible sov system.
/rant. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2980
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 06:38:00 -
[156] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:I was thinking more like HI/LO/NULL systems with MAGnitar/Blackhole/etc effects in wormholes that'd be less vanilla & more jungle like TBH
Besides the inability to quote things properly (either do it right or leave it alone, don't try (and fail) to edit your statement to change the meaning of your post), you missed the entire point of the post.
You brought up the Vietnam war as an example of what you want to see (a smaller group facing down a superpower and winning).
I'm just here to point out that that is a hilariously bad interpretation of history and demonstrates a stunning lack of knowledge of world history (which dovetails nicely with your previously and concurrently demonstrated lack of knowledge of the game you play).
How in the world would WH-style effects (which, being trivially discovered, do nothing to help or hinder anyone in a sov fight) in any way get you what you want, which is: DarthNefarius wrote:to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
708
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 07:10:00 -
[157] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:How in the world would WH-style effects (which, being trivially discovered, do nothing to help or hinder anyone in a sov fight) in any way get you what you want, which is: DarthNefarius wrote:to make more niches viable then the big boys have right now to trump them
Actually I doubt it'd be much of a hinderance but just more fun & add spice Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
708
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 07:13:00 -
[158] - Quote
dark heartt wrote:
Just because Shadoo wants to recreate RvB in null (don't deny it, that's what you want), doesn't mean that there is an imbalance of safety. It just means that they want to have good fights without worrying about using the terrible sov system.
/rant.
Weellll I guess I have no problems with RvB in NULL ( if it gets your rocks off fine ) just it does remind me of the risk aversion being decried about HI being replicated in NULL... just don't blame CCP for your own risk aversion Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Donald MacRury
PH0ENIX COMPANY Tribal Band
10
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 07:21:00 -
[159] - Quote
This is the craziest thing I ever heard. Maybe people should think for a moment that there isn't anything wrong with the system and just what people want to do. Besides structure grinding maybe time consuming and annoying but it exists and its been part of the system for as long as I can remember. It shouldn't even matter.
If two groups in null decide to fighter each other whats stopping them from just bashing their fleets together and getting kills. Or if one alliance wants to take the space of another, well then they will have to deal with grinding up their sov in order to take it.
So if people have a problem with this then maybe they should spend more time of coming up with creative ways of dealing with it rather than spending time complaining that eve should be changed. Every problem has a solution and it doesn't have to involve the mechanics of the system to be changed for it.
Don't like the lack of fighting between the large groups in null then join a group that does fight them. Don't like all the profits that are being made from moon goo then stop buying tech 2. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2980
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 07:28:00 -
[160] - Quote
Donald MacRury wrote:So if people have a problem with this then maybe they should spend more time of coming up with creative ways of dealing with it rather than spending time complaining that eve should be changed. Every problem has a solution and it doesn't have to involve the mechanics of the system to be changed for it.
The two fundamental problems with Null are: 1. There is relatively little incentive to take space. 2. There are literally Billions of EHP to grind through once you break the enemy and they leave. (Ignoring resists, it would take a 250 man fleet of Hellcats working 8 hours a day several months to take CFC or HBC space. With resists, longer, ofc).
Both of those are problems with the game mechanics. What's your magical non-game-mechanic-changing solution to these problems? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
Donald MacRury
PH0ENIX COMPANY Tribal Band
10
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 07:34:00 -
[161] - Quote
I'll be honest that there are some things that I am not familar with when it comes to null sec, and it takes a while to learn from what i've noticed.
From my perspective it seamed to make sense for it to take a while and be hard to grind through someone's sov but after thinking maybe that should only apply if an alliance is activtly defending their space. If an alliance abandon's their space then maybe their structures should weaken or become easier to take. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2980
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 09:09:00 -
[162] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:dark heartt wrote:
Just because Shadoo wants to recreate RvB in null (don't deny it, that's what you want), doesn't mean that there is an imbalance of safety. It just means that they want to have good fights without worrying about using the terrible sov system.
/rant.
Weellll I guess I have no problems with RvB in NULL ( if it gets your rocks off fine ) just it does remind me of the risk aversion being decried about HI being replicated in NULL... just don't blame CCP for your own risk aversion
The things HS asks for are generally along the lines of: "Make us safer using NPC magic."
The things Nullsec is asking for are along the lines of : "Give us a good reason to kick the crap out of each other, and make it easier to kick each other out of our space."
Totally the same thing.
Since there's no reason to take space from each other apart from bragging rights, and taking space is a months long ordeal of shooting inanimate objects, why not put the same Trillions of ISK that would go into a major Sov War on the line in a battledome for no reason other than bragging rights and skip the months long ordeal of Sov grinding? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Anunzi
High House Of Shadows Tribal Band
53
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:01:00 -
[163] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:
Weellll I guess I have no problems with RvB in NULL ( if it gets your rocks off fine ) just it does remind me of the risk aversion being decried about HI being replicated in NULL... just don't blame CCP for your own risk aversion
So, what happened to you Nefarius? A huge percentage of your posts are ranting and raving at the GÇ£risk adverse nullbearsGÇ¥ as you like to call us. Did you get griefed while applying to the gewns or something? Did PL hot drop you?
I just cant help noticing the amount of bitter pouring out of you is so intense its even made your avatar look like heGÇÖs just drank a pint of neat lemon juice.
Also, blue donut eh? http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16845619
Malcanis for CSM8, Its about damn time. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:08:00 -
[164] - Quote
Anunzi wrote:So, what happened to you Nefarius? A huge percentage of your posts are ranting and raving at the GÇ£risk adverse nullbearsGÇ¥ as you like to call us. Did you get griefed while applying to the gewns or something? Did PL hot drop you? I just cant help noticing the amount of bitter pouring out of you is so intense its even made your avatar look like heGÇÖs just drank a pint of neat lemon juice. Also, blue donut eh? http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16845619
So in order to prove to me there is no big blue doughnut you post a kill in HI SEC? Looks like NULL has run out of targets because they're all blue & has to resort to traveling to HI by your account yet still gank blue targets Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1479
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:10:00 -
[165] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Anunzi wrote:So, what happened to you Nefarius? A huge percentage of your posts are ranting and raving at the GÇ£risk adverse nullbearsGÇ¥ as you like to call us. Did you get griefed while applying to the gewns or something? Did PL hot drop you? I just cant help noticing the amount of bitter pouring out of you is so intense its even made your avatar look like heGÇÖs just drank a pint of neat lemon juice. Also, blue donut eh? http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16845619 So in order to prove to me there is no big blue doughnut you post a kill in HI SEC? Looks like NULL has run out of targets because they're all blue & has to resort totraveling to HI by your account
No one can e this dumb for real. I call troll.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7122
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:10:00 -
[166] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:So in order to prove to me there is no big blue doughnut you post a kill in HI SEC? Looks like NULL has run out of targets because they're all blue & has to resort totraveling to HI by your account
because naturally GSF members suicide ganking a jumpfreighter in hisec is not indicative of the fact that we're not blue to the HBC
can you explain this bit of logic ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade The East India Co.
1192
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:01:00 -
[167] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Donald MacRury wrote:So if people have a problem with this then maybe they should spend more time of coming up with creative ways of dealing with it rather than spending time complaining that eve should be changed. Every problem has a solution and it doesn't have to involve the mechanics of the system to be changed for it. The two fundamental problems with Null are: 1. There is relatively little incentive to take space. 2. There are literally Billions of EHP to grind through once you break the enemy and they leave. (Ignoring resists, it would take a 250 man fleet of Hellcats working 8 hours a day several months to take CFC or HBC space. With resists, longer, ofc). Both of those are problems with the game mechanics. What's your magical non-game-mechanic-changing solution to these problems?
Frankly, Ruby, of the two, #1 is the significantly more troubling problem. If #1 were fixed (in some fashion, don't ask me how), #2 would cease to be a problem (or more accurately, would stop being perceived as being as large of a problem as it is now).
Grinding off billions of hitpoints is always going to suck, but there are many levels of suck, and having a good reason to engage in the suck can make it less unappealing. Malcanis for CSM 8
Eve Online: The full-contact sport for your brain. Twitter --á@DeVeldrin |
Hannah Flex
laissez-faire economics
282
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:15:00 -
[168] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Donald MacRury wrote:So if people have a problem with this then maybe they should spend more time of coming up with creative ways of dealing with it rather than spending time complaining that eve should be changed. Every problem has a solution and it doesn't have to involve the mechanics of the system to be changed for it. The two fundamental problems with Null are: 1. There is relatively little incentive to take space. 2. There are literally Billions of EHP to grind through once you break the enemy and they leave. (Ignoring resists, it would take a 250 man fleet of Hellcats working 8 hours a day several months to take CFC or HBC space. With resists, longer, ofc). Both of those are problems with the game mechanics. What's your magical non-game-mechanic-changing solution to these problems? Frankly, Ruby, of the two, #1 is the significantly more troubling problem. If #1 were fixed (in some fashion, don't ask me how), #2 would cease to be a problem (or more accurately, would stop being perceived as being as large of a problem as it is now). Grinding off billions of hitpoints is always going to suck, but there are many levels of suck, and having a good reason to engage in the suck can make it less unappealing.
Believe it or not a lot of EVE Online sovereignty warfare is based around an alarm clock. An alarm clock in real life. Like you have to set your alarm to wake up in the middle of the night and do a thing in EVE Online and hope you dont oversleep then and make it to work/class.
As a defensive action, people who are being invaded will push their timers into an inopportune timezone for the invader. This causes stalemates, in order to break the stalemate the invader must have 'alarm clock' ops in order to make headway with certain shiptypes, FC's or sheer number of forces.
While certainly realistic from a dynamic gameworld/MMO standpoint, the alarm clock makes sov warfare inherently unfun. What to do about it? I dont know, but I do know sov warfare sucks- so put that in your L4 and smoke it highsec |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:18:00 -
[169] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:baltec1 wrote: What has our numbers got to do with the soul crushingly bad time everyone has with grinding down endless structure hitpoints for solid month?
Because when you have all the numbers and your goal is to conquer and divide up the whole universe, all that you get is a soul crushing bad time of shooting structures, and you deserve it. You'd think this is obvious. So the trillions of hitpoints you have to burn through in a sov war simply go away if we have smaller powerblocks? You do realise that it will take even longer with smaller fleets right?
I think it would grant the chance to those who don't see the grind as being such an eyebleed. New blood might not be so hesitant to give it a go since they are not jaded to process as of yet. And if they do... well... they got to try.
And you got new people into null.
Guess it could make more sense to take on a "if you can't beat them join them" attitude though, in the face of complaining how it's broken and needs to be fixed while I'm currently using it as intended.....
Bleh =(. Sounds like too many fat kids are complining of their weight as they bite into a big frosting covered piece of cake and bitching at their parents at the same time for giving it to them. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade The East India Co.
1192
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:18:00 -
[170] - Quote
Hannah Flex wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Donald MacRury wrote:So if people have a problem with this then maybe they should spend more time of coming up with creative ways of dealing with it rather than spending time complaining that eve should be changed. Every problem has a solution and it doesn't have to involve the mechanics of the system to be changed for it. The two fundamental problems with Null are: 1. There is relatively little incentive to take space. 2. There are literally Billions of EHP to grind through once you break the enemy and they leave. (Ignoring resists, it would take a 250 man fleet of Hellcats working 8 hours a day several months to take CFC or HBC space. With resists, longer, ofc). Both of those are problems with the game mechanics. What's your magical non-game-mechanic-changing solution to these problems? Frankly, Ruby, of the two, #1 is the significantly more troubling problem. If #1 were fixed (in some fashion, don't ask me how), #2 would cease to be a problem (or more accurately, would stop being perceived as being as large of a problem as it is now). Grinding off billions of hitpoints is always going to suck, but there are many levels of suck, and having a good reason to engage in the suck can make it less unappealing. Believe it or not a lot of EVE Online sovereignty warfare is based around an alarm clock. An alarm clock in real life. Like you have to set your alarm to wake up in the middle of the night and do a thing in EVE Online and hope you dont oversleep then and make it to work/class.
Oh trust me, I believe it. There is, frankly, nothing about the current sov grind that does not suck balls like a **** star. The lack of a reason to engage in the grind only makes the problem worse.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Eve Online: The full-contact sport for your brain. Twitter --á@DeVeldrin |
|
Hannah Flex
laissez-faire economics
282
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:27:00 -
[171] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:Oh trust me, I believe it. There is, frankly, nothing about the current sov grind that does not suck balls like a **** star. The lack of a reason to engage in the grind only makes the problem worse
Its like if your corp or alliance said: "Hey, you guys need to wake up at 4am and run 6 level 4 missions or install 75 manufacturing jobs" every single last person in highsec especially the original poster would be like: 'F that I play this game for fun and I do what I want." (see James 315 threads for that)
But in a large 0.0 alliance you invest your playtime and your skill and effort into a war-effort, you win and lose, make progress, smugpost and hurf-blurf, the enemy rages, you want to win, you want to end it, you want to finish the war so you alarm clock. It doesnt make it fun, its just something that needs to be done.
Sov warfare (for fun) is a myth and has never happened and will never happen. There needs to be a clear/capturable objective/benefit. Yet all of these highsec duders and peanut gallery guys are insisting that certain folks must make sov warfare for fun and belittle the ideas for shooting ships/each other for fun. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
3217
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:31:00 -
[172] - Quote
I don't understand the appeal of PvP if there is no risk.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7124
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:40:00 -
[173] - Quote
i love it when wretches compare wargames to RvB
as if nobody can interfere in them and as if we have ridiculous rules like "don't pod" or "don't primary hostile FCs" or "don't use ECM it's DISHONOURABLE" and "don't interfere in honourable 1v1s" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Dave Stark
2047
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:45:00 -
[174] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:I don't understand the appeal of PvP if there is no risk.
green killboard stats. Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Alara IonStorm
4647
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:51:00 -
[175] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:The lack of a reason to engage in the grind only makes the problem worse.
You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%. |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade The East India Co.
1193
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:59:00 -
[176] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:The lack of a reason to engage in the grind only makes the problem worse.
You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%.
It probably would be - if you could get enough of the 85% all moving in the same direction. The issue is that for a sov war to be successful against one of the major power blocks, you need to have the numbers to A) take the space away and then B) defend against the oncoming storm. The issue then becomes herding enough cats in one direction to make standing up against their fleets possible. I fought in the battle of 42SU-L when IRC lost their CSAA - I've seen the 800 man Maelstrom fleets the CFC can call out first hand.
Rousting enough of the 85% out of the self induced torpor to challenge that kind of combat might (and keep them interested long enough to finish gathering them in the first place) is a task that would make the following sov war look like a casual evening stroll.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Eve Online: The full-contact sport for your brain. Twitter --á@DeVeldrin |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
715
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:11:00 -
[177] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:The lack of a reason to engage in the grind only makes the problem worse.
You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%. Why?
Interdict Hi-Sec - it's the only way to be sure... |
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
552
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:30:00 -
[178] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:I don't understand the appeal of PvP if there is no risk. green killboard stats.
killboard stats the birth of all evil wumbo |
Alara IonStorm
4647
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:37:00 -
[179] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%.
Why? Because you are posting in a 9 page thread that goes on and on about how these Moons are so valuable and controlled by a small portion of the player base. Somehow moving them will bring about war, then perhaps people should try and conquer them. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5605
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:40:00 -
[180] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%.
Why? Because you are posting in a 9 page thread that goes on and on about how these Moons are so valuable and controlled by a small portion of the player base. Somehow moving them will bring about war, then perhaps people should try and conquer them.
What? The high sec lords doing things for themselves?! |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
713
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:09:00 -
[181] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
What? The high sec lords doing things for themselves?!
Can you please name a few of these HI SEC lords & thier titles? (eg: Shaddo NULL SEC lord of ThunderdomeGäó, The Mittani NULL SEC lord of TECH, Montolio the NULL SEC lord of NEO & blobs etc...) Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5610
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:12:00 -
[182] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What? The high sec lords doing things for themselves?!
Can you please name a few of these HI SEC lords? (eg: Shaddo NULL SEC lord of ThunderdomeGäó, The Mittani NULL SEC lord of TECH, etc...)
You can be the lord of bitterness. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
713
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:16:00 -
[183] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:
What? The high sec lords doing things for themselves?!
Can you please name a few of these HI SEC lords? (eg: Shaddo NULL SEC lord of ThunderdomeGäó, The Mittani NULL SEC lord of TECH, etc...) You can be the lord of bitterness.
I wouldn't be the HI SEC lord of bitterness... I'd be the Forum lord of bitterness while you & a few Goons could be called the Forum lords of hyprocacy Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5613
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 20:59:00 -
[184] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:
I wouldn't be the HI SEC lord of bitterness... I'd be the Forum lord of bitterness while you & a few Goons could be called the Forum lords of hyprocacy
That would require us to promote or try to enforce standards, attitudes, lifestyles, virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that we do not actually hold ourselves.
Lords of chaos would be more apt. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 21:01:00 -
[185] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:
I wouldn't be the HI SEC lord of bitterness... I'd be the Forum lord of bitterness while you & a few Goons could be called the Forum lords of hyprocacy
That would require us to promote or try to enforce standards, attitudes, lifestyles, virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that we do not actually hold ourselves. Lords of chaos would be more apt.
Funnily enough, when I was watching Batman Begins with my son last night... the way the Goons are handling things, very much resembles the League of Shadows.
Just sayin. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Sentamon
771
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 21:16:00 -
[186] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Asuri Kinnes wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: You would think 15% of players controlling the space would be incentive for the other 85%.
Why? Because you are posting in a 9 page thread that goes on and on about how these Moons are so valuable and controlled by a small portion of the player base. Somehow moving them will bring about war, then perhaps people should try and conquer them. What? The high sec lords doing things for themselves?!
Sure they do, they join you guys. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
713
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 21:40:00 -
[187] - Quote
OK since we're playing ThunderdomeGäó does this mean Master/Blaster where Shaddo is the dwarf Master & Mittans is the mental midget/physical giant named Blaster or the other way around?!?!?!... of course there's no denial Montrolio isTina Turner
Who runs EVE err I mean barter town??? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Frying Doom
1980
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 21:46:00 -
[188] - Quote
Well knowing CCP they will probably do something completely random
Like remove tech, declare it an exploit and remove the approximate isk from the alliances based on a price calculated by some extremely strange formula. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2983
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 21:56:00 -
[189] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:OK since we're playing ThunderdomeGäó
So, since you don't seem to like the idea of the Nullsec empires blowing up trillions of ISK for poops and giggles, why are you complaining about it on the forums instead of making preparations to disrupt them?
There are literally no game mechanic barriers to totally disrupting the Thunderdome you've been moaning about for the past few weeks. Or, if your issue is that moons aren't going to be in play, take them while their owners are distracted. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 22:11:00 -
[190] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:OK since we're playing ThunderdomeGäó So, since you don't seem to like the idea of the Nullsec empires blowing up trillions of ISK for poops and giggles, why are you complaining about it on the forums instead of making preparations to disrupt them? There are literally no game mechanic barriers to totally disrupting the Thunderdome you've been moaning about for the past few weeks. Or, if your issue is that moons aren't going to be in play, take them while their owners are distracted.
Ease of logistics and power projection dooms that to fail before it has even begun unless the attackers could rally 1000's of people.
Since 85% of the Eve population are 0.0 residents and their high-sec, out of corp neutral hauler alts, this would also be discovered woefully quickly. |
|
Alara IonStorm
4654
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 23:31:00 -
[191] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote: Ease of logistics and power projection dooms that to fail before it has even begun unless the attackers could rally 1000's of people.
Are you saying to take on the largest Empires of EVE you need an Army. Why can't you be like Rambo and solo World War II? CCP Fix!
|
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 23:39:00 -
[192] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote: Ease of logistics and power projection dooms that to fail before it has even begun unless the attackers could rally 1000's of people.
Are you saying to take on the largest Empires of EVE you need an Army. Why can't you be like Rambo and solo World War II? CCP Fix!
You're the one asking CCP to fix that, I never said that it shouldn't take an army, you're attempting to put words in my mouth. I am simply pointing out that it wouldn't be nearly so easy as Ruby would like to imply it would be.
Also, you're forgetting the heroes of pizza, they seem to be half-decent at running an insurgency. |
Alara IonStorm
4654
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 23:45:00 -
[193] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote: You're the one asking CCP to fix that, I never said that it shouldn't take an army, you're attempting to put words in my mouth. I am simply pointing out that it wouldn't be nearly so easy as Ruby would like to imply it would be.
Also, you're forgetting the heroes of pizza, they seem to be half-decent at running an insurgency.
Problem solved. CCP close the thread, people who want Tech start recruiting. |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 23:49:00 -
[194] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote: You're the one asking CCP to fix that, I never said that it shouldn't take an army, you're attempting to put words in my mouth. I am simply pointing out that it wouldn't be nearly so easy as Ruby would like to imply it would be.
Also, you're forgetting the heroes of pizza, they seem to be half-decent at running an insurgency.
Problem solved. CCP close the thread, people who want Tech start recruiting.
Why not encourage those who have Tech (apparently the only moon goo worth mention) to ramp up recruitment? Everyone in 0.0 should be encouraged to recruit hero tackles. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2985
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 01:13:00 -
[195] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote: Ease of logistics and power projection dooms that to fail before it has even begun unless the attackers could rally 1000's of people.
Are you saying to take on the largest Empires of EVE you need an Army. Why can't you be like Rambo and solo World War II? CCP Fix! You're the one asking CCP to fix that, I never said that it shouldn't take an army, you're attempting to put words in my mouth. I am simply pointing out that it wouldn't be nearly so easy as Ruby would like to imply it would be. Also, you're forgetting the heroes of pizza, they seem to be half-decent at running an insurgency.
I simply said that, unlike the case in HS, there are exactly zero game mechanical obstacles to disrupting their thunderdome if you don't like it.
Logistics are exactly as hard for them as they would be for you (actually easier for you, since you probably don't need to run battleship fleets). The fact that they're better at it is not a game mechanical obstacle.
Supers and Titans are available on the open market. You have access to the exact same tools they have to project power. The fact that they're better at it is not a game mechanical obstacle.
There are no game mechanical obstacles to disrupting the thunderdome or taking the Tech moons (which, incidentally, are worth less per hr than Ice mining). There are simply players in your way. Being unable to overcome player generated obstacles is not the game's fault.*
*Before Darth tries to says something about this: Thunderdome is not a reaction to being unable to power through the (game mechanical) giant ****-berry pie that is Sov grinding, it's being unwilling to bury your face in it when the pie-eating contest prize is getting to eat a septic tank** (and when you finish that, they give you a breath mint***).
** The hundreds of millions of EHP of Sov (and PI) structures left over after a bloc collapses and the war is "won".
***You get to own Sov... that holds no advantage over what you already have... and you have to bulk up your renter wing to pay the bills on it, which means you have to deal with renters... hooray! This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Ustrello
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 01:18:00 -
[196] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:
I wouldn't be the HI SEC lord of bitterness... I'd be the Forum lord of bitterness while you & a few Goons could be called the Forum lords of hyprocacy
That would require us to promote or try to enforce standards, attitudes, lifestyles, virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that we do not actually hold ourselves. Lords of chaos would be more apt.
I call Malal |
Esteban Dragonovic
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 07:40:00 -
[197] - Quote
It would seem that OP has absolutely no concept of what actually happens in a sov war under the current sov system and what makes most people with half a mind and some experience shutter at the whole idea. I'll outline the events very shortly and terribly in this manner:
1. Lets say the two largest coalitions currently in the game (CFC, HBC just for example) declare open sov war upon one another.
2. The two proceed to invade one another in a series of stalemates and structure grinding that continues for YEARS, not weeks, not months, YEARS. The size and disposition of the established powers under the current system would likely see a more drawn out conflict that would continue perpetually without end. Neither side would never actually manage to gain the upper hand for any significant amount of time long enough to produce more than a superficial impact.
3. Eventually after a great deal of time and little if any progress made, both sides finally burn out and quit eve because of the whole horrible ordeal.
4. This massive drop in subscriptions from what is likely to be almost 1/3rd of eve's player base proceeds to send the game in downward spiral due to what is probably more than half of the user generated content leaving the game.
5. After hemorrhaging subscriptions for a time eve finally dies as the sandbox cannot cope with such an extreme stress on the system.
Granted this scenario in particular may not be what would actually occur on the specifics, but the horrid process of the whole thing is probably fairly close.
Simply "Fiddling with tech" will not solve this problem as it is merely a symptom of the larger issue at the core design of the sov system. As it stands, the sov system, as well as a majority of the space in null, needs to be redesigned from the ground up to fix the numerous standing issues on how to encourage new blood in null as well as how to make large scale bloc wars actually damn fun instead of an eye clawing nightmare.
TL:DR : OP has no clue wtf hes talking about; fix the problem, not the symptoms |
Anunzi
High House Of Shadows Tribal Band
54
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:22:00 -
[198] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Anunzi wrote:So, what happened to you Nefarius? A huge percentage of your posts are ranting and raving at the GÇ£risk adverse nullbearsGÇ¥ as you like to call us. Did you get griefed while applying to the gewns or something? Did PL hot drop you? I just cant help noticing the amount of bitter pouring out of you is so intense its even made your avatar look like heGÇÖs just drank a pint of neat lemon juice. Also, blue donut eh? http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16845619 So in order to prove to me there is no big blue doughnut you post a kill in HI SEC? Looks like NULL has run out of targets because they're all blue & has to resort to traveling to HI by your account yet still gank blue targets Welcome to ThunderdomeGäó Udema
Ahhhh I see, you are just a bitter troll. You cannot possibly be that stupid to actually mean what you posted here.
Or can youGǪ
Malcanis for CSM8, Its about damn time. |
March rabbit
No Name No Pain
590
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:12:00 -
[199] - Quote
Anunzi wrote: Ahhhh I see, you are just a bitter troll. You cannot possibly be that stupid to actually mean what you posted here.
Or can youGǪ
translation: i have nothing to say but i need to do it!
to keep is simple: killing bears of friendly alliance is almost never the sign of war or conflict. Sometime alliances even reset standings to allow free roams inside their territory. Like it was in Delve/Querious in the middle of 2012. |
Anunzi
High House Of Shadows Tribal Band
54
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:32:00 -
[200] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:translation: i have nothing to say but i need to do it! to keep is simple: killing bears of friendly alliance is almost never the sign of war or conflict. Sometime alliances even reset standings to allow free roams inside their territory. Like it was in Delve/Querious in the middle of 2012.
So the fact that Goons are shooting PL is a NOT a sign of conflict and yet more :proof: of the blue donut.
Gotcha.
Malcanis for CSM8, Its about damn time. |
|
Kagura Nikon
Emptiness.
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:36:00 -
[201] - Quote
Just make ALL moon mining modules be outside POS and have 50K ehp.
Also make all the structures defensively sov related drop to 1/10th of their current HP pool.
Done.. It will become impossible to keep all universe under control by so few people... unless they work a LOT on it.
Also drop the stupid mail warnign that your sov system is being attacked. If you have no patrosl there to check for that you do not deserve to know! |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:24:00 -
[202] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Just make ALL moon mining modules be outside POS and have 50K ehp.
Also make all the structures defensively sov related drop to 1/10th of their current HP pool.
Done.. It will become impossible to keep all universe under control by so few people... unless they work a LOT on it.
Also drop the stupid mail warnign that your sov system is being attacked. If you have no patrosl there to check for that you do not deserve to know! And groups with even fewer people wouldn't be able to hold anything at all. Bad idea. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1068
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:26:00 -
[203] - Quote
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:It would seem that OP has absolutely no concept of what actually happens in a sov war under the current sov system and what makes most people with half a mind and some experience shutter at the whole idea. I'll outline the events very shortly and terribly in this manner: ....grinding that continues for YEARS...horrible ordeal... massive drop in subscriptions...eve finally dies...."Fiddling with tech" will not solve this problem
First, I think null is just a tad conceited although, your statement is not wholely untrue.
Grinding, any grinding is bad. The fact is, the large power blocs have spent years grinding what they have and are unwilling to grind to destroy each other now. Sov-null has essentially become too big to be arsed. Can't say I blame you. Sov was a bad idea to begin with, whether you agree with it or not, it has lead the current state. When speaking of a game, nothing should take years, cept maybe skill training. Otherwise, there is a certain lack of will when one is playing a game....for enjoyment.
Redefining ( ring mining ) and redistribution of goo is a solution or part of it.
The current staticity of null is related to two main issues, the grind not withstanding: 1) Static nature of moongoo & 2) force projection. Some changes can be incrementally deployed to reverse the present course of sov-null without utterly destroying the playerbase in null.
That moon-goo does not deplete from the system, constellation or region leads to a static build up of infrastructure defining the territories of alliances. This needs to change to more closely reflect reality. Empires have been built by their natural resources and detroyed by their depletion. Null should behave in the same way. The search for goo should be a constant endeavor. It should deplete and move requiring alliances to invest, reallocate, deinvest infrastructure constantly. Goo should also, not be the sole domain of sov-null. Instead more finite amounts should be available in npc null thereby resting a portion of sov-null's control over it.
Force-projection as it currently stands means large swaths of under-utilized space can be maintained leading to a concentration of allied players interacting in a very few number of fortified systems. When the claxons go off large fleets can be projected over very large distances to space that otherwise holds no value to those that own it other than it's goo. Making force projection more difficult effectively increases the size of null without adding systems to it. Several things need to take place to limit the size of a force that can be projected and the distance that they can project, effectively.
By doing such, changes can be incrementally introduced that does not break the back of the large power blocs, overnight. Of course, these are mechanical solutions to large power blocs. Not much can be done about the meta-power blocs. HTFU!...for the children! |
Kagura Nikon
Emptiness.
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:38:00 -
[204] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Just make ALL moon mining modules be outside POS and have 50K ehp.
Also make all the structures defensively sov related drop to 1/10th of their current HP pool.
Done.. It will become impossible to keep all universe under control by so few people... unless they work a LOT on it.
Also drop the stupid mail warnign that your sov system is being attacked. If you have no patrosl there to check for that you do not deserve to know! And groups with even fewer people wouldn't be able to hold anything at all. Bad idea.
Not at all, because they would be there to defend their rather small empire. Of course if attacked by a huge group they would fall... exaclty sam,e as today.. and exaclty same as shoudl be.
Thing is should be harder to defend, and should be impossible to defend a zone where no one lives. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5620
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 13:47:00 -
[205] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Just make ALL moon mining modules be outside POS and have 50K ehp.
Also make all the structures defensively sov related drop to 1/10th of their current HP pool.
Done.. It will become impossible to keep all universe under control by so few people... unless they work a LOT on it.
Also drop the stupid mail warnign that your sov system is being attacked. If you have no patrosl there to check for that you do not deserve to know! And groups with even fewer people wouldn't be able to hold anything at all. Bad idea. Not at all, because they would be there to defend their rather small empire. Of course if attacked by a huge group they would fall... exaclty sam,e as today.. and exaclty same as shoudl be. Thing is should be harder to defend, and should be impossible to defend a zone where no one lives.
You just made it impossible to defend moon mining equipment. |
De'Veldrin
East India Ore Trade The East India Co.
1195
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:31:00 -
[206] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Just make ALL moon mining modules be outside POS and have 50K ehp.
Also make all the structures defensively sov related drop to 1/10th of their current HP pool.
Done.. It will become impossible to keep all universe under control by so few people... unless they work a LOT on it.
Also drop the stupid mail warnign that your sov system is being attacked. If you have no patrosl there to check for that you do not deserve to know! And groups with even fewer people wouldn't be able to hold anything at all. Bad idea. Not at all, because they would be there to defend their rather small empire. Of course if attacked by a huge group they would fall... exaclty sam,e as today.. and exaclty same as shoudl be. Thing is should be harder to defend, and should be impossible to defend a zone where no one lives.
Yes, because small alliances have people logged in 23.5x7. Oh wait, no they don't - that would be the mammoth alliances with hundreds of people in all timezones.
Face it, this is a ****-tastic idea. Malcanis for CSM 8
Eve Online: The full-contact sport for your brain. Twitter --á@DeVeldrin |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
819
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:37:00 -
[207] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:
I wouldn't be the HI SEC lord of bitterness... I'd be the Forum lord of bitterness while you & a few Goons could be called the Forum lords of hyprocacy
That would require us to promote or try to enforce standards, attitudes, lifestyles, virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that we do not actually hold ourselves. Lords of chaos would be more apt.
There's a Wheel of Time joke in here somewhere. This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 16:44:00 -
[208] - Quote
Expounding on what I've previously said:
Moon-goo resources could be laid in sov-null much as they are now but with varying qualities. Goo could be arranged in such a way as to have low quality, medium quality, high quality deposits. There depletion could be a variable based solely on amounts extracted over a given time period. This would require alliances to manage their extraction as well as their own size and resource utilization. The more they extract, the sooner they have to identify the next high quality deposits. Coupled with logarithmic scales of force projection the next deposit may or may not require an alliance to redefine which system their capitol resides. Ultimately this would mean alliances would have to re-examine their meta-game allegiances establishing new ones and discarding the old leading to more conflict in null.
The low and medium quality deposits may mean, with logarithmic force projection in mind, that some space may not be worth the effort for the larger alliances but, very much worth it for smaller power-blocs. These lower quality deposits could deplete sooner requiring these alliances to move more often also requiring them to re-examine and establish new relationships with the next power-bloc that they snuggle against.
Having goo also available in non-sov null in the form of ring mining would mean it acts as a buffer during periods of transition in sov-null.
But, this is all dependent on logarithmic force projection. Which if you think about it, is similar to reality in that it becomes vastly more expensive to project force outside a country's immediate sphere of influence. What we have now is completely linear. If an alliance wants to project force over the entire length of its territory and further all it need do is place jump bridges or have cyno alts available. The cost is the same no matter how far it wants to project force. By tying force projection to a defined capitol system, logarithmic force projection becomes easy to implement.
All this would culminate in the end of big static power-blocs. Even if the entirety of sov-null were alligned if/when this was implemented, due to depletion of goo, these large friendly relationships would eventually have to pose the question, "My goo is running out, my friend to the east still has plenty, do we pre-emptively wage war to acquire those resources before its too late and we no longer have the ability to do it?"
If such a system were implemented I could also foresee the end to sov grinding as it currently is leaving it only as a relatively simple formality to establish territory. Granted, there are many other factors that need to be addressed but, in my opinion, essentially, this is what should happen if we want a populated, vibrant and ever changing sov-null environment rather than the under populated and static system we have now where the current power-blocs would rather not wage war least they be committed to a war of player attrition because it just takes so damned long to accomplish. HTFU!...for the children! |
Ustrello
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 16:55:00 -
[209] - Quote
Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever |
Goddamned American Capitalist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:25:00 -
[210] - Quote
Lemme guess, you are one of the GSF Survey bitches aren't you? |
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:30:00 -
[211] - Quote
Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever
I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person something through the gate. HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13294
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:35:00 -
[212] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person something through the gate. The problem with depletion is that it only generates even more static behaviour: between hoarding everything you can while you're in a good spot and then hunkering down while waiting for it to respawn, and constantly losing massive amounts of ISK chasing income that will be half (or wholly) depleted once you get there, which one do you think people will choose? Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:46:00 -
[213] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person something through the gate. The problem with depletion is that it only generates even more static behaviour: between hoarding everything you can while you're in a good spot and then hunkering down while waiting for it to respawn, and constantly losing massive amounts of ISK chasing income that will be half (or wholly) depleted once you get there, which one do you think people will choose?
Assuming that it does respawn to be the same size you mean.
Variable is variable. What if it respawns into a smaller lesser quality? And then again. And again. Do you still think that large force that can no longer afford their bill are just going to camp out, waiting? Having the "largest" force projection capabilities?
Really? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:54:00 -
[214] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person something through the gate. The problem with depletion is that it only generates even more static behaviour: between hoarding everything you can while you're in a good spot and then hunkering down while waiting for it to respawn, and constantly losing massive amounts of ISK chasing income that will be half (or wholly) depleted once you get there, which one do you think people will choose?
Tippia, I'll have to agree/disagree with you. But, let me outline my thinking. Depletion is something that would take months or longer to accomplish for high quality deposits. It depends on their extraction of the resource. To an extent they can control their depletion planning for it. Over time alliances will become accustomed to the hunt for the next deposit or they will become accustomed to more in-fighting to acquire existing deposits. There may indeed be hoarding. Again, non-sov null gets goo to buffer inadequate supply. But even if there is hoarding, hoarders will eventually need to expend their stockpiles to fund their empire and their conquests. As with anything in Eve there is always hoarding and always times of expenditure. So, I'm not seeing any more of an issue with hoarding than we've had in the past or present. HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13297
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:55:00 -
[215] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Assuming that it does respawn to be the same size you mean. No. Assuming it respawns at all, which it has to.
Quote:Variable is variable. What if it respawns into a smaller lesser quality? And then again. And again. Do you still think that large force that can no longer afford their bill are just going to camp out, waiting? Having the "largest" force projection capabilities? I think that miserly waiting for it to become profitable again (which it has to, or the universe will run out of the material in question before long) will always be preferable to wasting money on something that will inevitably turn out to be even less profitable by the time you get to it.
Low profit > low profit + loss. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:14:00 -
[216] - Quote
Re-read my last reply I editted it adding to it.
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Assuming that it does respawn to be the same size you mean. No. Assuming it respawns at all, which it has to. Quote:Variable is variable. What if it respawns into a smaller lesser quality? And then again. And again. Do you still think that large force that can no longer afford their bill are just going to camp out, waiting? Having the "largest" force projection capabilities? I think that miserly waiting for it to become profitable again (which it has to, or the universe will run out of the material in question before long) will always be preferable to wasting money on something that will inevitably turn out to be even less profitable by the time you get to it. Low profit > low profit + loss. Mr Kidd wrote:Tippia, I'll have to agree/disagree with you. But, let me outline my thinking. Depletion is something that would take months or longer to accomplish for high quality deposits. It depends on their extraction of the resource. To an extent they can control their depletion planning for it. Ok. Fair enough, but if it's operating on that kind of time scale, won't that just lead to a Gǣrolling staticnessGǥ instead? I.e. the big guys will remain big because they constantly nuke anyone who happens to sit on a newly-spawned goldmine, leaving behind a depleted wasteland once it has fallen below the threshold of profitability. Sure, there will be some dynamics in who owns what part of space, but none in who's participating. The system names may change, but the political map will not, and if two large coalitions come head to head because one of them happen to sit on a nice area and the other does not, then we're just back to the current situation and it will be far easier to (again) just wait for the spawn to roll over to something that's beneficial for youGǪ not to mention that if you're big enough, some part of your space is likely to be profitable enough at any given time to let you just wait it out.
Yes, there would be a static rolling nature to an alliance. We don't want to destroy the alliance we just want to make it move and be variable. We want to give it a common goal beyond "Well ok, we have all the good goo, so lets um......do stuff". We want its borders to change, we want goo to be outside it's influence or interest with logarithmic force projection. We want it to move like an amoeba thru sov-null forcing it to establish new relationship, fighting new enemies and discarding old relationships that no longer serve a purpose. Deposit depletion might take two former friends and move them in opposite directions letting smaller power-blocs fill the void between.
But the randomness of depletion coupled with extraction rates may fracture and divide such a coalition as you speak of. If one or the other alliance in the coalition depletes their resources too quickly, they may be more like to attack or be attack if they're no longer serving a purpose for the other alliance. HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13300
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:21:00 -
[217] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Yes, there would be a static rolling nature to an alliance. We don't want to destroy the alliance we just want to make it move and be variable. We want to give it a common goal beyond "Well ok, we have all the good goo, so lets um......do stuff". We want its borders to change, we want goo to be outside it's influence or interest with logarithmic force projection. We want it to move like an amoeba thru sov-null forcing it to establish new relationship, fighting new enemies and discarding old relationships that no longer serve a purpose. Deposit depletion might take two former friends and move them in opposite directions letting smaller power-blocs fill the void between.
But the randomness of depletion coupled with extraction rates may fracture and divide such a coalition as you speak of. I just don't see that happening. What you're describing isn't dynamic in much the same way as hanging the clock upside-down doesn't turn morning into afternoon. It'll just be the same static map fidgeting back and forth around the outer edge of the galaxy. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:24:00 -
[218] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Yes, there would be a static rolling nature to an alliance. We don't want to destroy the alliance we just want to make it move and be variable. We want to give it a common goal beyond "Well ok, we have all the good goo, so lets um......do stuff". We want its borders to change, we want goo to be outside it's influence or interest with logarithmic force projection. We want it to move like an amoeba thru sov-null forcing it to establish new relationship, fighting new enemies and discarding old relationships that no longer serve a purpose. Deposit depletion might take two former friends and move them in opposite directions letting smaller power-blocs fill the void between.
But the randomness of depletion coupled with extraction rates may fracture and divide such a coalition as you speak of. I just don't see that happening. What you're describing isn't dynamic in much the same way as hanging the clock upside-down doesn't turn morning into afternoon. It'll just be the same static map fidgeting back and forth around the outer edge of the galaxy.
Maybe, maybe not. But it would have to be better than what we have now. The reality is until a change is made and we see how things change noone can say for sure. But the variability of moving borders may add just enough dynamic to null. HTFU!...for the children! |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:34:00 -
[219] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Tippia, I'll have to agree/disagree with you. But, let me outline my thinking. Depletion is something that would take months or longer to accomplish for high quality deposits. It depends on their extraction of the resource. To an extent they can control their depletion planning for it. Ok. Fair enough, but if it's operating on that kind of time scale, won't that just lead to a Gǣrolling staticnessGǥ instead? I.e. the big guys will remain big because they constantly nuke anyone who happens to sit on a newly-spawned goldmine, leaving behind a depleted wasteland once it has fallen below the threshold of profitability. Sure, there will be some dynamics in who owns what part of space, but none in who's participating. The system names may change, but the political map will not, and if two large coalitions come head to head because one of them happen to sit on a nice area and the other does not, then we're just back to the current situation and it will be far easier to (again) just wait for the spawn to roll over to something that's beneficial for youGǪ not to mention that if you're big enough, some part of your space is likely to be profitable enough at any given time to let you just wait it out.
So you're saying that a conflict driver would be the same as things are now? What if using your argument, the spawn TIMES were the deciding factor? What if it took say, a mid size coalition (mid small large whatever) 3 weeks to clear out a system of moon go, but took 2 months for it to respawn to a size to adequately feed that corp? What if the RATES of growing were slower, but the # of moons were increased? You don't think that would shift the dynamics of sov space enough to encourage healthier fighting?
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Ustrello
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 22:13:00 -
[220] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person coming through the gate. Unfortunate for you, this is a situation that is ultimately bad for the game as a business. So, expect it to change.
Very good response to someone who has been in goons for all of two weeks. Very good |
|
Ustrello
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 22:15:00 -
[221] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Lemme guess, you are one of the GSF Survey bitches aren't you?
Nope but done it before enough to know I want to blow my brains out by the end, but try again vaunted npc poster |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 22:17:00 -
[222] - Quote
Ustrello wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person coming through the gate. Unfortunate for you, this is a situation that is ultimately bad for the game as a business. So, expect it to change. Very good response to someone who has been in goons for all of two weeks. Very good
I think you've pretty much qualified yourself. HTFU!...for the children! |
Ustrello
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 22:21:00 -
[223] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ustrello wrote:Have you ever scanned an entire region before let alone a constellation? Depletion is the most pants on head ******** idea ever I don't expect a goon sitting in his empty palace that is null to be accepting of the idea. It does require you to change and you know....do more than blob the next person coming through the gate. Unfortunate for you, this is a situation that is ultimately bad for the game as a business. So, expect it to change. Very good response to someone who has been in goons for all of two weeks. Very good I think you've pretty much qualified yourself.
Because depletion is probably the worst idea since the barge buff? |
Sentamon
777
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:18:00 -
[224] - Quote
Organized events, meaningless fights.
Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
baltec1
Bat Country
5640
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:22:00 -
[225] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends.
Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us. |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:26:00 -
[226] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us. I believe the expression I am looking for is "why bother"
With the tech moon welfare checks, destroying Goon ships has little or no meaning, while their destroying the ships of others does.
So while Tech moon and for that matter any top down income, Null will remain boring and frankly without much of a point. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
723
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:28:00 -
[227] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us.
Can I also join ThunderdomeGäó ? Do I have to include a 500 million deposit along with the ThunderdomeGäó fleet application & will you be handling all the ISK Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:38:00 -
[228] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: I believe the expression I am looking for is "why bother"
With the tech moon welfare checks, destroying Goon ships has little or no meaning, while their destroying the ships of others does.
Can you not afford ships? Battlcruisers are pretty cheap, you can grind up a new one in like an hour or 3 Cruisers, more if you go meta plus insurance.
It isn't like you can die or anything, you can attack endlessly. |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:43:00 -
[229] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: I believe the expression I am looking for is "why bother"
With the tech moon welfare checks, destroying Goon ships has little or no meaning, while their destroying the ships of others does.
Can you not afford ships? Battlcruisers are pretty cheap, you can grind up a new one in like an hour or 3 Cruisers, more if you go meta plus insurance. It isn't like you can die or anything, you can attack endlessly. I can afford lots of ships but again "Why bother"
I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses.
You would easily be able to sustain a 10 to 1 loss ratio while your opponents would eventually be unable to sustain that level. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:44:00 -
[230] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: You would easily be able to sustain a 10 to 1 loss ratio while your opponents would eventually be unable to sustain that level.
1 Hour of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser or more if you use Meta. Even more Smaller Ships. |
|
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:49:00 -
[231] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: You would easily be able to sustain a 10 to 1 loss ratio while your opponents would eventually be unable to sustain that level.
1 Hour of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser or more if you use Meta. Even more Smaller Ships. Money is less important then showing up more. So to use your analogy 1 Hour of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser for every one else Goonswarm 0 Hours of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser or more
So again why bother? We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:52:00 -
[232] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: So to use your analogy 1 Hour of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser for every one else Goonswarm 0 Hours of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser or more
So again why bother?
To fight them so much that they choose not marshal forces against you. Dedication matters more then money since there is no shortage of ships. |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:06:00 -
[233] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So to use your analogy 1 Hour of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser for every one else Goonswarm 0 Hours of Grinding = 1 Battlecruiser or 3 Cruiser or more
So again why bother?
To fight them so much that they choose not marshal forces against you. Dedication matters more then money since there is no shortage of ships. Except they have a massive moral booster in the Tech moons.
to look at it this way goons loose 1000 ships and have to do nothing to replace them
Everyone else as you pointed out losses 100 and needs to spend a collective 100 hours grinding.
So it really is a why bother as those moons are a massive moral boost beyond what anyone else can bring to the table
and if you doubt this just look at the Sov map. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13313
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:09:00 -
[234] - Quote
GǪsooo how much is a Tech moon worth a month, again? Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:13:00 -
[235] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: So it really is a why bother as those moons are a massive moral boost beyond what anyone else can bring to the table
An excellent reason to spur your troops on to conquer them in glorious battle. |
rodyas
tie fighters inc
1069
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:15:00 -
[236] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪsooo how much is a Tech moon worth a month, again?
Apparently enough to make players feel, they can lose ships easily in a thunderdome experience. Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:17:00 -
[237] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪsooo how much is a Tech moon worth a month, again? The more relevant question would be how large is the balance of Goonswarms wallet.
and the answer, last I heard was around 1.5 trillion. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
rodyas
tie fighters inc
1070
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:17:00 -
[238] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So it really is a why bother as those moons are a massive moral boost beyond what anyone else can bring to the table
An excellent reason to spur your troops on to conquer them in glorious battle.
Defenders can do that as well.
Personally I just say move to hi sec and do incursions or missions and what not. Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:18:00 -
[239] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So it really is a why bother as those moons are a massive moral boost beyond what anyone else can bring to the table
An excellent reason to spur your troops on to conquer them in glorious battle. No a very excellent reason not to bother.
We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
719
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:19:00 -
[240] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪsooo how much is a Tech moon worth a month, again? Are you trying to imply that they are worthless? Or that an Alliance that can declare "endless hulkageddon" *and mean it* doesn't have a huge resource reserve?
Interdict Hi-Sec - it's the only way to be sure... |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
723
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:20:00 -
[241] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪsooo how much is a Tech moon worth a month, again?
Thats because its that much of a problem Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13313
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:21:00 -
[242] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:The more relevant question would be how large is the balance of Goonswarms wallet. No. The relevant question is how much do they earn in a month GÇ£for freeGÇ¥, since we're trying to compare that to how much others earn through other means.
DarthNefarius wrote:Thats because its that much of a problem Eh what? I'm asking GÇ£how much?GÇ¥ GÇö GÇ£becauseGÇ¥ is not a sensible response to thatGǪ Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:22:00 -
[243] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:The more relevant question would be how large is the balance of Goonswarms wallet. No. The relevant question is how much do they earn in a month GÇ£for freeGÇ¥, since we're trying to compare that to how much others earn through other means. Oh I agree with that as well but there wallet comes into it as well as they have been getting these welfare checks for so long. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:23:00 -
[244] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: No a very excellent reason not to bother.
With an attitude like that you'll never beat them. Rome won without a single clash of sword or missile launched. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
719
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:25:00 -
[245] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:The more relevant question would be how large is the balance of Goonswarms wallet. No. The relevant question is how much do they earn in a month GÇ£for freeGÇ¥, since we're trying to compare that to how much others earn through other means. Actually, that still masks the relevant question.
Sheer numbers, both in resources, pilots, cap ships, super caps and all the background work that goes into making a group that size work *at all* (experience being a form of quality, itself).
To give credit where credit is due, Goons et. al. have been clamoring for Tech to be fixed and actually called it before the change went live.
That still doesn't change the fact that they're reduced to running "Thunderdome" ops...
Interdict Hi-Sec - it's the only way to be sure... |
Frying Doom
1985
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:25:00 -
[246] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: No a very excellent reason not to bother.
With an attitude like that you'll never beat them. Rome won without a single clash of sword or missile launched. So when did Rome fight an enemy with unlimited resources? We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
rodyas
tie fighters inc
1070
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:25:00 -
[247] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frying Doom wrote: No a very excellent reason not to bother.
With an attitude like that you'll never beat them. Rome won without a single clash of sword or missile launched.
They also got raped by genghis kahn. Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Alara IonStorm
4670
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:34:00 -
[248] - Quote
rodyas wrote: They also got raped by genghis kahn. or would have.
EDIT: Eh, I need a histroy lesson, that actually fall of rome is boring actaully. Much like the idea of a thunderdome is boring.
Crash Course makes everything fun. |
rodyas
tie fighters inc
1071
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:44:00 -
[249] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:rodyas wrote: They also got raped by genghis kahn. or would have.
EDIT: Eh, I need a histroy lesson, that actually fall of rome is boring actaully. Much like the idea of a thunderdome is boring.
Crash Course makes everything fun.
Still would have been more interesting if genghis khan invaded and tore them apart.
We just need to find a way to make the goons look appealing to the mongolians. Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Ryu Ibarazaki
Brave Newbies Inc.
12
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 01:08:00 -
[250] - Quote
rodyas wrote: Still would have been more interesting if genghis khan invaded and tore them apart.
We just need to find a way to make the goons look appealing to the mongolians.
A public relations win for the Goonswarm. Yesterday's savage barbarians, today's toga-clad servants of the Republic.
Manere parum pudici!
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5646
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 01:08:00 -
[251] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us. Can I also join ThunderdomeGäó ? Do I have to include a 500 million deposit along with the ThunderdomeGäó fleet application & will you be handling all the ISK You just gave me an idea. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
723
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 01:17:00 -
[252] - Quote
Ryu Ibarazaki wrote: A public relations win for the Goonswarm. Yesterday's savage barbarians, today's toga-clad servants of the Republic.
Manere parum pudici!
I think since we are discussing ThunderdomeGäó a better Latin moto would be:
Morituri Te Salutamus Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
Johan Civire
Dirty Curse inc.
581
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 02:17:00 -
[253] - Quote
I love hardcore to you know ID&T ftw ha? Cool using a brand name for eve online. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3011
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 20:45:00 -
[254] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses.
Each Tech moon is worth less per hour than a Mackinaw mining Ice. There are something around 500 tech moons (Goonswarm doesn't hold nearly all of them).
You saying you can't compete with 500 miners in Mackinaws? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Sentamon
778
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 20:52:00 -
[255] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us.
Nothing besides that fact that you recruited practically the whole server to your side. Bravo New BoB ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13328
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 20:57:00 -
[256] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Nothing besides that fact that you recruited practically the whole server to your side. Well, that's certainly a change from the normal Gǣhighsec majorityGǥ spiel you so often hearGǪ
I suppose that means that fixing highsec wouldn't actually create any backlash at all. Hop to it CCP!
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3011
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 21:00:00 -
[257] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Sentamon wrote:Nothing besides that fact that you recruited practically the whole server to your side. Well, that's certainly a change from the normal Gǣhighsec majorityGǥ spiel you so often hearGǪ I suppose that means that fixing highsec wouldn't actually create any backlash at all. Hop to it CCP!
We've always been at war with EASTASIA. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 21:58:00 -
[258] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses. Each Tech moon is worth less per hour than a Mackinaw mining Ice. There are something around 500 tech moons (Goonswarm doesn't hold nearly all of them). You saying you can't compete with 500 miners in Mackinaws? http://evemaps.dotlan.net/region/moons
Ok so you got the number of tech moons wrong
EvElopedia wrote: HUMBLE BEGINNINGS
The very smallest moon-mining operation requires no more than 150-200 million ISK to start up and this can certainly see some profit. This setup consists of a small control tower, which is the central nexus of the POS, a moon-harvesting array, a silo to hold the material harvested and, of course, fuel. Unlike mining lasers that you use on asteroids, the moon miner (or harvesting array) is fully automated and works 24/7, even through downtime. Once the modules are anchored, brought online, the material type is selected and the miner linked to the silo using the POS management interface, 100 units of the material you are mining will be dropped into the silo every hour. Some raw materials can be sold for more than the fuel cost of the POS, making mining them a profitable venture. You can have as many moon harvesting arrays running as you have different moon minerals. For example, if your moon has cadmium, caesium, and silicates then you can mine all 3 of these minerals at the same time if you have 3 moon harvesting arrays.
Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
729
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:22:00 -
[259] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:[quote=RubyPorto][quote=Frying Doom] Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day?
If so they probably hang out in delve & are BOTs...
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 |
baltec1
Bat Country
5673
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:29:00 -
[260] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Frying Doom wrote:[quote=RubyPorto][quote=Frying Doom] Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? If so they probably hang out in delve & are BOTs...
More likely Lonetrek or the Citadel. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:32:00 -
[261] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? You don't particularly need to. The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moonGǪ
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:38:00 -
[262] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? You don't particularly need to. The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moonGǪ except no hi-sec miner can mine 24 hours a day and if you think a miner makes 340 million in 4 hours you are very sadly mistaken. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:41:00 -
[263] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:except no hi-sec miner can mine 24 hours a day GǪand now, for an encore, try actually reading the post you respond to.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:52:00 -
[264] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:except no hi-sec miner can mine 24 hours a day GǪand now, for an encore, try actually reading the post you respond to. Yes and in response to that, yes it is less per hour, than a mack. But as I said that mack cannot mine 24 hours a day. So your comparison is flawed.
Semantics do not change the fact that tech makes Null, the "Why Bother" space, well that the broken Sov and the crappy industry.
All CCP need to do now is make PvP crappier in Null and lets face it local and Sov already do a good job for that. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 22:55:00 -
[265] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Yes and in response to that, yes it is less per hour, than a mack. But as I said that mack cannot mine 24 hours a day GǪwhich means you didn't read the post you were responding to. So let's try that again:
The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moon.
Do you notice why your response was nonsensical, or do you need the full diagram? Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
349
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:12:00 -
[266] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? You don't particularly need to. The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moonGǪ
Only that? I really need to read more on that game. I really though it was MUCH more considering the amount of bitching and moaning we read about those moons around here... |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
349
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:14:00 -
[267] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Sentamon wrote:Organized events, meaningless fights. Azeroth has invaded New Eden. Thanks Goons and friends. Nothing is stopping you from raising your own fleets to oppose us. Can I also join ThunderdomeGäó ? Do I have to include a 500 million deposit along with the ThunderdomeGäó fleet application & will you be handling all the ISK You just gave me an idea.
I am pretty sure it's what I think but could you please provide some of the results when you are done working that idea? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:21:00 -
[268] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Only that? I really need to read more on that game. I really though it was MUCH more considering the amount of bitching and moaning we read about those moons around here... If it's just the tech itself, then yes, that's all. You can generally make more money by reacting it into something more useful, but at that point, we need to start taking into account some kind of workload (and we really should compare that with T1 manufacturing anyway).
GǪso simply comparing base material extraction vs. base material extraction is the most straight-forward comparison we can make. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
349
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:24:00 -
[269] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Only that? I really need to read more on that game. I really though it was MUCH more considering the amount of bitching and moaning we read about those moons around here... If it's just the tech itself, then yes, that's all. You can generally make more money by reacting it into something more useful, but at that point, we need to start taking into account some kind of workload (and we really should compare that with T1 manufacturing anyway). GǪso simply comparing base material extraction vs. base material extraction is the most straight-forward comparison we can make.
Every single month, I learn at least one thing about player of this game and it's definately not that they are better/more hardcore/less whiny than wow players... |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:24:00 -
[270] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Yes and in response to that, yes it is less per hour, than a mack. But as I said that mack cannot mine 24 hours a day GǪwhich means you didn't read the post you were responding to. So let's try that again: The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moon. Do you notice why your response was nonsensical, or do you need the full diagram? Yes and a super costs more than a POS.
You will notice that this point has as much relevance as the amount a mack mines in an hour, has to how much a permanent AFK POS moon mining operation.
The other day I killed a rat and got a BPO in under a minute worth over 50 million, again this has no relevance, as the amount I make in a day is not calculated at 55 million a minute.
A moon miner, mines 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, nothing else does, so bringing up things that get a higher isk per hour over a short term are completely irrelevant. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
|
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:30:00 -
[271] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? You don't particularly need to. The 7.2M/h is all you need to know: a tech moon produces half of what a highsec miner does going after the worst ore he can find. Let's say they only mine four hours a day, that's three fairly casual (and unproductive) miners making up for a single tech moonGǪ Only that? I really need to read more on that game. I really though it was MUCH more considering the amount of bitching and moaning we read about those moons around here... It is more to do with the fact that they continuously mine without stopping so that 7.2 million per moon per hour means they earn just over 5 billion a month per moon with little or no player interaction.
The other problem is of course the limited number of regions these moons exist in, so what has happened is that these moons are held by a small number of alliances who get richer without being directly involved in the production. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:32:00 -
[272] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:A moon miner, mines 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, nothing else does, so bringing up things that get a higher isk per hour over a short term are completely irrelevant. GǪexcept that I'm not talking about the short-term. I'm talking about something that can happen 7 days a week, 365.25 days a year, because the daily requirement is so low.
Yes, a moon earns 5.2bn a month during its 720 moon-mining-hours of operation. It requires 360 ore-mining-hours to yield the same result, and the vast majority of that time is also spent AFK.
It is trivial to accumulate those hours during a month, and the triviality of this task is very much relevant to providing a perspective on exactly how much that moon is worth: it's worth about three slightly dim highsec miners.
Quote:It is more to do with the fact that they continuously mine without stopping so that 7.2 million per moon per hour means they earn just over 5 billion a month per moon with little or no player interaction. GǪjust like how a tiny group of miners earn just over 5 billion a month with little or no player interaction. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:01:00 -
[273] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Frying Doom wrote:A moon miner, mines 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, nothing else does, so bringing up things that get a higher isk per hour over a short term are completely irrelevant. GǪexcept that I'm not talking about the short-term. I'm talking about something that can happen 7 days a week, 365.25 days a year, because the daily requirement is so low. Yes, a moon earns 5.2bn a month during its 720 moon-mining-hours of operation. It requires 360 ore-mining-hours to yield the same result, and the vast majority of that time is also spent AFK. It is trivial to accumulate those hours during a month, and the triviality of this task is very much relevant to providing a perspective on exactly how much that moon is worth: it's worth about three slightly dim highsec miners. Quote:It is more to do with the fact that they continuously mine without stopping so that 7.2 million per moon per hour means they earn just over 5 billion a month per moon with little or no player interaction. GǪjust like how a tiny group of miners earn just over 5 billion a month with little or no player interaction. In other words, it takes a surprisingly small amount of work from a not particularly big group of players to out-earn all tech moons in the game. In the end, 1 moon-hour = -+ miner-hour, and the only question is if you care (not can GÇö because it's trivially easy GÇö just care) to produce the same total work hoursGǪ or more, if you want to out-earn that moon. Ok lets make this easier for you,
Given the number of hours required to operate a moon mining operation in a month, how much would a Hi-sec miner make? As yes the silos need to be emptied weekly and the POS needs fueling every month. but that's the lot. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13333
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:10:00 -
[274] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Given the number of hours required to operate a moon mining operation in a month, how much would a Hi-sec miner make? GǪand how much does a nullsec grunt earn from a moon mining operation in a month?
The point is that the supposedly insurmountable advantage a nullsec entity gains from owning a tech moon amounts to just that: three miners doing a bit of daily AFK-grinding. That is all. It's actually rather trivial to out-earn a tech moon for any entity that doesn't have one.
The vapid excuse GÇ£but tech moons!GÇ¥ only ever translates into GÇ£but I don't want to make any effort to earn the same amount of money, no matter how trivialGÇ¥. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Alara IonStorm
4679
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:38:00 -
[275] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: Ok lets make this easier for you,
Given the number of hours required to operate a moon mining operation in a month, how much would a Hi-sec miner make? As yes the silos need to be emptied weekly and the POS needs fueling every month. but that's the lot.
Because all that Moon Mining involves is POS stuff.
Forget the massive player built Empire that had to be created, recruited and maintained who constantly defend it.
People talk about Risk vs Reward tend to forget Effort vs Reward. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2500
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:46:00 -
[276] - Quote
Good God reading that "Thunderdome" idea makes me want to quit.
So, THIS is the end game?
It's time to make all resources FINITE. Everywhere. High, low, null - make it run out. Mine a system naked? No more to mine, for YEARS. Everybody and their brother missioning in a constellation? Sorry the agents have run out of work since the "pirates" got tired of being blown up by mission drakes over and over and they moved out conceding defeat.
Ice in the system? No more, you dried it all up.
23/7 ratters in the system? Gone. NPC pirates should not be so stupid that they keep sending ships to the same belts that keep getting blown up by the same people.
(Let ALL systems and sites be like wormholes: you farm it raw, no more sites).
Let the moon goo run out. You want to suck that moon dry till it caves in so you can build caps galore? Fine, the moons are sucked dry. Come back in a few years.
Does this not sound fair?
Look, ALL warfare in humanity is related to limited resources in one way or another. If anybody, at one point, decided "What would the human race do if resources were limitless?", then Eve Online is THAT answer. Congratulations, we now have the answer of what would happen if all resources on Earth magically sprung into existence: the end of war. Break out the magical unicorn champagne.
But this is not working for a game based on war.
Now, who would be against that?
Would it be all those people screaming "This is a PVP game!!! You can't handle that go back to WoW!!!! Noob! Phag!!! Carebear".
Ok, Leet PVPers, now the onus is on you to prove your e-peens: it's time to join on with the idea of limiting resources so this can be the game you claim it is. Oh don't worry, the carebears who want to ISK-snatch grinding mindlessly in highsec will be howling alongside your NULL overloords as they watch the magical ISK fountain dry up. And when Null Lord 1 runs out of moons and starts to covet the moons of Null Lord 2, while highsec comes out to null looking for resources, you will get all of the PVP your leet uber gate camps will want - and then some.
And if you don't like the idea, let us know what a hypocrite you are. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3012
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 02:20:00 -
[277] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day?
3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 6 hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 3 Hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day)
3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 4 hours per day (15*3*4=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 2 hours per day (15*6*2=180m ISK/day)
1 guy running Missions 3.5 hours per day (50*1*3.5=175m ISK/day)
Bet you there are more than 500 Mackinaws mining Ice in HS at any given time. Collect the efforts of all of them, and you've beaten all Tech income. By a lot.
Before you go on about it needing to be 1 Mackinaw, There are some 20,000 characters in Tech holding Alliances. Keeping that tech safe is a job shared by all of them. So if we're going to insist on comparing the income from one Mackinaw to the Tech income from one member of a Tech holding alliance, we'll compare 10m/hr to tech's total hourly income (500*7.2=3600m/hr) divided by the number of people it takes to keep them safe (as a reinforced POS produces nothing), getting 180,000 ISK/hr.
Tech income represents the collective effort of thousands of people to keep them safe. A mackinaw represents one guy watching a movie while white circles crawl around a picture. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Frying Doom
1995
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 02:24:00 -
[278] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? 3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 6 hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 3 Hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day) 3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 4 hours per day (15*3*4=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 2 hours per day (15*6*2=180m ISK/day) 1 guy running Missions 3.5 hours per day (50*1*3.5=175m ISK/day) Bet you there are more than 500 Mackinaws mining Ice in HS at any given time. Collect the efforts of all of them, and you've beaten all Tech income. By a lot. Before you go on about it needing to be 1 Mackinaw, There are some 20,000 characters in Tech holding Alliances. Keeping that tech safe is a job shared by all of them. So if we're going to insist on comparing the income from one Mackinaw to the Tech income from one member of a Tech holding alliance, we'll compare 10m/hr to tech's total hourly income (500*7.2=3600m/hr) divided by the number of people it takes to keep them safe (as a reinforced POS produces nothing), getting 180,000 ISK/hr. Tech income represents the collective effort of thousands of people to keep them safe. A mackinaw represents one guy watching a movie while white circles crawl around a picture. I am sorry I missed how many people have to log on in those 20,000 people and stay logged in, to make the moon miner work We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3012
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 02:26:00 -
[279] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I am sorry I missed how many people have to log on in those 20,000 people and stay logged in, to make the moon miner work
RF one and find out.
Also, not relevant. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts Hegemonous Pandorum
117
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 04:51:00 -
[280] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Tech is 72,000 isk per unit, so 7,200,000 per hour, 172,800,000 per day, so care to find me a mackinaw that mines 24 hours a day? 3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 6 hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ice 3 Hours per day (10*3*6=180m ISK/day) 3 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 4 hours per day (15*3*4=180m ISK/day) 6 guys in Mackinaws mining Ore 2 hours per day (15*6*2=180m ISK/day) 1 guy running Missions 3.5 hours per day (50*1*3.5=175m ISK/day) Bet you there are more than 500 Mackinaws mining Ice in HS at any given time. Collect the efforts of all of them, and you've beaten all Tech income. By a lot. Before you go on about it needing to be 1 Mackinaw, There are some 20,000 characters in Tech holding Alliances. Keeping that tech safe is a job shared by all of them. So if we're going to insist on comparing the income from one Mackinaw to the Tech income from one member of a Tech holding alliance, we'll compare 10m/hr to tech's total hourly income (500*7.2=3600m/hr) divided by the number of people it takes to keep them safe (as a reinforced POS produces nothing), getting 180,000 ISK/hr. Tech income represents the collective effort of thousands of people to keep them safe. A mackinaw represents one guy watching a movie while white circles crawl around a picture. I am sorry I missed how many people have to log on in those 20,000 people and stay logged in, to make the moon miner work
A moon miner works tirelessly for whoever is its master. If the 20k don't keep vigil, that moon miner will eventually fall to people who will. And then, how is the moon miner working for the 20k people? |
|
Sentamon
783
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 05:09:00 -
[281] - Quote
passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1074
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 14:47:00 -
[282] - Quote
The most comparable activity to moon mining is PI. I doubt you'll find any single toon making 5.2bil/month in passive PI income do nothing more than setting up a pos and keeping it fueled. Sure, with PI one can make billions a month but, at that point there is little about it that is passive given the complexity of production chains and utilizing several toons.
Whereas moon mining is pretty much a set it and forget it activity aside from refueling the pos once a month & unloading silos and you make 5.2bil/month. As to the 20,000 players keeping moon mining running, how many of them directly see how much of that income? My guess is maybe a handful. Now, cry me a river about alliance purchase plans, replacement plans, etc, etc, etc. The alliance still controls the income and the manner in which it is distributed, i.e. you play the game their way or you don't get any benefits. Moon goo income doesn't directly benefit the individual player in the way that a miner or pi industrialist directly earns his income. So, it really is apples and oranges to compare a miner's income to moon mining income.
And lets not forget that no other part of space has such a passively lucrative income stream that doesn't require direct payment to players for effort that they've put forth to acquire those valuable resources. The entirety of the rest of Eve is saddled with player level activities that a corp/alliance must try to capitalize, if even. Whereas, moon goo is a corp/alliance level activity that circumvents the individual player.
True, moon goo can be compared to other activities by income levels. But where passivity and economic benefit is concerned it is entirely a unique game mechanic. HTFU!...for the children! |
Speedkermit Damo
Callide Vulpis Curatores Veritatis Alliance
53
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 18:03:00 -
[283] - Quote
Just wondering as I am quite new to EVE.
Who held those regions in the North-west (which is where most moons are located, from what I understand) when tech-moons were introduced to EVE? Has it always been Goons or did someone else hold the space at the time? How long ago were tech-moons added? Don't Panic.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3017
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 00:39:00 -
[284] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges
His claim was that:
Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses.
The fact that each Tech moon earns half what a Miner mining in HS earns per hour shows that it is trivial to compete with Tech moon income. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 17:51:00 -
[285] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges
Especially when taken into account how many people can mine while their pos is hard at work.
Comparing the mack to the pos is going to make the miner lose because the person who owns the pos can do more than 1 thing with that 1 pilot. The mack pilot can only mine while he is mining. Regardless of whether he is afk or not.
That pos owner can be doing missions, defending that pos, mine, be on an alt, whatever. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 17:54:00 -
[286] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges His claim was that: Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses. The fact that each Tech moon earns half what a Miner mining in HS earns per hour shows that it is trivial to compete with Tech moon income.
So in order to create some sort of solution to the argument and maybe even to the nullsec industry problem.... moon mining tech pos's need to be actively ran by players with cycle times like a miner?
Or should they still be allowed to run autonomously 24/7? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3033
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 22:30:00 -
[287] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges His claim was that: Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses. The fact that each Tech moon earns half what a Miner mining in HS earns per hour shows that it is trivial to compete with Tech moon income. So in order to create some sort of solution to the argument and maybe even to the nullsec industry problem.... moon mining tech pos's need to be actively ran by players with cycle times like a miner? Or should they still be allowed to run autonomously 24/7?
I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic at hand, namely Frying's claim that nobody can compete with the income from Tech moons. Which claim has been shown to be false. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Zircon Dasher
153
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 23:02:00 -
[288] - Quote
Somebody wrote: Tech is 7,200,000 per hour/ 172,800,000 per day
Fun with numbers: (done in my head..... cba to check values for correctness)
2500 member alliance. 5% tax 5% of membership doing taxable tasks per day. average of 50,000,000 per day of tasks (25M per hour *2 hours... ie LOW BALL)
On average there will be 125 members doing taxable tasks per day, contributing 2,500,000 each for a total of 312,500,000 per day.
But good job showing why it is that a ground up alliance income stream is preferred over moons which are binary in their income generation.
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
276
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 14:24:00 -
[289] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges His claim was that: Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses. The fact that each Tech moon earns half what a Miner mining in HS earns per hour shows that it is trivial to compete with Tech moon income. So in order to create some sort of solution to the argument and maybe even to the nullsec industry problem.... moon mining tech pos's need to be actively ran by players with cycle times like a miner? Or should they still be allowed to run autonomously 24/7? I don't see how that has anything to do with the topic at hand, namely Frying's claim that nobody can compete with the income from Tech moons. Which claim has been shown to be false.
I just gathered that the fact of it being a passive income makes it very powerful as an income stream. When you take into account that active income gaining CAN be comparable, it in fact cannot be comparable when that passive in come stream can be added to the same wallet as an active income stream.
That's where the inbalance comes from. If you want to compare active mining (active? hah!) to passive tech moon PI, then the comparison has to match. Apples to apples, oranges to oranges and all that.
When you can make half as much NOT logging in but twice a week versus a miner who has to mine 4 hours a day 5-7 days a week.... there's a bit of comparitive disparity.
So passively, nothing CAN compete with tech moon mining, which makes his statement true. Because when you look at the time it takes from player interaction and "work" (work? hah again with bot aspirant behavior but i digress), moon mining has a way higher rate than mining. ALOT more.
Or we can try to put it into an "equal" formula... Tippia I think, raised the isk per hour ratio, or maybe you did I'm unsure; moot point anyways, because it's not a ratio of activity equally applied.
Basically, in order to compete with someone who logs in for roughly 2 hours a week to maintain the PI facility, I have to mine for what, 20? 28? per week to compete (ore/ice) financially?
So to top that off, that person who is in control of the PI facility, can ALSO mine that same # of hours. That kind of makes the example.... invalid. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:26:00 -
[290] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:So passively, nothing CAN compete with tech moon mining, which makes his statement true. Because when you look at the time it takes from player interaction and "work" (work? hah again with bot aspirant behavior but i digress), moon mining has a way higher rate than mining. ALOT more.
Ok. But if we're setting things equal, what do you think the average income of a known-to-be undefended Tech Moon POS is? It's actually negative (because the POS you threw up costs money that won't be recouped by the time it gets RFed/destroyed).
What's the average income of a known-to-be undefended Mackinaw? It's the same as any other Mackinaw, because CONCORD's always there to hold your hand.
Moons require less daily effort, but require occasional enormous effort (defense fleets). AFK mining requires more daily effort, but never requires any effort spikes.
If you assume 1 defense/repair fleet per month (250 people for 2-3 hours is 500 man hours) you get 10m ISK/man-hour for tech moon income. Which is, once again, lower than mining. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
288
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:42:00 -
[291] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:So passively, nothing CAN compete with tech moon mining, which makes his statement true. Because when you look at the time it takes from player interaction and "work" (work? hah again with bot aspirant behavior but i digress), moon mining has a way higher rate than mining. ALOT more. Ok. But if we're setting things equal, what do you think the average income of a known-to-be undefended Tech Moon POS is? It's actually negative (because the POS you threw up costs money that won't be recouped by the time it gets RFed/destroyed). What's the average income of a known-to-be undefended Mackinaw? It's the same as any other Mackinaw, because CONCORD's always there to hold your hand. Moons require less daily effort, but require occasional enormous effort (defense fleets). AFK mining requires more daily effort, but never requires any effort spikes. If you assume 1 defense/repair fleet per month (250 people for 2-3 hours is 500 man hours) you get 10m ISK/man-hour for tech moon income. Which is, once again, lower than mining.
That seems like you're word twisting the situation to compare a tank fit mack versus a yield fit mack. It might be my comprehension skills, or lack thereof, but I still do not see how you can equate passive versus active in regards to income streams.
What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =)
Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then?
Oh, and nothin is saying I can't find a remote npc null ice belt to mine in without having to depend on concord either. Just to keep things simple of course. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13373
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:48:00 -
[292] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =)
Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then? Then it's not really a tech moon, either, so we're talking a hell of a lot lower income (and it's not all that high to begin with). Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1080
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:50:00 -
[293] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:So passively, nothing CAN compete with tech moon mining, which makes his statement true. Because when you look at the time it takes from player interaction and "work" (work? hah again with bot aspirant behavior but i digress), moon mining has a way higher rate than mining. ALOT more. Ok. But if we're setting things equal, what do you think the average income of a known-to-be undefended Tech Moon POS is? It's actually negative (because the POS you threw up costs money that won't be recouped by the time it gets RFed/destroyed). What's the average income of a known-to-be undefended Mackinaw? It's the same as any other Mackinaw, because CONCORD's always there to hold your hand. Moons require less daily effort, but require occasional enormous effort (defense fleets). AFK mining requires more daily effort, but never requires any effort spikes. If you assume 1 defense/repair fleet per month (250 people for 2-3 hours is 500 man hours) you get 10m ISK/man-hour for tech moon income. Which is, once again, lower than mining.
Sounds like you're trying to quantify the overall effort of all the players in an alliance in defending a moon mining operation. This is similar to the type of work I'm in. And in comparison of value of one activity versus another certain assumptions are made while ignoring unquantifiable data even while knowing that data would otherwise influence value. If you can't quantify it, you can't use it. In the end of such an analysis everything does equate because it's assumed such data being true for one item and not being true for another cannot be quantified when no other comparative evidence is available. Such analysis are imperfect. As one making such an analysis it is up to that person to adequately explain the differences, what was done to try to explain those differences, why those differences were not considered and finally why the analysis is as accurate as possible in light of such differences. With that said.....
All you really need to do is compare amount of income minus investment (infrastructure) to acquire the resource minus a value given to a player's time and you can come to some comparative numbers. Now, what you consider investment is up to you but you can't just say player A invests a mackinaw and player B is investing an entire alliance. If you do, then you can't really compare the two since they're sufficiently different to be considered completely separate activities that have no quantifiable comparison. It would be like me comparing the value of a cruise ship for a corporation to a bicycle for an individual. Sure you could do it, but it won't exactly have anything meaningful in the analysis.
If I were going to go through the hassle of comparing moon mining to ice mining I would leave the analysis considering only the income from the activities minus time required for the individual player to acquire those resources. Everything else, I'm not comparing since there is no comparison. HTFU!...for the children! |
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
531
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:53:00 -
[294] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Sentamon wrote:passive and offline income does not equal active online income
apples and oranges His claim was that: Frying Doom wrote:I nor anyone else can compete against those tech moons, as even if someone where to take say 10 of them off you, you have gained so much isk for so long that you would have the ability to fight back even if you were to sustain massive losses. The fact that each Tech moon earns half what a Miner mining in HS earns per hour shows that it is trivial to compete with Tech moon income.
Do you really believe your own PR?
The single biggest danger to EVE is the proliferation of ALTS! Kill an alt today!
Petition for a Minimum bounty of 10 mil. Prevent useless bounties!
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:57:00 -
[295] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:That seems like you're word twisting the situation to compare a tank fit mack versus a yield fit mack. It might be my comprehension skills, or lack thereof, but I still do not see how you can equate passive versus active in regards to income streams.
An AFK, Tank fit Mack earns more per hour than a Tech Moon.
Quote:What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =)
Then find me a Tech moon owned by someone unable to defend it, or an empty one to indicate that that situation is even remotely reasonable.
Quote:Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then? It does, so your hypothetical is not relevant.
Quote:Oh, and nothin is saying I can't find a remote npc null ice belt to mine in without having to depend on concord either. Just to keep things simple of course.
Ok. How long can you mine there safely once you're known to be there alone? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
288
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:59:00 -
[296] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =)
Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then? Then it's not really a tech moon, either, so we're talking a hell of a lot lower income (and it's not all that high to begin with).
Yea, I don't have any experience with it, and won't presume to be an expert, but I do know the difference between active and passive incomes and multitasking and handling multiple streams of income =)
After all, 1+1>1 "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
motgus
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 20:59:00 -
[297] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:Just wondering as I am quite new to EVE.
Who held those regions in the North-west (which is where most moons are located, from what I understand) when tech-moons were introduced to EVE? Has it always been Goons or did someone else hold the space at the time? How long ago were tech-moons added?
I do not know how long ago they were introduced, but prior to CFC (goons and allies) controlling the north there was the northern coalition which controlled the tech flow. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:00:00 -
[298] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Do you really believe your own PR?
5b per month is dead easy for an individual to produce. All you need is 500 people willing to work together to support an anti-Tech alliance, and that alliance has more income than the income derived from all Tech moons combined. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:01:00 -
[299] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =)
Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then? Then it's not really a tech moon, either, so we're talking a hell of a lot lower income (and it's not all that high to begin with). Yea, I don't have any experience with it, and won't presume to be an expert, but I do know the difference between active and passive incomes and multitasking and handling multiple streams of income =) After all, 1+1>1
The topic is whether active income can compete with less active income. Not whether it can replicate it. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
288
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:04:00 -
[300] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:That seems like you're word twisting the situation to compare a tank fit mack versus a yield fit mack. It might be my comprehension skills, or lack thereof, but I still do not see how you can equate passive versus active in regards to income streams. An AFK, Tank fit Mack earns more per hour than a Tech Moon. Quote:What if that undefended pos was NOT attacked? Would that change your argument? You are using the term "known-to-be" which just seems a bit too one sided to honestly reply to =) Then find me a Tech moon owned by someone unable to defend it, or an empty one to indicate that that situation is even remotely reasonable. Quote:Because what if that pos did not need to be defended? How much we talkin then? It does, so your hypothetical is not relevant. Quote:Oh, and nothin is saying I can't find a remote npc null ice belt to mine in without having to depend on concord either. Just to keep things simple of course. Ok. How long can you mine there safely once you're known to be there alone?
It would be irrelevant. You want specifics to justify a generalization? I mean, originally we were talking about active versus passive income. Now you're talkign abilities involved.
Like for instance, your variable on "how long can you mine there safely once you're known...", that right there is an open ended question not a closed ended question. I could NEVER accurately answer it. You couldn't either. Same elements as your specifics to tech moons.
Defend from who? Defend from Goons? Is it a Goon moon? Is it a lowsec moon? Null?
Look, you are a fan of saying 1+1>1, and that holds true here.
While you maintain that passive income, you can also add active income. You can have that passive income working for you when you do not have the man hours to add active income.
The rate might be different, but so is the frequency. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:12:00 -
[301] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:While you maintain that passive income, you can also add active income. You can have that passive income working for you when you do not have the man hours to add active income.
The rate might be different, but so is the frequency.
The claim was that nobody can compete with Tech income. The fact that 500 AFK Ice miners produce a larger income per hour than all Tech moons combined shows that you can compete with it.
If you don't have the man hours to make 5b a month, you don't have the man hours to defend a Tech moon. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
671
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:18:00 -
[302] - Quote
"ISK wins wars" is a top five clueless hisec forum warrior myth that gets tossed around here a lot.
It is, at best, a secondary factor.
I will never understand why some people on here talk so much about that which they know so little. |
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
536
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:28:00 -
[303] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:While you maintain that passive income, you can also add active income. You can have that passive income working for you when you do not have the man hours to add active income.
The rate might be different, but so is the frequency. The claim was that nobody can compete with Tech income. The fact that 500 AFK Ice miners produce a larger income per hour than all Tech moons combined shows that you can compete with it. If you don't have the man hours to make 5b a month, you don't have the man hours to defend a Tech moon.
Only you, Mittens and your 1000's of alts believe this, who else are you expecting to convince?
You like to ignore the fact that you have controlled these moons for years, when they were turning out absurd amounts of income, add to that very little conflict with all your pets and you have a situation where you've stockpiled so much isk, that 100,000 miners couldn't compete with it.
Even your little CODE. pets and their losses are a minor side event. And with you paying them to attack afk mining in highsec, just how are these miners supposed to afk all day? Then you expect the miners to pool all their resources to finance an attack? Here's the real difference, All the moon income is controlled and handle by a few specific players, and doled out as needed to the pilots. You seem to think it will work the other way around, where 1000's of pilots pool there isk to finance and attack. In EvE? Are you really that out of touch with reality? And where are these miners going to obtain all the Supers and Titans they will need to even show up for a fight? When they don't have Sov?
You can bleat till the cows come home, but anyone with more than a couple months in the game knows what's really happening. The single biggest danger to EVE is the proliferation of ALTS! Kill an alt today!
Petition for a Minimum bounty of 10 mil. Prevent useless bounties!
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:34:00 -
[304] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Only you, Mittens and your 1000's of alts believe this, who else are you expecting to convince?
You like to ignore the fact that you have controlled these moons for years, when they were turning out absurd amounts of income, add to that very little conflict with all your pets and you have a situation where you've stockpiled so much isk, that 100,000 miners couldn't compete with it.
Even your little CODE. pets and their losses are a minor side event. And with you paying them to attack afk mining in highsec, just how are these miners supposed to afk all day? Then you expect the miners to pool all their resources to finance an attack? Here's the real difference, All the moon income is controlled and handle by a few specific players, and doled out as needed to the pilots. You seem to think it will work the other way around, where 1000's of pilots pool there isk to finance and attack. In EvE? Are you really that out of touch with reality?
You can bleat till the cows come home, but anyone with more than a couple months in the game knows what's really happening.
1. Whose fault is it that nobody's been trying to take the Tech moons from their owners for those years? (Hint: It's probably not the fault of the owners for defending what's theirs)
2. GSF stopped running mining bounties 6 months ago.
3. Yes, they are supposed to pool their resources if they want to take space from people already established there. That's how independent entities have always gotten their start Nullsec. The members fund their own PvP until the alliance can develop a proper income stream (used to be through taking r64s, but those got nerfed due to whining, resulting in the dominance of Tech).
4. Still never paid my :tenbux: This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7183
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:35:00 -
[305] - Quote
sniggwaffe has tons and tons of tech moons and space I hear ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:37:00 -
[306] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:While you maintain that passive income, you can also add active income. You can have that passive income working for you when you do not have the man hours to add active income.
The rate might be different, but so is the frequency. The claim was that nobody can compete with Tech income. The fact that 500 AFK Ice miners produce a larger income per hour than all Tech moons combined shows that you can compete with it. If you don't have the man hours to make 5b a month, you don't have the man hours to defend a Tech moon.
Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison.
Comparing an active income to a passive income doesn't give a meaningful comparison until you turn the hour of effort into a multiplier. While mining ice does make more isk, it requires more effort. So lets say, for argument an ice miner makes 10mil/hour. So that's 166,666 isk per minute of direct effort. What is it for moon goo per hour? 700K? I'll assume 10 minutes of effort a month to unload the silo....hell..lets be generous...1 hour per month. So that's 83.33 mil//min. IDK, sounds like a lot more than 166,666/min.
Where can I make 83mil/min in Eve, not in null? HTFU!...for the children! |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
758
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:40:00 -
[307] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:"ISK wins wars"
ISK for ship replacement programs wins wars
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7183
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 21:56:00 -
[308] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Varius Xeral wrote: "ISK wins wars" ISK for ship replacement programs wins wars FIXED
i'm sorry that we're successful
would you like us to be less successful so that others might actually have a chance at winning ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7183
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 22:02:00 -
[309] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison.
yes mining blue ice in 0.0 is more lucrative than mining blue ice in an 0.7 tell us another one ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7183
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 22:05:00 -
[310] - Quote
also the best part is where you compared ice mining to moons
see when you lose your mackinaw you don't have to form a fleet to take it back, you just buy another one and continue quasi-botting away, while losing a moon means you have to either scan another moon and tower it or take that moon back
but those are just trivial differences you'll set aside because they don't fit within your narrative right? ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1082
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 22:23:00 -
[311] - Quote
Andski wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison. yes mining blue ice in 0.0 is more lucrative than mining blue ice in an 0.7 tell us another one
http://eve.grismar.net/ore/ice.php HTFU!...for the children! |
Frying Doom
2008
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 22:56:00 -
[312] - Quote
Andski wrote:also the best part is where you compared ice mining to moons
see when you lose your mackinaw you don't have to form a fleet to take it back, you just buy another one and continue quasi-botting away, while losing a moon means you have to either scan another moon and tower it or take that moon back
but those are just trivial differences you'll set aside because they don't fit within your narrative right? No matter what way it is put, top down income needs to die and be replaced with bottom up active mining.
Exactly the same as Sov should be tied to activity. We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
motgus
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:37:00 -
[313] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:"ISK wins wars" is a top five clueless hisec forum warrior myth that gets tossed around here a lot.
It is, at best, a secondary factor.
I will never understand why some people on here talk so much about that which they know so little.
Could not be a more true statement
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:53:00 -
[314] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison.
Comparing an active income to a passive income doesn't give a meaningful comparison until you turn the hour of effort into a multiplier. While mining ice does make more isk, it requires more effort. So lets say, for argument an ice miner makes 10mil/hour. So that's 166,666 isk per minute of direct effort. What is it for moon goo per hour? 700K? I'll assume 10 minutes of effort a month to unload the silo....hell..lets be generous...1 hour per month. So that's 83.33 mil//min. IDK, sounds like a lot more than 166,666/min.
Where can I make 83mil/min in Eve, not in null?
And one fleet to defend that POS costs a minimum of 250 man hours (more likely 500-750). Something that you conveniently forget.
Direct competition doesn't significantly interrupt an Ice miner (a second Ice miner in the same belt does nothing to affect your procurement of Ice). Direct competition entirely halts moon material production (1d17hrs of production lost any time a POS is RFed, and you have to defend it if you want to keep it) while the winner of the competition is hashed out. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7184
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:55:00 -
[315] - Quote
wow time to bust out those macks and mine dark glitter in 0.0 for a jaw-dropping 20m/hour ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3048
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:56:00 -
[316] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:No matter what way it is put, top down income needs to die and be replaced with bottom up active mining.
Exactly the same as Sov should be tied to activity.
My problem with activity level based Sov is that it seems silly to have Sov be based on PvE grinding*. I guess that works for FW, but I don't think it belongs in Sov Null.
*Basing it on PvP activity has other glaring problems. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
932
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 04:56:00 -
[317] - Quote
Andski wrote:wow time to bust out those macks and mine dark glitter in 0.0 for a jaw-dropping 20m/hour 13.6 and you have to watch local. I think Dark Glitter 0.0 Ice belts exist only because anyone mining in one is obviously a bot |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
674
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 05:08:00 -
[318] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:My problem with activity level based Sov is that it seems silly to have Sov be based on PvE grinding*. I guess that works for FW, but I don't think it belongs in Sov Null.
*Basing it on PvP activity has other glaring problems.
Yes, a rat shooting competition for a binary sov/no sov outcome is a terrible idea. The better ideas I've seen have "sov" as a fluid measure of system usage available to multiple groups, that then allows beneficial and vulnerable upgrades based on that fluid "sov" level.
You wouldn't grind rats in blobs until you can plant your flag and walk away. Rather you would use the space because you wanted to, and benefits would accrue from that usage, perhaps without any formal 100% "flag-planting control" ever coming into play (what purpose would that old style "sov" actually serve in this case besides verite map epeen?)
Stations, however, should still be strictly conquerable, and not tied, or not strictly tied, to the users of the system it resides in; and they should be stront timers, not terrible dominion timers.
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
759
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 05:24:00 -
[319] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Frying Doom wrote:No matter what way it is put, top down income needs to die and be replaced with bottom up active mining.
Exactly the same as Sov should be tied to activity. My problem with activity level based Sov is that it seems silly to have Sov be based on PvE grinding*. I guess that works for FW, but I don't think it belongs in Sov Null. *Basing it on PvP activity has other glaring problems.
So if basing SOV "on PvP activity has other glaring problems." & "Sov be based on PvE grinding" is bad you'd perfer it based on BLOBS on gates.... that kinda activity sounds like a dead end when the blob appears to be merging ito a single entity with Montrolio's resignation.... Sure BLOB activity is activity but when there's only 1 big blue blob what's left? Annual Jita burns & bi-monthly Uedema gank HI SEC invasions ( not that either isn't fun or a limited period of time) Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1082
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 11:58:00 -
[320] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison.
Comparing an active income to a passive income doesn't give a meaningful comparison until you turn the hour of effort into a multiplier. While mining ice does make more isk, it requires more effort. So lets say, for argument an ice miner makes 10mil/hour. So that's 166,666 isk per minute of direct effort. What is it for moon goo per hour? 700K? I'll assume 10 minutes of effort a month to unload the silo....hell..lets be generous...1 hour per month. So that's 83.33 mil//min. IDK, sounds like a lot more than 166,666/min.
Where can I make 83mil/min in Eve, not in null? And one fleet to defend that POS costs a minimum of 250 man hours (more likely 500-750). Something that you conveniently forget. Direct competition doesn't significantly interrupt an Ice miner (a second Ice miner in the same belt does nothing to affect your procurement of Ice). Direct competition entirely halts moon material production (1d17hrs of production lost any time a POS is RFed, and you have to defend it if you want to keep it) while the winner of the competition is hashed out.
Of course I'm conveniently forgetting ignoring it. Just like you're conveniently pulling 250 man hours out of your butt. In order to consider how much real effort goes into a moon goo pos you'll need to consider a tad bit more data like all income streams possible by the sov-null alliance and it's players as well as all defensive actions and how many moon goo pos's were attacked, all this over a given period of time before you can even begin to make meaningful comparisons. See, those fleets just aren't sitting around defending moon goo. They're doing other things so there is multiplicity of use you have to consider. Because of that, not just moon goo needs to be considered, since these same fleets will also be generating income from mining, ratting, pewing, etc, etc, etc.
So until someone has that data, I don't, my 83.33mil/min to 166k/min comparison of moon and ice mining, respectively, is at least more valid than your 250 man hours since you didn't even explain how you came to it.
But I think I've already stated this, just in another manner so I would gather you're not really following the thread. HTFU!...for the children! |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7186
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 16:29:00 -
[321] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Of course I'm conveniently forgetting ignoring it. Just like you're conveniently pulling 250 man hours out of your butt. In order to consider how much real effort goes into a moon goo pos you'll need to consider a tad bit more data like all income streams possible by the sov-null alliance and it's players as well as all defensive actions and how many moon goo pos's were attacked, all this over a given period of time before you can even begin to make meaningful comparisons. See, those fleets just aren't sitting around defending moon goo. They're doing other things so there is multiplicity of use you have to consider. Because of that, not just moon goo needs to be considered, since these same fleets will also be generating income from mining, ratting, pewing, defending other infrastructure etc, etc, etc. It would be a rather complex analysis to accurately compare it to a simple activity such as ice mining in HS which is why it is not comparable, imo.
So until someone has that data, I don't, my 83.33mil/min to 166k/min comparison of moon and ice mining, respectively, is at least more valid than your 250 man hours since noone knows where this 250hrs comes from.
But I think I've already stated this, just in another manner so I would gather you're not really following the thread.
Actually, Ruby is wrong. 250 man hours assumes that a POS defense op will wrap up within an hour - it's usually more like 2-3 hours, so it'd be 500-750 man hours for a defense op.
Also, when ice mining only requires you to park a mackinaw in an ice belt, turn ice harvesters on, go AFK, come back in 30-40 minutes, drop the ice into an Orca, and return to your movie, the effort required to scoop silos completely eclipses that. Ice mining is effectively passive income. ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
1200
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 17:14:00 -
[322] - Quote
Andski wrote:see when you lose your mackinaw you don't have to form a fleet to take it back, you just buy another one and continue quasi-botting away, while losing a moon means you have to either scan another moon and tower it or take that moon back
Andski wrote:Also, when ice mining only requires you to park a mackinaw in an ice belt, turn ice harvesters on, go AFK, come back in 30-40 minutes, drop the ice into an Orca, and return to your movie, the effort required to scoop silos completely eclipses that. Ice mining is effectively passive income.
I tried to feel sorry for Goons once, but then I remembered that I have a soul. Live Events are neither. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3057
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 20:22:00 -
[323] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Of course I'm conveniently forgetting ignoring it. Just like you're conveniently pulling 250 man hours out of your butt. In order to consider how much real effort goes into a moon goo pos you'll need to consider a tad bit more data like all income streams possible by the sov-null alliance and it's players as well as all defensive actions and how many moon goo pos's were attacked, all this over a given period of time before you can even begin to make meaningful comparisons. See, those fleets just aren't sitting around defending moon goo. They're doing other things so there is multiplicity of use you have to consider. Because of that, not just moon goo needs to be considered, since these same fleets will also be generating income from mining, ratting, pewing, defending other infrastructure etc, etc, etc. It would be a rather complex analysis to accurately compare it to a simple activity such as ice mining in HS which is why it is not comparable, imo.
So until someone has that data, I don't, my 83.33mil/min to 166k/min comparison of moon and ice mining, respectively, is at least more valid than your 250 man hours since noone knows where this 250hrs comes from.
But I think I've already stated this, just in another manner so I would gather you're not really following the thread.
It comes from 1 full defense/repair fleet for one hour per month. 250 people (or characters, multiboxing doesn't matter) is a full fleet, and Tech moon defense/repair isn't going to take less than that or less than one hour (It's generally going to take quite a lot more, but lowballing simply strengthens my argument). I chose 1 per month because for all the whining about Tech, surely some of the people whining should be disrupting it at at least that rate (if the attackers aren't pulling their weight, that's not the defender's fault). And of course, this is ignoring the lost income from the time the POS spends RFed.
The fleets will not be mining, ratting, pewing, or defending other structures (Ok, I could see there being some other structure timer happening in the same system, at the same time, but it's so vanishingly unlikely that the timers would match up within the same hour, that I feel confidant in discounting it, as I've never seen a combo POS/other structure defense/repair fleet) during a POS defense op. So the income they produce at other times is not relevant.
Anyway, all of this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Frying claimed that Tech moon income could not be competed with by anyone. Not only is he proven wrong by history (the fall of the NC orchestrated by the non-Tech holding DRF), but he's proven wrong by the fact that each Tech moon requires less than 24 man hours of AFK Ice mining per day to produce a competitive income source. The fact that one may be more or less labor intensive (or the fact that one is far less capital or organizationally intensive) is not relevant to the fact that they are competitive. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
761
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 20:45:00 -
[324] - Quote
Will be interesting if Odessy's resource redistribution will redistribute TECH moons along with HI SEC's lo end minerals to NULL Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
baltec1
Bat Country
5719
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 20:50:00 -
[325] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Will be interesting if Odessy's resource redistribution will redistribute TECH moons along with HI SEC's lo end minerals to NULL
We can but hope. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
761
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 20:53:00 -
[326] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:
I tried to feel sorry for Goons once, but then I remembered that I have a soul.
I tried to feel sorry for the Goons the other day but couldn't because I put up my soul as collateral, in lieu of the 500 million desposit to join them, & lost it Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Dave Stark
2187
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 20:58:00 -
[327] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:
I tried to feel sorry for Goons once, but then I remembered that I have a soul.
I tried to feel sorry for the Goons the other day but couldn't because I put up my soul as collateral, in lieu of the 500 million desposit to join them, & lost it
i'm not sure what's more likely to be true, the fact that you had a soul, or that goons would do that. Want miners to move from high sec to null sec? Then give them a reason to join player corps, and stop null sec grav sites being worth less isk/hour than high sec asteroid belts. Really isn't difficult. |
Markus Reese
Incertae Sedis
339
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 21:41:00 -
[328] - Quote
Balthisus Filtch wrote:So here is the problem with fixing moon goo.
New player base comes from 2 main places.
1 - random people pulled in by marketing, PR and advertising
2. - the 2 big nullsec blocks which feed players into the game from the IRL websites they are linked to
The majority of people want to play games casually (if you don't believe that then just look at the dumbing down of any major franchise). Unsurprisingly then a significant portion of new players that arrive in EVE also want to play casually. If developers don't cater to them then the game suffers significantly financially.
The random ppl joining in hi-sec get relative safety and a mission system/ship progression to suit their needs.
Those joining major power block get free ships and modules paid for by Moon goo. Their game consists of no hassle /hard work major fleet fights.
Turn off the moon goo and free stuff alliance programs and you might just turn off a significant route by which new players are attracted into and retained in the game. Clearly Moon Goo is totally game unbalancing and totally unfair..... BUT having implemented it, how do they get themselves out of it without damaging themselves financially.
IMO this is why the most obvious fix in the game hasn't appeared to gather any momentum to being fixed. CCP aren't stupid, they see the problem - but there is no win win solution right now.
Final killer - its the new players that pay for subscriptions - the older player base are in the main buying plex from new players - so financially new players are the lifeblood of the game. So that moon goo led gameplay driven by the IRL websites is really key to CCP, that constant stream of new players joining and leaving is good for them.
The flipside is that more player will move into null security because they won't need to train and be required to fly manditory Tier 3 BS with full T2 fits and other half billion ships. Remove the wealth and make major combat more battlecruiser centric with battleship supports, etc. Quite frankly, I know for myself as a non alt using player who just wants to enjoy the character, the cost of fights and constant CTA makes it near impossible for me to be able to consistently keep with doctrine and reimbursement quite often can be sketchy/limited.
I will not offer any solution, because I do not have the time at the moment to give it long and considered thought. But I think something important is if we can get combat low cost again.
Also, a personal opinion, the way players focus on killboards, killmails and efficiency I personally think is the biggest detriment to pvp. Efficiency also seems loaded as well. I never really see people below like 70%. The only measure of success should be tangible in game. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7186
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 23:27:00 -
[329] - Quote
let's make 0.0 combat more battlecruiser-centric while battlecruisers get nerfed into the ground
great plan ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1085
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:37:00 -
[330] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:It comes from 1 full defense/repair fleet for one hour per month. 250 people (or characters, multiboxing doesn't matter) is a full fleet, and Tech moon defense/repair isn't going to take less than that or less than one hour (It's generally going to take quite a lot more, but lowballing simply strengthens my argument). I chose 1 per month because for all the whining about Tech, surely some of the people whining should be disrupting it at at least that rate (if the attackers aren't pulling their weight, that's not the defender's fault). And of course, this is ignoring the lost income from the time the POS spends RFed.
The fleets will not be mining, ratting, pewing, or defending other structures (Ok, I could see there being some other structure timer happening in the same system, at the same time, but it's so vanishingly unlikely that the timers would match up within the same hour, that I feel confidant in discounting it, as I've never seen a combo POS/other structure defense/repair fleet) during a POS defense op. So the income they produce at other times is not relevant.
Anyway, all of this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Frying claimed that Tech moon income could not be competed with by anyone. Not only is he proven wrong by history (the fall of the NC orchestrated by the non-Tech holding DRF), but he's proven wrong by the fact that each Tech moon requires less than 24 man hours of AFK Ice mining per day to produce a competitive income source. The fact that one may be more or less labor intensive (or the fact that one is far less capital or organizationally intensive) is not relevant to the fact that they are competitive.
Ice mining is not competitive with moon mining. Two completely different markets.
As to the 250 man fleet protecting the pos for one hour....of sure. But you're going to have to quantify a ton of other variables. See, to compare moon mining to ice mining in hs you're going to have to quantify not just the moon goo, the poor sap that has to maintain it and the defense fleet. You're going to have to quantify all of it....all of the moon mining....how many times each moon mining pos was attacked in a given time....all the income generated by the alliance in the same time frame by all activities even at the player level since it's assumed they pay up to their corps who then pay up to the alliance. Then we're going to have to calculate "effort" for all this including for moon mining, boil it all down to comparative data. You can't just say a fleet of 250 people shows up for 1 hour and that's comparative effort.....it means squat because that ice miner has to spend the entirety of his time mining to mine his ice. That defense fleet who benefits from that moon goo doesn't. They can go off and do other things to make isk while their moon-goo is extracted and that needs to be considered too! HTFU!...for the children! |
|
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:42:00 -
[331] - Quote
No, the ice miner just has to press F1 and occasionally empty his ore hold into an Orca. That's it. Stop pretending there's more effort involved than that. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
762
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:45:00 -
[332] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:No, the ice miner just has to press F1 and occasionally empty his ore hold into an Orca. That's it. Stop pretending there's more effort involved than that.
Well when you can gank a moon mining operation with 2-3 catlysts then we'll start seriously comparing ice mining & Moons goo extraction Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1085
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:55:00 -
[333] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:No, the ice miner just has to press F1 and occasionally empty his ore hold into an Orca. That's it. Stop pretending there's more effort involved than that.
I'm trying to seriously compare the two. As I've stated for the umpteenth time, they've not directly comparable. But, that doesn't seem to stop the proponents of moon-goo from pointing out that an ice miner can make more than a moon-goo pos. A serious comparison of two forms of income that in no way have anything to do with the other requires that facts are quantified, income considered in comparison of effort and then all the extraneous data peeled away until you're left with moon-goo income/hour of effort as to compare it directly compare it to ice mining income/hour of effort. So far, the proponents are coming up short...
Want to say a fleet of 250 people defend a moon-pos for 1 hour...fine....I need to know what they're doing to make isk the other 719hours in a month, plex purchase with rl income included. That ice miner can't do anything but mine to make isk from ice. That 250 man fleet can. That income must be considered. HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13378
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:57:00 -
[334] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ice mining is not competitive with moon mining. Yes it is. 7M ISK/h is 7M ISK/h. Earning it one way means that activity is competitive with earning it another way. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:57:00 -
[335] - Quote
Why is it you see the same goons and their pets non stop trolling until they get a thread they dont like locked.
Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Please dont allow them to do this to every post they dont like.
The game wont end if you ban a few goons and their pets for trolling. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13378
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:58:00 -
[336] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want?
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 00:59:00 -
[337] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Why is it you see the same goons and their pets non stop trolling until they get a thread they dont like locked.
Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Please dont allow them to do this to every post they dont like.
The game wont end if you ban a few goons and their pets for trolling. Just because we don't agree with you doesn't mean we're trolling. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1085
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:01:00 -
[338] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ice mining is not competitive with moon mining. Yes it is. 7M ISK/h is 7M ISK/h. Earning it one way means that activity is competitive with earning it another way.
If you make 7m isk/hour mining the entire hour as a single player and I, as a single player, make 7m isk/hour having a moon goo pos that leaves me free to mine along side of you for an additional 7mi/hour....who makes more isk? HTFU!...for the children! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13378
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:02:00 -
[339] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:If you make 7m isk/hour mining the entire hour and I make 7m isk/hour having a bot do it for me leaving me free to invest my time in other incoming generating effort, who makes more isk/hour? Irrelevant to the question of whether it's competitive or not. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1085
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:04:00 -
[340] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:If you make 7m isk/hour mining the entire hour and I make 7m isk/hour having a bot do it for me leaving me free to invest my time in other incoming generating effort, who makes more isk/hour? Irrelevant to the question of whether it's competitive or not.
Sure it's relevant. In a market the two do not compete. In active versus passive income the two do not compete.
Spin it how you want Tippia.
HTFU!...for the children! |
|
Dash Bishop
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:06:00 -
[341] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want?
I'm sure he fails to see the irony in that. Just like he fails to make a valid point every time he touches the keyboard to make a post. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13378
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:06:00 -
[342] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Sure it's relevant. In a market the two do not compete. Wrong GÇ£competitiveGÇ¥.
7M/h is 7M/h. Unless one of those 7M somehow buys more than the other, they are fully competitive with each other. The rest is just noise. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Khalkotauroi Defence Labs
7040
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:06:00 -
[343] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want? We can but hope. I'm so tempted to ask the unanswered question, but this isn't the thread for it.
Eve in a nutshell, it's you vs the universe, and every machiavellian space bastard in it. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1087
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:22:00 -
[344] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Sure it's relevant. In a market the two do not compete. Wrong GÇ£competitiveGÇ¥. 7M/h is 7M/h. Unless one of those 7M somehow buys more than the other, they are fully competitive with each other. The rest is just noise.
You expect me to believe you don't consider opportunity cost? 7m is 7m. The fact that a moon mining pos will hypothetically generate 7mil per hour for it's owner gives that person the opportunity to do something else, make isk, pew, have fun, all three while the single ice miner must sacrifice his ability to do anything else but mine for that hour......they are not equal, not similar activities. One can be directly quantified isk/hour for a single player. The other cannot. Trying to convince anyone with an understanding of the two that they are directly comparable is laughable. HTFU!...for the children! |
Ander Fred
Psykotic Meat Nulli Legio
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:31:00 -
[345] - Quote
--Note: TLDR at bottom. Yet another 'save the universe' post.
Time for something constructive: The problem is not the moon mining. The problem is the composition of modules and ships. Tech is not the bottleneck because of production, it's because of consumption. The solution is a dreadful rework of blueprints. On that note:
75% of the drake and abaddon (and mael) is trit. 18% is py. Both minerals are far more likely to be mined in HS, since the volumes required far outstrip the ability of 'byproduce' minerals from higher end ores. This makes HS the engine to drive war in null, which I'm pretty sure you'll agree is the wrong way of doing things. Solutions:
Run HS industry into the ground. I'm serious.
Right now, you wanna get a new abaddon? Chances are it came from Jita. You want to get some more drones? They came from Jita. Chances are even higher than it was produced in HS, in a HS station. Compare the number of production, research etc slots in HS stations to that in null. HS has far far more potential than Null. What's that I hear you cry? "Put up a POS ***!" Well sure, but what about the running cost? It's still higher than HS, and HS can put up quite a lot of safer POSs. So that's not a solution.
So we have a situation where: The majority of minerals for popular doctrine ships are sourced in HS The majority of production capacity is in HS There is no incentive to move production out to the 'empires' it fuels
So what to do? Well, a blueprint rework is a giant pain. So let's try something else. Something like running HS industry into the ground by removing 90% of production capacity from HS, and tripling the production capacity of a Null station (even more for the 'factory' version maybe, someone go run me some numbers). You can still produce in HS, but you have to run a POS to do so. This puts up your production cost, but doesn't eliminate you from competing if you want (ok, it will on some items, so sue me). In contrast, the bulk of production is now in nullsec. Would you rather a) mine in HS and ship it all out, uncompressed or b) mine in Null and move it into the factory station?
What would this do? GÇó For starters, it'd give HS industry a massive blow to the face and then a backslap for good measure. GÇó Would it do much to bots? Mmmmm maybe. At least in Null they'd have to content with the 'ever AFK cloaker', and computers are bad at risk calculations (yeh, I know, someone will figure it out, but that's reality). GÇó Next, it'd promote the industrialisation of nullsec, something that is missing. Empires are not empires, they are gangs that go to the local superweapon store and pick up a bunch of stuff then fight with it. GÇó On to the Farms & Fields dead horse: What's the point of a farm and field if there are not farmers to farm it? In order for space to hold a value it must be used. Right now, space is of a value by itself, even unused. If a greater emphasis can be placed on the value of using it, it will prompt the larger blocs to encourage smaller entities to move into it. Sure you'll still have the blobs, but smaller entities will war amongst themselves and in general provide a bit of diversity. So make your field, and then promote farmers to come farm it. If the guy next door wants your farm, he'll have to fight for it. GÇó Logistics. Not the ship, the space empire fuelling variety. If production can be moved out to the empires, then the logistics change dramatically. No longer about shipping from Jita, you'd have to manage your space to be able to fuel your war machine. Wanna expand? You don't have the income from the farms to do so. You have to go to war. That in turn will stimulate the economy of the local area, so prices will have a greater local effect.
So to conclude: EVE is a game about fighting. Be it in the production of materials for fights or the actual fighting, it's still fighting. Currently, the production for those fights is easier, safer and cheaper in HS than it is in Null, so the people fighting source their superweapons from the giant supermarket in space that is Jita. This makes space seem 'small', as it's just a short trip to the market to get new stuff. Smack HS production in the jewels and shift it out to Null. This makes 'bloc' market fluctuations (unless you're dumb and, and change is a) good and b) makes the world look larger. Uniformity is what kills EVE, it's why ships are changed, modules added etc. Time to do it for the industrial side.
TLDR: Really long post about how to influence production in HS and Null, enhance the worth of space, improve the 'this is my empire' feeling and save the universe from entropy*
*maybe |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
762
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:39:00 -
[346] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:If you make 7m isk/hour mining the entire hour and I make 7m isk/hour having a bot do it for me leaving me free to invest my time in other incoming generating effort, who makes more isk/hour? Irrelevant to the question of whether it's competitive or not. 7M/h = 7M/h. There's no two ways about it.
It is VERY relavent: you are comparing a 'no-show' 24X7 job to a job where you still have to clock in ( admittedly you only have to pop in every hour still its alot less then what 2-3 times a week? ) Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Tetsuo Tsukaya
Pixel Navigators Hostile Work Environment.
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:40:00 -
[347] - Quote
Ander Fred wrote:--Note: TLDR at bottom. Yet another 'save the universe' post.
Time for something constructive: The problem is not the moon mining. The problem is the composition of modules and ships. Tech is not the bottleneck because of production, it's because of consumption. The solution is a dreadful rework of blueprints. On that note:
75% of the drake and abaddon (and mael) is trit. 18% is py. Both minerals are far more likely to be mined in HS, since the volumes required far outstrip the ability of 'byproduce' minerals from higher end ores. This makes HS the engine to drive war in null, which I'm pretty sure you'll agree is the wrong way of doing things. Solutions:
Run HS industry into the ground. I'm serious.
Right now, you wanna get a new abaddon? Chances are it came from Jita. You want to get some more drones? They came from Jita. Chances are even higher than it was produced in HS, in a HS station. Compare the number of production, research etc slots in HS stations to that in null. HS has far far more potential than Null. What's that I hear you cry? "Put up a POS ***!" Well sure, but what about the running cost? It's still higher than HS, and HS can put up quite a lot of safer POSs. So that's not a solution.
So we have a situation where: The majority of minerals for popular doctrine ships are sourced in HS The majority of production capacity is in HS There is no incentive to move production out to the 'empires' it fuels
So what to do? Well, a blueprint rework is a giant pain. So let's try something else. Something like running HS industry into the ground by removing 90% of production capacity from HS, and tripling the production capacity of a Null station (even more for the 'factory' version maybe, someone go run me some numbers). You can still produce in HS, but you have to run a POS to do so. This puts up your production cost, but doesn't eliminate you from competing if you want (ok, it will on some items, so sue me). In contrast, the bulk of production is now in nullsec. Would you rather a) mine in HS and ship it all out, uncompressed or b) mine in Null and move it into the factory station?
What would this do? GÇó For starters, it'd give HS industry a massive blow to the face and then a backslap for good measure. GÇó Would it do much to bots? Mmmmm maybe. At least in Null they'd have to content with the 'ever AFK cloaker', and computers are bad at risk calculations (yeh, I know, someone will figure it out, but that's reality). GÇó Next, it'd promote the industrialisation of nullsec, something that is missing. Empires are not empires, they are gangs that go to the local superweapon store and pick up a bunch of stuff then fight with it. GÇó On to the Farms & Fields dead horse: What's the point of a farm and field if there are not farmers to farm it? In order for space to hold a value it must be used. Right now, space is of a value by itself, even unused. If a greater emphasis can be placed on the value of using it, it will prompt the larger blocs to encourage smaller entities to move into it. Sure you'll still have the blobs, but smaller entities will war amongst themselves and in general provide a bit of diversity. So make your field, and then promote farmers to come farm it. If the guy next door wants your farm, he'll have to fight for it. GÇó Logistics. Not the ship, the space empire fuelling variety. If production can be moved out to the empires, then the logistics change dramatically. No longer about shipping from Jita, you'd have to manage your space to be able to fuel your war machine. Wanna expand? You don't have the income from the farms to do so. You have to go to war. That in turn will stimulate the economy of the local area, so prices will have a greater local effect.
So to conclude: EVE is a game about fighting. Be it in the production of materials for fights or the actual fighting, it's still fighting. Currently, the production for those fights is easier, safer and cheaper in HS than it is in Null, so the people fighting source their superweapons from the giant supermarket in space that is Jita. This makes space seem 'small', as it's just a short trip to the market to get new stuff. Smack HS production in the jewels and shift it out to Null. This makes 'bloc' market fluctuations (unless you're dumb and, and change is a) good and b) makes the world look larger. Uniformity is what kills EVE, it's why ships are changed, modules added etc. Time to do it for the industrial side.
TLDR: Really long post about how to influence production in HS and Null, enhance the worth of space, improve the 'this is my empire' feeling and save the universe from entropy*
*maybe
Great idea. And I suppose for those of us not in a blue donut corp we can just FOAD whenever we need to replace any of the stuff that regularly gets blown up living in low sec?
Or did you really think "what if you gave my alliance EVERYTHING" was going to be well received? Moving industry out of the near absolute safety of hi-sec into the near absolute safety of sov null sec does nothing except make rich null bears richer, how is that helping? |
Ander Fred
Psykotic Meat Nulli Legio
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 01:55:00 -
[348] - Quote
Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:
Great idea. And I suppose for those of us not in a blue donut corp we can just FOAD whenever we need to replace any of the stuff that regularly gets blown up living in low sec?
Or did you really think "what if you gave my alliance EVERYTHING" was going to be well received? Moving industry out of the near absolute safety of hi-sec into the near absolute safety of sov null sec does nothing except make rich null bears richer, how is that helping?
Nullsec is all about size. The big alliances can afford to be elitist right now cos they don't need the industrialists. Make it so that industrialists give a significant edge to combat and they'll have a reason to be nice and stop the 'omfg we're big we want this space cos we can have it'. You seem to have missed that point.
Also, lowsec is next to highsec. Highsec will still be capable of production, more than enough to produce for FW, wars etc. Heck, if it isn't then I'm pretty sure that Null will supply it. Highsec/low can be accessed from null. This is not about 'OMFG STARVE HS MWAHAHAHA' this is about changing the direction of the flow of goods. Null is still pretty safe true, but not as safe as HS. Blop drops are nasty (cos let's face it, your farm is gonna be cynojammed).
Next point of 'giving my alliance everything': Why mine? It's not the biggest, most powerful, most active etc etc. This would benefit other alliances more than mine, so please, you have braincells for a reason.
|
Tetsuo Tsukaya
Pixel Navigators Hostile Work Environment.
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 02:05:00 -
[349] - Quote
Ander Fred wrote:Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:
Great idea. And I suppose for those of us not in a blue donut corp we can just FOAD whenever we need to replace any of the stuff that regularly gets blown up living in low sec?
Or did you really think "what if you gave my alliance EVERYTHING" was going to be well received? Moving industry out of the near absolute safety of hi-sec into the near absolute safety of sov null sec does nothing except make rich null bears richer, how is that helping?
Nullsec is all about size. The big alliances can afford to be elitist right now cos they don't need the industrialists. Make it so that industrialists give a significant edge to combat and they'll have a reason to be nice and stop the 'omfg we're big we want this space cos we can have it'. You seem to have missed that point. Also, lowsec is next to highsec. Highsec will still be capable of production, more than enough to produce for FW, wars etc. Heck, if it isn't then I'm pretty sure that Null will supply it. Highsec/low can be accessed from null.
Again, other than making the nullbears even richer what is the benefit here? Some of us just want cheap ships to pew in, moving industry to null sure isn't going to facilitate that, explain to me why those of us who aren't interested in null blob life should get behind your idea. |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 02:05:00 -
[350] - Quote
Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:Or did you really think "what if you gave my alliance EVERYTHING" was going to be well received? Moving industry out of the near absolute safety of hi-sec into the near absolute safety of sov null sec does nothing except make rich null bears richer, how is that helping? Yeah, cause the "rich null bears" don't already do their industry in highsec where everything is significantly easier than it would be under his proposed scheme. Or did you even read it? Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
|
Ander Fred
Psykotic Meat Nulli Legio
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 02:47:00 -
[351] - Quote
Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:
Nullsec is all about size. The big alliances can afford to be elitist right now cos they don't need the industrialists. Make it so that industrialists give a significant edge to combat and they'll have a reason to be nice and stop the 'omfg we're big we want this space cos we can have it'. You seem to have missed that point.
Also, lowsec is next to highsec. Highsec will still be capable of production, more than enough to produce for FW, wars etc. Heck, if it isn't then I'm pretty sure that Null will supply it. Highsec/low can be accessed from null.
Again, other than making the nullbears even richer what is the benefit here? Some of us just want cheap ships to pew in, moving industry to null sure isn't going to facilitate that, explain to me why those of us who aren't interested in null blob life should get behind your idea. [/quote]
Why would the nullbears get richer? The HS bears would get poorer if they didn't move. The entire point of this is to promote warfare. You still get your cheap ships, just that they are being made out in Null. This reduces (it won't remove) the logistical nightmare of shipping from Jita (all you who live on the fringes of the galaxy, rejoice!), it promotes mining and system development in Null, it increases the worth of your space and in turn, the want to defend your space or upgrade to next door's space.
Next! |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7186
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 03:12:00 -
[352] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:No, the ice miner just has to press F1 and occasionally empty his ore hold into an Orca. That's it. Stop pretending there's more effort involved than that. Well when you can gank a moon mining operation with 2-3 catlysts then we'll start seriously comparing ice mining & Moons goo extraction
when you can go to jita and immediately replace a moon then i'll take any comparison of ice mining and moon mining seriously ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Ander Fred
Psykotic Meat Nulli Legio
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 03:26:00 -
[353] - Quote
Andski wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:No, the ice miner just has to press F1 and occasionally empty his ore hold into an Orca. That's it. Stop pretending there's more effort involved than that. Well when you can gank a moon mining operation with 2-3 catlysts then we'll start seriously comparing ice mining & Moons goo extraction when you can go to jita and immediately replace a moon then i'll take any comparison of ice mining and moon mining seriously
Investment in ice mining: Strip miners, exhumer (cos we're fancy), orca if you really wanna be fancy.
Investment in moon mining: Conquer the space. Hold the space. POS, silos, harvesters, fuel, defensive modules.
See the difference? One is a solo to small gang venture, the other is an alliance/coalition venture. Don't try comparing them, they make a resource, that's about all they have in common. |
Tesal
245
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 04:18:00 -
[354] - Quote
Ander Fred wrote:Why would the nullbears get richer? The HS bears would get poorer if they didn't move. The entire point of this is to promote warfare. You still get your cheap ships, just that they are being made out in Null. This reduces (it won't remove) the logistical nightmare of shipping from Jita (all you who live on the fringes of the galaxy, rejoice!), it promotes mining and system development in Null, it increases the worth of your space and in turn, the want to defend your space or upgrade to next door's space. Next!
You have combat goggles. I better take what you have to say seriously.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3057
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 04:18:00 -
[355] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Ice mining is not competitive with moon mining. Two completely different markets.
As to the 250 man fleet protecting the pos for one hour....of sure. But you're going to have to quantify a ton of other variables. See, to compare moon mining to ice mining in hs you're going to have to quantify not just the moon goo, the poor sap that has to maintain it and the defense fleet. You're going to have to quantify all of it....all of the moon mining....how many times each moon mining pos was attacked in a given time....all the income generated by the alliance in the same time frame by all activities even at the player level since it's assumed they pay up to their corps who then pay up to the alliance. Then we're going to have to calculate "effort" for all this including for moon mining, boil it all down to comparative data. You can't just say a fleet of 250 people shows up for 1 hour and that's comparative effort.....it means squat because that ice miner has to spend the entirety of his time mining to mine his ice. That defense fleet who benefits from that moon goo doesn't. They can go off and do other things to make isk while their moon-goo is extracted and that needs to be considered too!
You keep confusing comparable and competitive.
Competitive means that, with or without some extra effort, you can match or exceed the income (and, of course, there are better ways to match Tech income than Ice mining; that's just the lowest effort method, esp taking multiboxing into account). You can. Therefore, you can compete with Tech income. And, as it happens, you can do it with far fewer people working together than it takes to own Tech moons (empirically defined as the smallest independent owner of Tech).
But if we want to keep diving into your comparative rabbit hole:
A fleet of 250 Ice miners showing up for 2 hours will exceed the income of a Tech moon. That's not "all their time," that\s 2 hours a month. One person, acting alone, devoting all their time, can exceed a Tech moon (in a pretty reasonable total hour count if you multibox). But tech moons cannot be held by one person acting alone (no matter how many alts they use). The owner of a Tech moon has to be able to field that fleet of 250 at a time of his enemy's choosing. Which requires the ability to field a fleet 24/7. The Ice miners get to choose when and where to invest their effort, and have no need to coordinate timing.
Which is harder, fielding 250 people for two hours a month (or 125x4hrs, or any other combination that equals 500 man hours of mining, each hour consisting of not much more than one button press) a at any time of their choosing, spread out over whenever they want to show up; or fielding 250 people all at once at a time of your enemy's choosing (or, if you're lucky and have someone available to Stront time, and the enemy doesn't kite the timer, maybe a time of your choosing). This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 04:31:00 -
[356] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want?
Shouldnt this be considered a troll? |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 04:40:00 -
[357] - Quote
Dash Bishop wrote:Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want? I'm sure he fails to see the irony in that. Just like he fails to make a valid point every time he touches the keyboard to make a post.
Seemed like a valid question to me. Every time a post goes up that the goonies or their pets dont like the same people turn it into a troll fest until it gets locked. Very clear pattern here. I would like to see this changed or someone from CCP to look into to this and find out why these same people can continue to lock post after post via trolling and never get banned for it. |
Xpaulusx
Naari LLC Marauder Syndicate
201
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 05:02:00 -
[358] - Quote
CCP knows that the MoonGoo oligarchs are too big to fail, so expect the intentional foot dragging on the issue from CCP for the next ten years ...................................................... |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
1212
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 05:58:00 -
[359] - Quote
Ander Fred wrote:Run HS industry into the ground. I'm serious.
Ander Fred wrote:This is not about 'OMFG STARVE HS MWAHAHAHA'
And we're done. Live Events are neither. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2761
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 11:00:00 -
[360] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Dash Bishop wrote:Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want? I'm sure he fails to see the irony in that. Just like he fails to make a valid point every time he touches the keyboard to make a post. Seemed like a valid question to me. Every time a post goes up that the goonies or their pets dont like the same people turn it into a troll fest until it gets locked. Very clear pattern here. I would like to see this changed or someone from CCP to look into to this and find out why these same people can continue to lock post after post via trolling and never get banned for it.
If informative, well thought out posts are trolling, then what is your definition of constructive posting? Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
|
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
223
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 12:20:00 -
[361] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Gotta like how the spacerich NULLbears try to paint SOV as too tuff while amassing TECH fortunes that'll last for years.... Every future expansion that doesn't address the moon goo bottle neck that lead to this ThunderdomeGäó is another expansion that in IMHO will lead to NULL's stagnation.... While I understand Shaddooo's tactical desire to have TECH funded gudfights for his owns everlasting tech funded wars the rest of Eve will suffer... Instead of misdirecting all Eve's ills on HI SEC lets point it at were its due: its time to break the near TECH monoploy CCP
Anyone is welcome to try and come to take all the tech from the CFC, its the SoV grind that's the problem. That and you're one of those guys who has to capitalise words to emphasis them.
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1091
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 12:55:00 -
[362] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: You keep confusing comparable and competitive.
Competitive means that, with or without some extra effort, you can match or exceed the income
But if we want to keep diving into your comparative rabbit hole:
A fleet of 250 Ice miners showing up for 2 hours will exceed the income of a Tech moon. That's not "all their time," that\s 2 hours a month. One person, acting alone, devoting all their time, can exceed a Tech moon (in a pretty reasonable total hour count if you multibox). But tech moons cannot be held by one person acting alone (no matter how many alts they use). The owner of a Tech moon has to be able to field that fleet of 250 at a time of his enemy's choosing. Which requires the ability to field a fleet 24/7. The Ice miners get to choose when and where to invest their effort, and have no need to coordinate timing.
Which is harder, fielding 250 people for two hours a month (or 125x4hrs, or any other combination that equals 500 man hours of mining, each hour consisting of not much more than one button press) a at any time of their choosing, spread out over whenever they want to show up; or fielding 250 people all at once at a time of your enemy's choosing (or, if you're lucky and have someone available to Stront time, and the enemy doesn't kite the timer, maybe a time of your choosing).
But it's not competitive and it's not comparable. It's not competitive since the owner of that moon pos can go make more isk while that pos is extracting, making him isk. Those 250 ice miners mine for 2 hours. They're not mining for 720hours and they certainly can't do anything else while they're mining.
I never said having an alliance to support moon mining isn't difficult. But to treat moon mining as a singular income for the alliance, as the sole enabler of all there is out there and try to directly compare it to a simple activity such as ice mining stating that the ice miner can make more than moon mining is a meaningless comparison. What was done was to completely ignore opportunity cost and say "Hey, these two activities are equal"....they are not.
The reason I "keep confusing competitive with comparable" moon mining and ice mining are neither.
The most direct comparison of moon mining is to PI. The reason noone is doing is it wouldn't sound as good as "A miner can make more than a moon".
HTFU!...for the children! |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 16:07:00 -
[363] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Dash Bishop wrote:Tippia wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Moderators how about instead of locking the thread you start locking the trolls. Then you'd never be allowed to post. Is that really what you want? I'm sure he fails to see the irony in that. Just like he fails to make a valid point every time he touches the keyboard to make a post. Seemed like a valid question to me. Every time a post goes up that the goonies or their pets dont like the same people turn it into a troll fest until it gets locked. Very clear pattern here. I would like to see this changed or someone from CCP to look into to this and find out why these same people can continue to lock post after post via trolling and never get banned for it. If informative, well thought out posts are trolling, then what is your definition of constructive posting? Informative and constructive post would not be. Should this always be the case but sadly it is not. The pattern is very obvious and clear should you want to take the time to go back through the locked post you will see the same people trolling over and over until the topic is locked.
My concern or question why is this allowed to continue? Why not lock the trolls and not the thread? Why allow certain goonies or their pets to troll a topic they disagree with until it is locked? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13380
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 16:27:00 -
[364] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Informative and constructive post would not be. Should this always be the case but sadly it is not. The pattern is very obvious and clear should you want to take the time to go back through the locked post you will see the same people trolling over and over until the topic is locked. Maybe if you had opted for answering the questions everyone was asking rather than trolling, it wouldn't have happened.
Quote:My concern or question why is this allowed to continue? Why not lock the trolls and not the thread? Why allow certain goonies or their pets to troll a topic they disagree with until it is locked? Largely because they're not trolling. They're simply disagreeing and providing arguments against the case. This quickly makes the trolls go nuts as they can find no way out other than to repeat their already-failed evasions, personal abuse, and unproven or even contra-factual nonsenseGǪ and that's what gets the thread closed.
If they clamped down hard on trolling, you'd be out of here, and you know it, so this is just you lying again, this time about how you want to see the rules enforced. You're not even attempting to stay on-topic in this thread, and instead go straight for the personal attacks and the trolling attempts to drag the whole thing onto an irrelevant tangent.
Mr Kidd wrote:But it's not competitive and it's not comparable. It's competitive because income is income. 7M/h is 7M/h. The complaint is always that you can't compete with the income generated by tech moons, but the simple fact of the matter is that you can. Trivially. One of the worst-paying activities in the game produces the same income, and it arguably does it with less interaction and effort than what's required to keep the moon going (which means that the whole GÇ£you can do other stuff at the same timeGÇ¥ argument isn't true either). Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 16:46:00 -
[365] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Ice mining is not competitive with moon mining. Yes it is. 7M ISK/h is 7M ISK/h. Earning it one way means that activity is competitive with earning it another way.
What if the people in control of the pos also mine is?
Isn't 1+1>1? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13381
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 16:56:00 -
[366] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:What if the people in control of the pos also mine is?
Isn't 1+1>1? See the above discussion about having to defend the POS.
1+1-1 = 1.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:06:00 -
[367] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:What if the people in control of the pos also mine is?
Isn't 1+1>1? See the above discussion about having to defend the POS. 1+1-1 = 1.
But we are talking about income as 7m = 7m, which is where the problem comes from. Per hour, per minute, per action... all have variables.
Defending, maintaining, etc are maintenance of continuing to do the same method of income over and over.
Not to do it the first time.
Otherwise that argument holds true for the afk miner (comparison was made) losing his 200m mack every week to gankers and NO knights =).
In THAT case, pos moon mining would definitely outweigh ice mining.
But, we still have the constant that someone who has a pos, even 250 people who share in its duties, can also ice mine when they do NOT have to defend the pos, which allows for a combination of mining and gaining passive income from the pos, since they need to be logged in anyways concerning the arguments given.
That's where the 1+1 comes from, compared to the ice miner who is just 1.
Variables variables variables. We can always compound the situation and make it more muddied, but that only helps the argument that moon mining and ice mining are not competitive, nor comparable.
Otherwise it would be moot because scamming and trading could, and does, make more income. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13381
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:09:00 -
[368] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:But, we still have the constant that someone who has a pos, even 250 people who share in its duties, can also ice mine when they do NOT have to defend the pos, which allows for a combination of mining and gaining passive income from the pos, since they need to be logged in anyways concerning the arguments given.
That's where the 1+1 comes from, compared to the ice miner who is just 1. GǪand, likewise, those ice miners can do something else when they do NOT have to miner the ice to match the moon income (since it takes pretty much no time at all to bring it to the same level). So they get 1+1 as well.
The point is that the POS income isn't nearly as passive as people like to make it out to be GÇö it requires a fair amount of manhours to keep it going, so it can very easily amount to less payoff for your efforts than what the competing, moon-less organisation is doing. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
DrHekki
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:24:00 -
[369] - Quote
The problem is NOT the moon goo. The problem is the endless grind needed to disrupt the entities that own them.
I am not a fan of the idea of ring mining. The investment in game yadda yadda is bull crap - I have a full time job and I want to play the game not spend hours grinding. I mainly play the game solo since the last time I trusted people my game went sour and I nearly un-subbed, I play with approximately 10 people and that's all I need to enjoy eve.
That being said bottlenecks make for good targets, the only problem is the owners and complexes of the bottlenecks are too damn powerful for anyone to disrupt. The current environment involves attacked shooting pos, defender sits in station and organises a "SOS Fleet" for when pos comes out of reinforcement. I think this is where it goes wrong. Reinforcement timers - and yet everything mission related in eve gets blown up there and then. Why are player owned structure different?
I prefer the idea of forcing people to live in their space and not just to pos spam the entirety of the map just because "they can". Think of an eve where roaming gangs can disrupt the bottlenecks through knocking them out there and then. I'd love that game play and it would give small groups of people the chance to claim their state. Anyway leave moon mining alone its not that act that stagnates the game, its the grind involved in what players have to do in order to **** someone off. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:24:00 -
[370] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:But, we still have the constant that someone who has a pos, even 250 people who share in its duties, can also ice mine when they do NOT have to defend the pos, which allows for a combination of mining and gaining passive income from the pos, since they need to be logged in anyways concerning the arguments given.
That's where the 1+1 comes from, compared to the ice miner who is just 1. GǪand, likewise, those ice miners can do something else when they do NOT have to miner the ice to match the moon income (since it takes pretty much no time at all to bring it to the same level). So they get 1+1 as well. The point is that the POS income isn't nearly as passive as people like to make it out to be GÇö it requires a fair amount of manhours to keep it going, so it can very easily amount to less payoff for your efforts than what the competing, moon-less organisation is doing.
But they have to be logged in to get that ice. If the POS isnt in reinforced mode, its chuggin along regardless of whether it is defended or not. And at the discretion of the player, he can engage in active activities to generate income. Hell, ratting the belts in same system if he wants.
Regardless of how much income is generated, the form of that income is not comparable, defined per action. Even taking into consideration that even with a corp who maintains it, needing 250 capsuleers to defend it, those 250 pilots are not getting any of that income by default. They don't get a share of the bounty, just like that ice miner doesn't split his holds by default.
Any sort of ship reimbursement, or isk sharing is done by decision, if any is done.
The entire nature of the logistics involved, eloquently proven by yourself and others, has already demonstrated that you cannot compare ice mining to pos moon mining.
Just defending it does not make your wallet blink. Because it is passive. Meaning you can be docked up doing trading, you can rat, you can mine, you could be doing an anomaly. With the same pilot. (No reason to bring multiboxing in, we talking about personal incomes).
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:27:00 -
[371] - Quote
This isn't to say there isn't an issue with it, this is just saying using some sort of "but ice miners make more" is an irrelevant fact to dumb down the importance of a group of people maintaining a moon mining pos. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13381
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:38:00 -
[372] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:But they have to be logged in to get that ice. GǪand without people logging in to protect the POS, it won't be producing anything either and everything done this week will be lost.
Quote:Regardless of how much income is generated, the form of that income is not comparable, defined per action. GÇ£Defined by actionGÇ¥ huh? Yeah, sure. If we remove all things that are not exactly like moon mining from the list, there is nothing on the list that compares to moon mining. That's a nice tautology that says absolutely nothing.
Again, the point is that it's trivially easy to get the same kind of income from other activities, with the same kind of workload, as you'd get from moon mining. What those other activities are is pretty irrelevant since the base whine is that it's supposedly impossibleGǪ when in actual fact, it is not.
Quote:Even taking into consideration that even with a corp who maintains it, needing 250 capsuleers to defend it, those 250 pilots are not getting any of that income by default. They don't get a share of the bounty, just like that ice miner doesn't split his holds by default. Sure. If the ice miners refuse to chip in and help the alliance to keep up with the Jonses, because they want to keep all that profit for themselves, then the alliance won't have the money to compete. That's no different from if the moon-mining alliance's members refuse to chip in the time to keep the POS going because they want to spend that time earning money for themselves. They, too, will not have the money to compete (since they won't have the moon any more).
Either way, it's individuals foregoing personal profit to earn the collective a bunch of money, and either way, the collective earns the same level of income for the same amount of effort. Thus, even the most horrible misuse of your time GÇö ice mining GÇö can easily compete with moon mining for creating alliance income.
This is sharp contrast to the claims that it is absolutely impossible to do anything of the kind and that owning a tech moon is a nigh-unbeatable advantage in the ISK war.
Quote:This isn't to say there isn't an issue with it, this is just saying using some sort of "but ice miners make more" is an irrelevant fact to dumb down the importance of a group of people maintaining a moon mining pos. GǪand no-one is saying that. What we're saying is that the whole Gǣwe can't beat them, they have techGǥ argument is dumb because it ignores the very relevant fact that keeping that tech flowing requires a fair amount of effort, and that you can quite easily match both the effort and the income through other means. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:48:00 -
[373] - Quote
You are absolutely right. Using ice mining as an example is really really terrible when talking about moon mining. It shouldn't have been done at all. But considering how you conveneiently forget the fact that the person with access to the holds of that pos doesn't even need to be online to defend it....
Well, passive income and active income are not comparable. Therefore should not be even used at all in the same sentence.
But I do not think you are correct in what you said about "Either way, it's individuals foregoing personal profit to earn the collective a bunch of money, and either way, the collective earns the same level of income for the same amount of effort."
Because now we are comparing the activities of 1 versus a group? Even better! What if those 250 pilots mined ice instead. Where's the comparison now? Oh wait, it would be comparable! But not moon mining.
"This is sharp contrast to the claims that it is absolutely impossible to do anything of the kind and that owning a tech moon is a nigh-unbeatable advantage in the ISK war."
I think if you had, as a leader, 250 pilots fly in a mack, for 2 hours a day, while their moon mining pos was online, save up their money as an alliance, and fought the equal numbered alliance who only mined 2 hours a day with their same # of pilots... the war chest wouldn't be near the same in isk. Forget the logistics of defending, strip everything else down; keep it comparable. Same # of pilots, same fits, hell, same belt. But only 1 side had a moon mining pos.
How much a difference do you think the war chest would be in regards to wallet amount? You're saying it would be close to the same. I don't believe it.
Sorry for the late edit, but I was trying to find the actual post that started the ince mining comparison, and going through from post #1, I happened on this-
Tippia wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:It isn't just Tech my friend, there is also Neo now as well.
The only people who don't want Moon Goo fixed are those with high-end Moon Goo. Fixed. At least they're the only ones trying to do something about it. For some reason, people without moon goo seem adamant that things must absolutely not change in any wayGǪ wonder why that is. Beekeeper Bob wrote:Here's some homework for you.... How many incursion runners does it take to balance out one tech moon? Zero. The two have nothing to do with each other since they operate on completely different scales.
Figured it was kind of relevant =) "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13382
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 17:56:00 -
[374] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:You are absolutely right. Using ice mining as an example is really really terrible when talking about moon mining. It shouldn't have been done at all. But considering how you conveneiently forget the fact that the person with access to the holds of that pos doesn't even need to be online to defend it.... GǪa fact that is completely irrelevant since the whole point is that same effort = same income for both activities. The guy taking all the ice out of the corp hangar and putting in the market doesn't have to be online for the ice mining op either.
Quote:Well, passive income and active income are not comparable. Sure they are. It's all about the value for the effort and the scale of both. In ice mining, we have something that very closely matches moon mining.
Quote:But I do not think you are correct in what you said about "Either way, it's individuals foregoing personal profit to earn the collective a bunch of money, and either way, the collective earns the same level of income for the same amount of effort."
Because now we are comparing the activities of 1 versus a group? No. We've been comparing group vs. group the whole time.
Quote:I think if you had, as a leader, 250 pilots fly in a mack, for 2 hours a day, while their moon mining pos was online, save up their money as an alliance, and fought the equal numbered alliance who only mined 2 hours a day with their same # of pilots... the war chest wouldn't be near the same in isk. Ehm. We're talking about 2 hours a month for that ice mining. In the scenario you just painted, the moon mining income accounts for just over 1% GÇö it's a rounding error. The difference it will make is nil. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 18:07:00 -
[375] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Gotta like how the spacerich NULLbears try to paint SOV as too tuff while amassing TECH fortunes that'll last for years.... Every future expansion that doesn't address the moon goo bottle neck that lead to this ThunderdomeGäó is another expansion that in IMHO will lead to NULL's stagnation.... While I understand Shaddooo's tactical desire to have TECH funded gudfights for his owns everlasting tech funded wars the rest of Eve will suffer... Instead of misdirecting all Eve's ills on HI SEC lets point it at were its due: its time to break the near TECH monoploy CCP Anyone is welcome to try and come to take all the tech from the CFC, its the SoV grind that's the problem. That and you're one of those guys who has to capitalise words to emphasis them.
If the grind is part of the problem as you claim how could anyone do this? The effort and resources required to take the moons would be pointless. Even if they make to where you have to control the planet via Dust they have already amassed enough wealth to buy or pay these people off. |
Jonah Gravenstein
Khalkotauroi Defence Labs
7247
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 18:10:00 -
[376] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote: Informative and constructive post would not be. Should this always be the case but sadly it is not. The pattern is very obvious and clear should you want to take the time to go back through the locked post you will see the same people trolling over and over until the topic is locked.
My concern or question why is this allowed to continue? Why not lock the trolls and not the thread? Why allow certain goonies or their pets to troll a topic they disagree with until it is locked?
Learn to post on topic, informatively and constructively, without evasion, personal attacks and outright trolling, then you'll actually have a leg to stand on.
On topic, nullsec entities running their own "thunderdrome" is not a problem for the game or CCP, they have come up with a way to amuse themselves and get decent fights without having to partake in the dire mechanic that is sov. The nullsec alliances are the biggest proponents of both nerfing moon goo and and making the grinding of sov more conducive to actually having some fun, rather than a boring and expensive chore.
Eve in a nutshell, it's you vs the universe, and every machiavellian space bastard in it. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 18:15:00 -
[377] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:You are absolutely right. Using ice mining as an example is really really terrible when talking about moon mining. It shouldn't have been done at all. But considering how you conveneiently forget the fact that the person with access to the holds of that pos doesn't even need to be online to defend it.... GǪa fact that is completely irrelevant since the whole point is that same effort = same income for both activities. The guy taking all the ice out of the corp hangar and putting in the market doesn't have to be online for the ice mining op either. Quote:Well, passive income and active income are not comparable. Sure they are. It's all about the value for the effort and the scale of both. In ice mining, we have something that very closely matches moon mining. Quote:But I do not think you are correct in what you said about "Either way, it's individuals foregoing personal profit to earn the collective a bunch of money, and either way, the collective earns the same level of income for the same amount of effort."
Because now we are comparing the activities of 1 versus a group? No. We've been comparing group vs. group the whole time. Quote:I think if you had, as a leader, 250 pilots fly in a mack, for 2 hours a day, while their moon mining pos was online, save up their money as an alliance, and fought the equal numbered alliance who only mined 2 hours a day with their same # of pilots... the war chest wouldn't be near the same in isk. Ehm. We're talking about 2 hours a month for that ice mining. In the scenario you just painted, the moon mining income accounts for just over 1% GÇö it's a rounding error. The difference it will make is nil.
Still, can use the same forumla. Whether it be per month or per hour. Ice mining is as close to moon mining in a pos as using incursions as an example of income.
Oh, and the original post to start comparing ice miners came from-
Which is what started the whole debacle. (post #254). About 3 pages I think, after you discounted incursions as being a poor comparison because it scaled differently.
So, now... are we going to use 7m = 7m or are we going to retract scaling and find ways to compare something incomparable? Obviously we have already figured out an ice miner doesn't need a corp to back him/her, and we all know by discussion that a moon mining pos isn't going to be maintained by 1 person either.
So again, how do they compare without being so far off scale again? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 18:21:00 -
[378] - Quote
Although, I would be curious to know how an entity in sov maintains their bills by having their miners out in the fields and what kind of pseudo numbers they can generate, just mining.
Would be interesting to compare, notso? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 18:38:00 -
[379] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Still, can use the same formula. Whether it be per month or per hour. Ice mining is as close to moon mining in a pos as using incursions as an example of income. Because that is 2 hours per month, for 250 pilots. I think that's a relative point. Because that is NOW saying you have to have 250 pilots to mine 2 hours per month to value 1 tech moon, when the formula given was the fact that goons had 500 moons? That's a HELLUVA lot of ice. The game has 500 tech moons; I have no idea how many of those the goons have. It was brought up to show how even a small alliance can outproduce the entire tech moon population in the game, if they want to.
The reason we're using ice mining as a point of comparison is because of how close it is in terms of income per hour, income per effort, and man-hour investment requirement for a given pile of cash. All of that makes them comparable, and all of it shows that there are plenty of income sources that are competitive with moon mining.
Yes, with a bit of luck, you'll be able to cover several moons with the same defensive effort to save on the man-hour investment there, but at the same time, you can also choose not to use the worst imaginable income source (ice mining) as your way of competing with that. You can instead use (horrible) ore mining, and suddenly, your the same effort is worth two moons. You can use (good) ore mining, and now it's worth three or four.
GǪand yes, if you can get the members to go along, you could use missions or FW or even incursions, and make a the effort be worth 10GÇô15 moons. The reason I discounted incursions is because it was a different question back then, and because incursions are the epitome of personal enrichments. What we're talking about now is what effort-for-isk and man-hour ratios are comparable to and competitive with what you get from a top-end moon. Ice fits the bill very nicely.
Quote:So, now... are we going to use 7m = 7m or are we going to retract scaling and find ways to compare something incomparable? Seeing as how they're entirely comparable already, no retraction is needed. And 7M is indeed the same thing as 7M in terms of what it'll buy you and how much effort you have to put in to get it. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:06:00 -
[380] - Quote
So hmm... just to make sure I understand correctly... you're saying an ice miner mining ice for 2 hours a month is the equivalent of an entity running a tech moon pos?
I find it very hard to believe that someone mining 2 hours a month makes as much as the alliance who owns 1 tech moon makes passively, and that those other pilots wouldn't make their own isk as well... by uh, mining if not ratting.
Why else would you even bother grinding sov (which sov null pilots are endlessly crying about how dull and boring it is) just so they don't need to mine ice for 2 hours.
And not only that, but to try to find justification to even compare the 2.
Something tells me this conversation has turned dishonest. I can make over 38mil every 2 days from my crappy PI in .7 space.
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:20:00 -
[381] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:So hmm... just to make sure I understand correctly... you're saying an ice miner mining ice for 2 hours a month is the equivalent of an entity running a tech moon pos? No. I'm saying that the amount of people required to defend a POS once a month would, if they had no POS to defend and instead spent that time mining ice, earn just as much money either way. Or, well. I'm saying that you really need to go after horrible ore to do that, but those who actually run those defence ops seem to suggest that ice mining will be sufficient.
At any rate, be it tech moon or ice mining, the man-hours required to keep the ISK rolling in is the same, as is the amount of ISK.
Quote:Why else would you even bother grinding sov (which sov null pilots are endlessly crying about how dull and boring it is) just so they don't need to mine ice for 2 hours. Sov isn't the same as moon mining, and grinding sov does not mean you get the tech moon required to save you from those 2 hours of mining.
Sov has its own rewards and its own set of problems, and it's a completely separate issue. What this whole comparison is about is to debunk the myth that owning a tech moon provides you with an income source that no-one else can compete with. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:33:00 -
[382] - Quote
But players who are defending that pos are not entitled to any of the tech/moongo that pos produces. They are doing it to helpt their alliance, which has other meta gaming stuffs in place for whatever it that alliance does, so does not in fact, equate to income.
Which again, is why it's a passive income not an active income. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
|
ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
123
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:40:00 -
[383] - Quote
Moderation discussion removed.
Please try to remember that all moderation issues should be either reported or petitioned. Discussing moderation in the forums can be bad for your character's health.
From the forum Rules: "11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category." ISD Cura Ursus Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:46:00 -
[384] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:But players who are defending that pos are not entitled to any of the tech/moongo that pos produces. They are doing it to helpt their alliance, which has other meta gaming stuffs in place for whatever it that alliance does, so does not in fact, equate to income. GǪand the people who are doing the mining and donating it are doing it to help their alliance, which has the same kind of meta gaming stuff in place for whatever it is that alliance does, so it's not income either in that case.
Either way, the two amount to the same thing.
Quote:Which again, is why it's a passive income not an active income. GǪwhich doesn't particularly matter. Income is income, and man-hours required to produce it is man-hours required to produce it.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 20:00:00 -
[385] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:So hmm... just to make sure I understand correctly... you're saying an ice miner mining ice for 2 hours a month is the equivalent of an entity running a tech moon pos? No. I'm saying that the amount of people required to defend a POS once a month would, if they had no POS to defend and instead spent that time mining ice, earn just as much money either way. Or, well. I'm saying that you really need to go after horrible ore to do that, but those who actually run those defence ops seem to suggest that ice mining will be sufficient. At any rate, be it tech moon or ice mining, the man-hours required to keep the ISK rolling in is the same, as is the amount of ISK. Quote:Why else would you even bother grinding sov (which sov null pilots are endlessly crying about how dull and boring it is) just so they don't need to mine ice for 2 hours. Sov isn't the same as moon mining, and grinding sov does not mean you get the tech moon required to save you from those 2 hours of mining. Sov has its own rewards and its own set of problems, and it's a completely separate issue. What this whole comparison is about is to debunk the myth that owning a tech moon provides you with an income source that no-one else can compete with.
I dunno, I still find it hard to believe that it wouldn't be worth having the moons for the income.
If it took my 1,000 member corp to mine for 2 hours a month each, to make the same amount of isk of 5 moons (4 or whatever) at the cost of MAYBE needing to defend it... that's still twice as much income as if we did not have any tech moons. AND not only that, but that's alliance income i do NOT have to share with my alliance. Ice mining, would be personal income, and pos would be alliance income. The access of those areas and safe spots to also rat in, have fun social meta game crap like thunderdomes, or be able to afford ship replacement, comes from that.
Not to mention taxation, as well as market and access to whatever else (kind of leading into sov, sorry).
So sure, by itself tech moon income might not be the greatest, but again, when you are talking tech and moon mining, you aren't only talking about it being the only income. Just 1 source of PASSIVE income. Which is a big big difference from just mining, or ratting, or doing incursions, or any other ACTIVE source of income, which can in fact stack.
Again, the comparison is just not there.
If you were my corp leader, you wouldn't hand me a paycheck for defending your moongoo mining pos. You'd have other perks set aside for my service. We are all in the same corp (hypothetically afterall). But that doesn't mean I have automatic access to that alliance wallet, or that everyone gets an equal share.
Or are you saying it does? You're combining a personal income and a group income saying they are both. It looks like you are not keeping the 2 seperate, which obviously they are designed to do.
Or I can only see this as you wanting to see moongoo go into highsec as any other PI type of passive income.
Because you can mine ice anywhere and everywhere and it is comparable as you say =P (I don't believe in it but meh). "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 20:03:00 -
[386] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:But players who are defending that pos are not entitled to any of the tech/moongo that pos produces. They are doing it to helpt their alliance, which has other meta gaming stuffs in place for whatever it that alliance does, so does not in fact, equate to income. GǪand the people who are doing the mining and donating it are doing it to help their alliance, which has the same kind of meta gaming stuff in place for whatever it is that alliance does, so it's not income either in that case. Either way, the two amount to the same thing. Quote:Which again, is why it's a passive income not an active income. GǪwhich doesn't particularly matter. Income is income, and man-hours required to produce it is man-hours required to produce it.
It matters greatly. I am not required to give a tithe of X amount of ice I mine. I can mine what I want when I want and my corp is not entitled to any of it save for taxes. They don't even require me to mine at all. Professions are kept seperate. This is Eve afterall. Whatever I donate, if I donate, is by free will. Has nothing to do whatsoever about what I do or choose to do if I am CEO of a corp who has tech moons to mine off of. That's a bit of stretch to even bring that into it.
Again, you are proving right now that 7m =/= 7m as income.
Because passive and active matter greatly. It becomes 1+1>1 all over again in a full circle. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 20:11:00 -
[387] - Quote
For instance Tippia.... since I'm using work as an example....
If I'm salaried as an employee, I get paid the same amount of money if I work 30 hours or 40 or 90 (moon mining pos) and so do not have to put in a set amount of man hours to equate that same amount of money. Some weeks I might have to put in more hours (pos got reinforced/attacked/defended) and sometimes I might get to work less hours (all safe and clear).
If I work hourly, I get a specific rate per hour I work (ice mining) and if my car breaks down (ganked) or for some other reason I cannot log in (connectivity?) I cannot work (mine ice) therefore I make 0 income for that amount of time. I would have to work a specific amount of time to equate to that salaried employee.
Granted there ARE other elements involved, but for the sake of income there is not. We are talking value of # of hours to make the same amoutn of money, not HOW to get them.
In both instances, no pos/miner = no isk. But that isn't in question.
We don't NEED 250 miners. We don't NEED 1 pos or 1 moon. We don't need constant vigil to do so. Again, outside influences CAN determine the outcome, but are not relevant to what the activity brings, or how it brings it.
It might take more miners if you are in a popular belt routinely patrolled by New Order, you might have that POS near a borderland or hotspot.
But those are not constants. So they, as you put it, don't matter. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 20:17:00 -
[388] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:It matters greatly. Nope. Members spending time to maintain a constant income for the alliance = members spending time to maintain a constant income for the alliance.
As long as the time and the income remains the same, what they do during that time and how the income is earned is just a matter of preference GÇö the end result is the same.
Quote:I am not required to give a tithe of X amount of ice I mine. Sure. But if you don't, your alliance won't be able to provide you with the services that the pooled resources will provide. Just like how, if the moon miners don't tithe X amount of time (which is the same amount you're tithing), their alliance won't be able to provide them with the services that the pooled resources will provide.
If that's your level of (non-)involvement, then it comes as no surprise that you can't compete with those who do put in that effort. The inability to compete has absolutely squat to do with the income source, though. It wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference if you had a moon because you'd still be missing the thing that allows you to get something out of it.
However, if you are willing to put in the work, ice mining is a competitive (and comparable) activity for producing tech-moon levels of income.
Quote:Again, you are proving right now that 7m =/= 7m as income. Nope. I'm still saying that 7M = 7M. I'm also saying that 1 man-hour = 1 man-hour. Finally, 7M ISK per man-hour = 7M ISK per man-hour. After all, how can it be otherwise.
I think the problem you're having is that you equate GÇ£passiveGÇ¥ with GÇ£requires no effort to earn or maintainGÇ¥. This is a myth. Moon mining is passive in the sense that it doesn't need (much) constant poking to keep running, but that doesn't mean it won't require a significant expenditure of time and effort to do so.
Quote:Because passive and active matter greatly. It becomes 1+1>1 all over again in a full circle. It would if the passive income required fewer man-hours than the active one for the same income. Since it doesn't, we have 1=1 and 1+1 = 1+1. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 20:55:00 -
[389] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:It matters greatly. Nope. Members spending time to maintain a constant income for the alliance = members spending time to maintain a constant income for the alliance. As long as the time and the income remains the same, what they do during that time and how the income is earned is just a matter of preference GÇö the end result is the same. Quote:I am not required to give a tithe of X amount of ice I mine. Sure. But if you don't, your alliance won't be able to provide you with the services that the pooled resources will provide. Just like how, if the moon miners don't tithe X amount of time (which is the same amount you're tithing), their alliance won't be able to provide them with the services that the pooled resources will provide. If that's your level of (non-)involvement, then it comes as no surprise that you can't compete with those who do put in that effort. The inability to compete has absolutely squat to do with the income source, though. It wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference if you had a moon because you'd still be missing the thing that allows you to get something out of it. However, if you are willing to put in the work, ice mining is a competitive (and comparable) activity for producing tech-moon levels of income. Quote:Again, you are proving right now that 7m =/= 7m as income. Nope. I'm still saying that 7M = 7M. I'm also saying that 1 man-hour = 1 man-hour. Finally, 7M ISK per man-hour = 7M ISK per man-hour. After all, how can it be otherwise. I think the problem you're having is that you equate GÇ£passiveGÇ¥ with GÇ£requires no effort to earn or maintainGÇ¥. This is a myth. Moon mining is passive in the sense that it doesn't need (much) constant poking to keep running, but that doesn't mean it won't require a significant expenditure of time and effort to do so. Quote:Because passive and active matter greatly. It becomes 1+1>1 all over again in a full circle. It would if the passive income required fewer man-hours than the active one for the same income. Since it doesn't, we have 1=1 and 1+1 = 1+1.
Aha, you are looking at it personally. It doesn't matter what MY level of involvement is, we aren't talking about specifics.
I don't need to be committed to understand or have a basic level of comprehension.
Please don't make it personal, I am not required to replace my corpie's ships, since I am not FC, nor is it my idea when we go on a roam, however I freely hand out isk (I have enough RL money to purchase plex when I see the need so do not hold value to isk anyways) to help those corpies out if they are short on isk or feel the risk to their wallet is greater than the fun they might be missing out on.
I understand what passive means, and I am not confusing what it means. But I do know that while something is passive, and even works during downtime, it does in fact allow me the freedom to explore active sources of income as well.
In short, if I'm in charge of a moon mining pos, I can still mine ice and make more money than the person who is only mining ice. Period.
Since I can do both, theoretically, the value of 1 is not the same for both sides. So it isnt 1+1=1+1 because only 1 side has the passive income. Again, it's 1+1>1. Value of 1 being "income stream", substitute icemining for moonmining as you see fit. Or maybe it needs to be X+Y>X. But since you can mine ice and moon mine at the same time with that 1 account, it will always amass more income than just ice mining. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:07:00 -
[390] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Aha, you are looking at it personally. No. I'm still looking at it at an alliance level, and at how many man-hours are required to maintain a given income level.
Quote:I understand what passive means, and I am not confusing what it means. But I do know that while something is passive, and even works during downtime, it does in fact allow me the freedom to explore active sources of income as well. GǪand there's no difference in that regard between the moon mining and the ice mining.
You're still operating under the belief that, just because moon mining is labelled GÇ£passiveGÇ¥, spending time to keep it up and running it will somehow leave you with more free time to pursue other activities than spending the same amount of time doing something else that earns you the same level of income.
Quote:In short, if I'm in charge of a moon mining pos, I can still mine ice and make more money than the person who is only mining ice. Period. GǪbut to own that POS, you have to spend time on it GÇö time you can't use to make more money than the ice-mining guy. Meanwhile, he spends that time to make the same money you do.
End result:
Alliance A requires N members to donate X amount of their time in order to earn Y ISK per month. Alliance B requires N members to donate X amount of their time in order to earn Y ISK per month. Members of alliance A can spend the rest of their time to earn more ISK for themselves or the alliance. Members of alliance B can spend the rest of their time to earn more ISK for themselves or the alliance.
You are essentially claiming that the difference between these two cases is so huge that you can't compare them and that doing one is not competitive compared to the other. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3059
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:07:00 -
[391] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:But it's not competitive and it's not comparable. It's not competitive since the owner of that moon pos can go make more isk while that pos is extracting, making him isk. Those 250 ice miners mine for 2 hours. They're not mining for 720hours and they certainly can't do anything else while they're mining.
I never said having an alliance to support moon mining isn't difficult. But to treat moon mining as a singular income for the alliance, as the sole enabler of all there is out there and try to directly compare it to a simple activity such as ice mining stating that the ice miner can make more than moon mining is a meaningless comparison. What was done was to completely ignore opportunity cost and say "Hey, these two activities are equal"....they are not.
The reason I "keep confusing competitive with comparable" is because moon mining and ice mining are neither.
The most direct comparison of moon mining is to PI. The reason noone is doing is it wouldn't sound as good as "A miner can make more than a moon".
Those people defending the POS can't do anything else during the defense fleet.
2 hours a month with virtually no risk and low capital investment is competitive with 1 hour a month with a high risk of loss and an enormous capital investment.
Nobody is saying they're equal. Just that you can use Ice mining income to compete with the income from Tech moons. Which means that it is not true that "nobody can compete with Tech moon income." This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:19:00 -
[392] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Aha, you are looking at it personally. No. I'm still looking at it at an alliance level, and at how many man-hours are required to maintain a given income level. Quote:I understand what passive means, and I am not confusing what it means. But I do know that while something is passive, and even works during downtime, it does in fact allow me the freedom to explore active sources of income as well. GǪand there's no difference in that regard between the moon mining and the ice mining. You're still operating under the belief that, just because moon mining is labelled GÇ£passiveGÇ¥, spending time to keep it up and running it will somehow leave you with more free time to pursue other activities than spending the same amount of time doing something else that earns you the same level of income. Quote:In short, if I'm in charge of a moon mining pos, I can still mine ice and make more money than the person who is only mining ice. Period. GǪbut to own that POS, you have to spend time on it GÇö time you can't use to make more money than the ice-mining guy. Meanwhile, he spends that time to make the same money you do. End result: Alliance A requires N members to donate X amount of their time in order to earn Y ISK per month. Alliance B requires N members to donate X amount of their time in order to earn Y ISK per month. Members of alliance A can spend the rest of their time to earn more ISK for themselves or the alliance. Members of alliance B can spend the rest of their time to earn more ISK for themselves or the alliance. You are essentially claiming that the difference between these two cases is so huge that you can't compare them and that doing one is not competitive compared to the other.
But that's simply not true. You have to actively be logged in, as an ice miner, all the time you are making that isk. You simply cannot gain ice while offline. In order to make the same amount of isk as an ice miner, you need to be logged in for over 500 hours a month, as 1 person. You said that is only on an alliance level... so ok. Per alliance member (we will use your 250 people at 2 hrs per month) you are logged in, mining ice. You might have a defensive op for that pos at what, once a week? once a month? at around 2 hrs per op, right? or would it take 4?
So.... to use 4 hours per op, 4 ops a month, 250 members are dedicated to protecting that pos and are not allowed to move from there to do anything else (I'll ignore secondary accounts and multiboxing since that's immaterial), and you are saying that in order to match that with 250 ice miners, they all need to mine ice for only 2 hours a month each right?
What if they also donated their "not protecting the pos" time to mine ice? That would be exponentially more right?
So... obviously, not everyone mines ice, obviously not everyone wants to mine ice. But, they can when they are not on defensive duty right? Something tells me the picture you are trying to paint isn't that easy.
Now I get that the argument could stand that they could be mining alot more often and make tons more money, but then that would be a redundancy since alliance level activities are trying their hardest to get sov working, and/or own that sov, and want the tech moons, even to a level that there is a cartel specifically for that reason.
A cartel.
I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness".
But we have a cartel to govern the prices of tech, for the production of specific ships.
I don't think you are treating moongoo with the respect that it deserves given the level of metagame activity based on it. Or you are giving ice mining way too much credit.
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
2518
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:21:00 -
[393] - Quote
Has this devolved into bored nullsec gankers complaining about miners in high sec yet?
Just thought I'd pop in and check. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13383
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:35:00 -
[394] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:[But that's simply not true. You have to actively be logged in, as an ice miner, all the time you are making that isk. GǪand you have to actively be logged in, as the moon miner, or you won't make that ISK either. Sure, the POS will be collecting goo all some of that time, but you won't be make a cent from it.
Quote:So.... to use 4 hours per op, 4 ops a month, 250 members are dedicated to protecting that pos and are not allowed to move from there to do anything else (I'll ignore secondary accounts and multiboxing since that's immaterial), and you are saying that in order to match that with 250 ice miners, they all need to mine ice for only 2 hours a month each right? Actually, at that point, the ice miners are already waaay ahead in the income department.
The moon miners have already spent 4,000 man-hours to earn their 5bn; the ice miners have only spent 500 to earn theirsGǪ
Quote:What if they also donated their "not protecting the pos" time to mine ice? That would be exponentially more right? Not exponentially, no. They'd earn as much during their not-protecting-the-POS time as the ice miners would earn during their not-mining-ice time. If either party decides to put in extra effort to earn more for the alliance, the other party can do the same.
Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness". How many do you see that complain how they can't possible compete with tech moons, when history has shown on numerous occasions that you can actually do that just fineGǪ?
Quote:But we have a cartel to govern the prices of tech, for the production of specific ships. Of course. If they can put an upwards pressure on price to make their effort worth more, without instantly losing all their sales to competitors, why on earth wouldn't they? That is just a matter of economic sense and doesn't really say anything about how well other income sources can compete with that kind of income. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Takseen
University of Caille Gallente Federation
393
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:37:00 -
[395] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Has this devolved into bored nullsec gankers complaining about miners in high sec yet?
Just thought I'd pop in and check.
Perhaps TiDi has slowed down the epic Thunderdome battle so much that they can make forum posts inbetween gun cycles? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3059
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:38:00 -
[396] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:But that's simply not true. You have to actively be logged in, as an ice miner, all the time you are making that isk. You simply cannot gain ice while offline. In order to make the same amount of isk as an ice miner, you need to be logged in for over 500 hours a month, as 1 person. You said that is only on an alliance level... so ok. Per alliance member (we will use your 250 people at 2 hrs per month) you are logged in, mining ice. You might have a defensive op for that pos at what, once a week? once a month? at around 2 hrs per op, right? or would it take 4?
So.... to use 4 hours per op, 4 ops a month, 250 members are dedicated to protecting that pos and are not allowed to move from there to do anything else (I'll ignore secondary accounts and multiboxing since that's immaterial), and you are saying that in order to match that with 250 ice miners, they all need to mine ice for only 2 hours a month each right?
Yes. 250 Ice Miners for 2 hrs a month is 500 hrs of Ice Mining, earning the alliance about 5b. And, to use your assumptions: 250 People on 4 defense ops per month, each lasting 4 hours, is 4,000 hrs of defensive operations, earning the alliance about 5b.
500 pilot-hours is less than 4,000 pilot-hours, and the income that each grants the alliance is the same.
Quote:What if they also donated their "not protecting the pos" time to mine ice? That would be exponentially more right?
So could the Ice mining tribe. In fact, using your assumptions, the Ice mining tribe has more time left available after their 2hrs/month compete-with-tech contribution to make money than the Tech moon tribe does after their 16 hours of defend-Tech.
Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness".
What do you think "rent" is?
Quote:But we have a cartel to govern the prices of tech, for the production of specific ships.
I don't think you are treating moongoo with the respect that it deserves given the level of metagame activity based on it. Or you are giving ice mining way too much credit.
Not really. The cartel's ability to set monopolistic prices has been largely (if not entirely) broken by the introduction of PT Alchemy. That's why Tech moons are worth 5b a month (@75k/unit) each and no longer worth 13.5b a month (@200k/unit) each. All that's really left of OTEC is a defensive pact. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:54:00 -
[397] - Quote
Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness". How many do you see that complain how they can't possible compete with tech moons, when history has shown on numerous occasions that you can actually do that just fineGǪ?
Quote:But we have a cartel to govern the prices of tech, for the production of specific ships. Of course. If they can put an upwards pressure on price to make their effort worth more, without instantly losing all their sales to competitors, why on earth wouldn't they? That is just a matter of economic sense and doesn't really say anything about how well other income sources can compete with that kind of income.[/quote]
Atleast 1.
So what's the #1 source of alliance income then? Why would a cartel even bother being a cartel, helping to govern and use economic sense when timewise you could, with the right numbers (which most alliances have) just strip everything on a daily basis, even using escort fleets to encourage safety? You can see quite simply how many threads there are (realistic or not in their accuracy) about the misnomers of tech income. You can also see a huge number of sov/null arguments about blue donuts and all that.
If mining was really as lucrative as you make it out to be, that would be the simplest largest conflict driver into non-sov bashing fights in Eve's history since belts grow and reset and change daily. You wouldn't need to see Thunderdomes. Null would be EXTREMELY active with mining, and pvp.
No. We see all the crying about highsec industry instead, while all those empty systems we pass through travelling on a roam, full of ore and ice, just sitting there.
If you could make that much money, even for 1 week, by mining ore and ice, it would stand to reason you could effectively crash highsecs industry and market profitability in the following week by flooding all those materials and just dominating the game.
Screw highsec's mining. Take NO's Knights' game 1 step further. Screw bumping and ganking freighters. Grab 200 pilots and mine 20 belts dry, use that capital to fit 2 million gank ships and just strip highsec's belts out (in 1 region).
Turn highsec upside down.
Make Burn Jita look like a passing car accident. That would get CCP's attention. Nevermind worrying about passive or active incomes.
But no.... diplomacy and politics and moongoo right? Way more important. Hell, if the people that be decided, they could force someone to do it with threat of ejection. Mittani's post about trimming the fact from Test could be a springboard.
But we know it isn't that easy. We know it's simply "take 500 mackinaws and mine ice" to be the same as moongoo mining and all the hub bub of null =P.
EDIT- I screwed up the quotes and can't be bothered to fix them; getting off work. Sorry. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 21:57:00 -
[398] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness". What do you think "rent" is?
I dunno, the money you pay that you get from anomalies? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
3261
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 22:11:00 -
[399] - Quote
How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other?
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3059
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 22:15:00 -
[400] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness". What do you think "rent" is? I dunno, the money you pay that you get from anomalies?
You're pretty dense, huh?
I never said that Ice mining was the only way to compete with Tech income. There are tons of others that do so with a lot less time invested. Ice mining is just handy because it's infinitely extensible and has an income per hour that's roughly the same as a Tech moon.
Rent is a way to harness a bunch of people (aka Renters) to produce income for the alliance. Tech is a way to harness a bunch of people (aka Offensive/Defensive fleets) to produce income for the alliance.
Nobody in the landlord alliance cares how you make the ISK to pay your rent. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
565
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 22:18:00 -
[401] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other?
too many wumbo |
Tesal
246
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 22:27:00 -
[402] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other?
Its important to rehash everything that's already been said so people live it over and over and over and over. If you repeat stuff enough times it becomes true. That's how the forums work. Right now we are lead to believe that ice mining = tech moons.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3059
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 23:17:00 -
[403] - Quote
Tesal wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other? Its important to rehash everything that's already been said so people live it over and over and over and over. If you repeat stuff enough times it becomes true. That's how the forums work. Right now we are lead to believe that ice mining = tech moons.
Sure. If you don't actually read the posts that you think are leading you to believe that. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1093
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 04:41:00 -
[404] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Tesal wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other? Its important to rehash everything that's already been said so people live it over and over and over and over. If you repeat stuff enough times it becomes true. That's how the forums work. Right now we are lead to believe that ice mining = tech moons. Sure. If you don't actually read the posts that you think are leading you to believe that.
To you and Tippia:
I understand what you're saying about the 250 players having to defend the moon goo pos. I do. But you still can't say it equates to ice mining and being competitive. It's not, not until you want to analyze opportunity costs, the number moon goo pos's in a select alliance, how many times they have to defend those pos's and sov, plus all the additional income they generate doing other things. Only then will you be able to compare the two. I'm done with this discussion. You will not accept it because you don't want to accept it because just below the surface you know it to be true and to be a source of income that far exceeds anything else in the game as a 23/7/30 passive income stream. You know this, I know this, the reader know this. Anyone who reads this thread and the points I've outlined ad nauseam will know this.
HTFU!...for the children! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4411
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 05:24:00 -
[405] - Quote
"They're not the same!" "Well no, but you can demonstrate how moon mining requires more effort and collaboration on the part of more players in order to achieve the same net income as a much smaller collaboration with much less effort when ice mining." "BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME YOU CAN'T COMPARE THE TWO" Malcanis for CSM 8 Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
767
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 05:39:00 -
[406] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:How many pages has it been two people arguing with each other? not enough yet obviously Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
85
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 05:52:00 -
[407] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Acac Sunflyier wrote:It's hard when you're not big. Some of the null people who are talking about how hard things are aren't goonswarm. the small businesses of eve do fail within a year. You basically have to be sponsored by a large, well funded alliance to survive in nullsec these days. Or rent from one of them. A TMC guy pointed this out not long ago but all the highsec people shot him down because "Abloobloobloo Tech moons". Even those of us whose alliances are space rich (for the most part) realise the bad state that nullsec is in & would like to see it fixed. CCP made a crappy sov system then made it worse by not listening to the playerbase, but we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's still available. It was the same deal with highsec incursion payouts. It was far too profitable, but we still took advantage of it. DarthNefarius likes to overlook that.
Everything comes down to choise, ibet most would reason like this... on the other hand, if you really cared and wanted a change forced, the big owners off null could simply say, no one gets any goo, we control it, nothing gets out and nothing will be built... thats also a choise that dont abuse the game and will ripple through all layers of EVE and point to things on a bigger scale... taking advantage of it, only lets something that should been fixed to stay alive longer then it should... choises, responsibility |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
767
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 07:55:00 -
[408] - Quote
Well I gues we'll be seeing on June 4th if Odyssey addresses the near monopoly TECH bottleneck or they cave in to the big blue doughnut & address it SoonGäó Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3977
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 08:17:00 -
[409] - Quote
Takseen wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Has this devolved into bored nullsec gankers complaining about miners in high sec yet?
Just thought I'd pop in and check. Perhaps TiDi has slowed down the epic Thunderdome battle so much that they can make forum posts inbetween gun cycles?
What makes you believe they ever log in and activate a gun?
Forum PvP, THAT's the 250 man hours a month activity they love so much. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3060
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 10:20:00 -
[410] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:To you and Tippia:
I understand what you're saying about the 250 players having to defend the moon goo pos. I do. But you still can't say it equates to ice mining and being competitive. It's not, not until you want to analyze opportunity costs, the number moon goo pos's in a select alliance, how many times they have to defend those pos's and sov, plus all the additional income they generate doing other things. Only then will you be able to compare the two. I'm done with this discussion. You will not accept it because you don't want to accept it because just below the surface you know it to be true and to be a source of income that far exceeds anything else in the game as a 23/7/30 passive income stream. You know this, I know this, the reader know this. Anyone who reads this thread and the points I've outlined ad nauseam will know this.
Is the income from holding Stocks competitive with the Income from holding Bonds?
They're not comparable, clearly, because holding stocks incurs risks and obligations far different from the risks and obligations incurred by holding bonds; for instance, stocks represent holding an equity stake in the company while bonds just represent a lien on the company's assets. Another example: Stocks come with risks
I would say that the income from those sources is still Competitive.
Similarly, the income from other sources (example used was Ice mining, but you can sub in any income that can make use of large numbers of characters) can be competitive with income from Tech moons, even if it's not easily comparable.
There are about 500 Tech Moons in the game. Assuming Goonswarm holds all of them (they don't), that's an income of 2.5T ISK/month divided by their membership of 9884 for 253 mil per month per member.
To compete with [this vast overestimation of] Goonswarm's income, all you need to do is to get a similar number of people to contribute 253m/month. Whether they earn that Mining, Mission running, whatever, doesn't matter. That's all you need to have your alliance income be competitive with the sum of all the Tech income in the game. Mining, that's an hour per night, Mission running would be 5 hours per month, and neither would significantly affect your alliance's ability to be combat ready (as both activities can easily be interrupted without consequence). This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
5732
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 10:57:00 -
[411] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Well I gues we'll be seeing on June 4th if Odyssey addresses the near monopoly TECH bottleneck or they cave in to the big blue doughnut & address it SoonGäó
We have yet to find someone in favor of keeping tech as it is right now. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1520
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 12:30:00 -
[412] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:"They're not the same!" "Well no, but you can demonstrate how moon mining requires more effort and collaboration on the part of more players in order to achieve the same net income as a much smaller collaboration with much less effort when ice mining." "BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME YOU CAN'T COMPARE THE TWO"
It's a typical high sec, null sec discussion, with the high sec side saying some stuff unsupported by any kind of reason and the null sec side presenting actual verifiable/testable facts...and getting ignored.....
In other words, Tuesday in General Discussion.
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3060
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 12:38:00 -
[413] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Well I gues we'll be seeing on June 4th if Odyssey addresses the near monopoly TECH bottleneck or they cave in to the big blue doughnut & address it SoonGäó
Yes, doing the opposite of what the "big blue doughnut" has been asking CCP to do since before the R64 Nerf/Tech Buff went live on TQ is "caving into them."
NefariousLogicGäó This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
251
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 14:29:00 -
[414] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Varius Xeral wrote: "ISK wins wars" ISK for ship replacement programs wins wars FIXED
Umm... Hire a merc crew - no ship replacement needed for them, just more isk. It's been done and more than 1 war in null has changed direction due to paid-help supporting less eager/willing native support. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 16:52:00 -
[415] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:RubyPorto wrote:Quote:I don't see many alliances complaining about being forced to mine, which would have been the case I think had you been right in level of "competitiveness". What do you think "rent" is? I dunno, the money you pay that you get from anomalies? You're pretty dense, huh? I never said that Ice mining was the only way to compete with Tech income. There are tons of others that do so with a lot less time invested. Ice mining is just handy because it's infinitely extensible and has an income per hour that's roughly the same as a Tech moon. Rent is a way to harness a bunch of people (aka Renters) to produce income for the alliance. Tech is a way to harness a bunch of people (aka Offensive/Defensive fleets) to produce income for the alliance. Nobody in the landlord alliance cares how you make the ISK to pay your rent.
Considering you were the one who went straight to "cannot compete with 500 mackinaws" in a quick kneejerk response.. it isn't ME who was being dense.
I've been in a talk with Tippia for like 7 pages sparring over different points without having to resort to name calling.
Guess it's you with the issues, not me. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 17:14:00 -
[416] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:"They're not the same!" "Well no, but you can demonstrate how moon mining requires more effort and collaboration on the part of more players in order to achieve the same net income as a much smaller collaboration with much less effort when ice mining." "BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME YOU CAN'T COMPARE THE TWO" It's a typical high sec, null sec discussion, with the high sec side saying some stuff unsupported by any kind of reason and the null sec side presenting actual verifiable/testable facts...and getting ignored..... In other words, Tuesday in General Discussion.
How on earth does passive versus active relate to null vs high? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
769
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 17:21:00 -
[417] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: It's a typical high sec, null sec discussion, with the null sec side saying some stuff unsupported by any kind of reason and the hi sec side presenting actual verifiable/testable facts...and getting ignored.....
In other words, Tuesday in General Discussion.
FIXED Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 18:01:00 -
[418] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut. GǪtoo bad that the blue doughnut doesn't actually exist. If it did, those things might have actually been real problems...
Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you.
The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
|
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188
State War Academy Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 18:02:00 -
[419] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: It's a typical high sec, null sec discussion, with the null sec side saying some stuff unsupported by any kind of reason and the hi sec side presenting actual verifiable/testable facts...and getting ignored.....
In other words, Tuesday in General Discussion.
FIXED
LOL very true. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3060
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 23:18:00 -
[420] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Considering you were the one who went straight to "cannot compete with 500 mackinaws" in a quick kneejerk response.. it isn't ME who was being dense.
I've been in a talk with Tippia for like 7 pages sparring over different points without having to resort to name calling.
Guess it's you with the issues, not me.
Where in the world did I say anything to the effect that anyone "cannot compete with 500 mackinaws"? I said that 500 mackinaws can produce income that is competitive with all the tech moons in the game, combined. I never said that that was the only way to produce an income that is competitive with tech moon income, just one way.
You then presented the assumption that it takes 4,000 man hours to defend a Tech moon, and claimed that the remainder of the defender's play time lets them somehow make more money doing the same activities available to non-moon holders than the non-moon holders can with their 3500 man-hour head start.
And then you bizzarely tried to claim that renting space does not represent a way to produce income for the alliance without Tech because not all of the rental income comes from Ice mining. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3060
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 23:21:00 -
[421] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Tippia wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut. GǪtoo bad that the blue doughnut doesn't actually exist. If it did, those things might have actually been real problems... Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you. The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
Once again, if you don't like it, why aren't you forming a response to disrupt the event or distract the participants?
There are literally no game mechanical obstacles in your way. The only possible obstacles are ineptness, laziness, or poverty (which comes back to ineptness). What's your excuse? This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
baltec1
Bat Country
5736
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 23:29:00 -
[422] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:
Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you.
The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
Its clear you dont live in null. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3982
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 23:54:00 -
[423] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Is the income from holding Stocks competitive with the Income from holding Bonds?
They're not comparable, clearly, because holding stocks incurs risks and obligations far different from the risks and obligations incurred by holding bonds; for instance, stocks represent holding an equity stake in the company while bonds just represent a lien on the company's assets. Another example: Stocks come with risks
I would TOTALLY love you explained these utterly basic concepts to the average EU Bruxelles boureucrat, who keep inventing new and destructive ways to destroy the risk:reward equation off RL trading.
In my country due to Tobin Tax and other similar atrocities a bond yields 4% a year and pure security trading (riskier than stocks) is slowly dropping down to 6%. Result: most stopped doing anything and closed shop or (like in my case) have to leave their country, their home and their relatives and migrate in civilized countries where capital at risk is still valued.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3060
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:20:00 -
[424] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
I would TOTALLY love you explained these utterly basic concepts to the average EU Bruxelles boureucrat, who keep inventing new and destructive ways to destroy the risk:reward equation off RL trading.
In my country due to Tobin Tax and other similar atrocities a bond yields 4% a year and pure security trading (riskier than stocks) is slowly dropping down to 6%. Result: most stopped doing anything and closed shop or (like in my case) have to leave their country, their home and their relatives and migrate in civilized countries where capital at risk is still valued.
The US has a fairly friendly capital gains tax setup. It's actually somewhat friendlier to stocks than to bonds. (You pay tax on the interest from the bonds every year, even on zero coupon bonds, while you only pay taxes [at a lower than normal rate to boot*] on the net profit over the life of your holding of a piece of stock.)
Of course, some (mostly municipal) bonds are partly or entirely tax free.
*Assuming you've held for over a year. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2770
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:04:00 -
[425] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Tippia wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut. GǪtoo bad that the blue doughnut doesn't actually exist. If it did, those things might have actually been real problems... Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you. The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
Yes we live in null. No we don't play with our eyes shut. Yes the sea of blue is imaginary. The response to the potential war was a result of politics. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 10:38:00 -
[426] - Quote
Consider the effect the following will have on the game before advertising your noobness:
Jump drives work only in nulsec. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Anunzi
High House Of Shadows Tribal Band
61
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 10:57:00 -
[427] - Quote
Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:Tippia wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:So... what's the problem again? Oh yeah, it keeps the Blue Doughnut interested enough to keep playing without starting a war big enough to inflict any actual harm to the Blue Doughnut. In other words, it avoids the two outcomes that can bring down the Blue Doughnut, namely bittervets unsubscribing from boredom and the possibility of the Blue Doughnut becoming a Red Doughnut. GǪtoo bad that the blue doughnut doesn't actually exist. If it did, those things might have actually been real problems... Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you. The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
I donGÇÖt what part of null you live in sparky, I'm going to guess somewhere like Jita, but down in actual null we get fights very often.
Maybe you should actually try coming to null sec before spouting such drivel?
Malcanis for CSM8, Its about damn time.
A vote for Malcanis is a vote for bacon! |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 13:30:00 -
[428] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Considering you were the one who went straight to "cannot compete with 500 mackinaws" in a quick kneejerk response.. it isn't ME who was being dense.
I've been in a talk with Tippia for like 7 pages sparring over different points without having to resort to name calling.
Guess it's you with the issues, not me. Where in the world did I say anything to the effect that anyone "cannot compete with 500 mackinaws"? I said that 500 mackinaws can produce income that is competitive with all the tech moons in the game, combined. I never said that that was the only way to produce an income that is competitive with tech moon income, just one way. You then presented the assumption that it takes 4,000 man hours to defend a Tech moon, and claimed that the remainder of the defender's play time lets them somehow make more money doing the same activities available to non-moon holders than the non-moon holders can with their 3500 man-hour head start. And then you bizzarely tried to claim that renting space does not represent a way to produce income for the alliance without Tech because not all of the rental income comes from Ice mining.
I would encourage you to reread the thread. I've only regurgitated whatever facts have been spilled over this thread. I did not make up any of my own. I still find it silly you think passive and active incomes are comaprable, or even competitive, since by nature, they are different.
You can say "you you you you" all you want until you are blue in the face, but it's still the redundancies you post that are skewed. I still maintain passive is passive, and active is active, therefore in different realms and not to be compared.
I am not the one who said anything about it taking anything for any group to do anything at all. I also did not say anything about rent, or from ice, save for the fact that all those streams of income are varied and different.
Please, for the love of god, read the thread before you chime in with wild accusations. Or atleast cite your work.
What I did mention, is that you don't need to defend a moon 23/7. That was in retaliation to say it took more logisticly, to gain benefit from moon mining. I spoke of the fact that the person netting the income doesn't need to defend it, because it is done on an alliance level, therefore NOT COMPARABLE to ice mining, which is done on the single player level.
Read read read read man, just read ffs. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1526
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 13:41:00 -
[429] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: It's a typical high sec, null sec discussion, with the null sec/REAL EVe PLAYER side saying some stuff unsupported by any kind of stupidity and the hi sec side presenting actual non-existant and imaginary facts...and clinging to that BS.....
In other words, DarthNefariusday in General Discussion.
FIXATED ON NULL
Repaired!
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13395
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 13:53:00 -
[430] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:I understand what you're saying about the 250 players having to defend the moon goo pos. I do. But you still can't say it equates to ice mining and being competitive. How is spending 500 man-hours to earn 5bn ISK not the comparable to or competitive with spending 500 man-hours to earn 5bn ISK?
Quote:It's not, not until you want to analyze opportunity costs, the number moon goo pos's in a select alliance, how many times they have to defend those pos's and sov, plus all the additional income they generate doing other things. True. All in all, keeping that POS up and running to ensure the income probably costs far more (but offers some fun and banter) than doing in the simple (but boring) way and just mine for the income. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 14:04:00 -
[431] - Quote
1 method you HAVE to spend the man hours to achieve, the other you only MAYBE have to spend man hours to ensure you achieve it. That's the difference. 1 you, by definition, HAVE to have an alliance to do (which I believe is false, you only have to have an alliance to keep it solvent but that's moot), the other, can be accomplished by X# of pilots on a singular level and therefore is a variable based on that fluctuation for it's income.
Passive =/= Active. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3061
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 18:46:00 -
[432] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:I would encourage you to reread the thread. I've only regurgitated whatever facts have been spilled over this thread. I did not make up any of my own. I still find it silly you think passive and active incomes are comaprable, or even competitive, since by nature, they are different.
Do you think that income from owning bonds and owning stocks are competitive? They're clearly not comparable due to the vastly different risk and benefit structure, but as an investor, I certainly look at them as being competitive.
You can compete with an income source without having a similarly structured income source.
Quote:You can say "you you you you" all you want until you are blue in the face, but it's still the redundancies you post that are skewed. I still maintain passive is passive, and active is active, therefore in different realms and not to be compared.
I am not the one who said anything about it taking anything for any group to do anything at all. I also did not say anything about rent, or from ice, save for the fact that all those streams of income are varied and different.
You claimed that no alliance requires their members to mine. I simply pointed out that Rent is exactly that, since the actual activity being used to replace and compete with tech moon income is irrelevant.
Quote:Please, for the love of god, read the thread before you chime in with wild accusations. Or atleast cite your work.
What I did mention, is that you don't need to defend a moon 23/7. That was in retaliation to say it took more logisticly, to gain benefit from moon mining. I spoke of the fact that the person netting the income doesn't need to defend it, because it is done on an alliance level, therefore NOT COMPARABLE to ice mining, which is done on the single player level.
And you don't need to Ice mine 24/7 with comparable numbers to replace the income from a Tech moon.
In fact, using the assumptions you presented, you need to spend less time and effort mining Ice to make 5b ISK than you need to spend defending a Tech moon.
Murk Paradox wrote:1 method you HAVE to spend the man hours to achieve, the other you only MAYBE have to spend man hours to ensure you achieve it. That's the difference. 1 you, by definition, HAVE to have an alliance to do (which I believe is false, you only have to have an alliance to keep it solvent but that's moot), the other, can be accomplished by X# of pilots on a singular level and therefore is a variable based on that fluctuation for it's income.
Passive =/= Active.
Averages. They're what's for dinner.
You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production).
Also, the fact that Ice mining can be done individually, on their own time, is a huge advantage for Ice mining. If you have variation on participation for your Tech moon defense fleets, you may well lose the moon (loosing all the income, not just part of it). Then you need at least 2 successful fleets in a row to get it back.
The original claim was that "nobody can compete with Tech moon income." The fact that a similar sized group to goonswarm could produce an income greater than the entire combined income of all Tech moons by having its members donate only 250m/month to the war effort (be that through 25hrs/month of mining, 5hrs/month missioning, 2hrs/month running incursions), means that that claim is entirely discredited.
Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Anabella Rella
Gradient Electus Matari
566
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 20:46:00 -
[433] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:
...Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced.
Right, like that's even possible. You guys seriously need to stop pushing the lie that your mega-alliances can ever be dethroned. You have had years of all the advantages of income, organization, super capital blobs, etc to ever be taken down via in-game mechanics. The only way a mega-alliance will go down is via metagaming or internal dissent. To pretend otherwise is either naive in the extreme or intellectually dishonest.
What you want is irrelevant, what you've chosen is at hand. |
baltec1
Bat Country
5743
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 20:49:00 -
[434] - Quote
Anabella Rella wrote:
Right, like that's even possible. You guys seriously need to stop pushing the lie that your mega-alliances can ever be dethroned. You have had years of all the advantages of income, organization, super capital blobs, etc to ever be taken down via in-game mechanics. The only way a mega-alliance will go down is via metagaming or internal dissent. To pretend otherwise is either naive in the extreme or intellectually dishonest.
War is war, how its fought matters not so long as you win. No empire lasts forever, not even ours. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 21:23:00 -
[435] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:I would encourage you to reread the thread. I've only regurgitated whatever facts have been spilled over this thread. I did not make up any of my own. I still find it silly you think passive and active incomes are comaprable, or even competitive, since by nature, they are different. Do you think that income from owning bonds and owning stocks are competitive? They're clearly not comparable due to the vastly different risk and benefit structure, but as an investor, I certainly look at them as being competitive. You can compete with an income source without having a similarly structured income source. Quote:You can say "you you you you" all you want until you are blue in the face, but it's still the redundancies you post that are skewed. I still maintain passive is passive, and active is active, therefore in different realms and not to be compared.
I am not the one who said anything about it taking anything for any group to do anything at all. I also did not say anything about rent, or from ice, save for the fact that all those streams of income are varied and different. You claimed that no alliance requires their members to mine. I simply pointed out that Rent is exactly that, since the actual activity being used to replace and compete with tech moon income is irrelevant. Quote:Please, for the love of god, read the thread before you chime in with wild accusations. Or atleast cite your work.
What I did mention, is that you don't need to defend a moon 23/7. That was in retaliation to say it took more logisticly, to gain benefit from moon mining. I spoke of the fact that the person netting the income doesn't need to defend it, because it is done on an alliance level, therefore NOT COMPARABLE to ice mining, which is done on the single player level. And you don't need to Ice mine 24/7 with comparable numbers to replace the income from a Tech moon. In fact, using the assumptions you presented, you need to spend less time and effort mining Ice to make 5b ISK than you need to spend defending a Tech moon. Murk Paradox wrote:1 method you HAVE to spend the man hours to achieve, the other you only MAYBE have to spend man hours to ensure you achieve it. That's the difference. 1 you, by definition, HAVE to have an alliance to do (which I believe is false, you only have to have an alliance to keep it solvent but that's moot), the other, can be accomplished by X# of pilots on a singular level and therefore is a variable based on that fluctuation for it's income.
Passive =/= Active. Averages. They're what's for dinner. You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production). Also, the fact that Ice mining can be done individually, on their own time, is a huge advantage for Ice mining. If you have variation on participation for your Tech moon defense fleets, you may well lose the moon (loosing all the income, not just part of it). Then you need at least 2 successful fleets in a row to get it back. The original claim was that "nobody can compete with Tech moon income." The fact that a similar sized group to goonswarm could produce an income greater than the entire combined income of all Tech moons by having its members donate only 250m/month to the war effort (be that through 25hrs/month of mining, 5hrs/month missioning, 2hrs/month running incursions), means that that claim is entirely discredited. Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced.
Stocks and bonds huh? Ok, which is moon mining and which is ice mining?
And seriously, moon mining and ice mining can NOT be competitive if you can do both at same time. This is why it shows as a failure to compare. You have to choose 1 or the other as a comparison. Those activities do not fit the criteria.
Period. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 21:25:00 -
[436] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Anabella Rella wrote:
Right, like that's even possible. You guys seriously need to stop pushing the lie that your mega-alliances can ever be dethroned. You have had years of all the advantages of income, organization, super capital blobs, etc to ever be taken down via in-game mechanics. The only way a mega-alliance will go down is via metagaming or internal dissent. To pretend otherwise is either naive in the extreme or intellectually dishonest.
War is war, how its fought matters not so long as you win. No empire lasts forever, not even ours.
Unfortunately, that point has been argued by "your" side by quite a few people in other sov discussions, namely power projection.
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3061
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 22:50:00 -
[437] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Stocks and bonds huh? Ok, which is moon mining and which is ice mining?
And seriously, moon mining and ice mining can NOT be competitive if you can do both at same time. This is why it shows as a failure to compare. You have to choose 1 or the other as a comparison. Those activities do not fit the criteria.
Period.
You can't ice mine and defend a moon at the same time.
Also, we're not comparing them. Just showing that the income derived from each can be competitive. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3061
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 22:54:00 -
[438] - Quote
Anabella Rella wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
...Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced.
Right, like that's even possible. You guys seriously need to stop pushing the lie that your mega-alliances can ever be dethroned. You have had years of all the advantages of income, organization, super capital blobs, etc to ever be taken down via in-game mechanics. The only way a mega-alliance will go down is via metagaming or internal dissent. To pretend otherwise is either naive in the extreme or intellectually dishonest.
Absolutely. NoBOBy could ever be dethroned by a less experienced group due to their years of income, nobody with Tech could be taken out by someone without Tech due to their high levels of orgaNCization, and no longstanding mega-alliance can be destroyed without disintegrating due to purely internal issues because of their Super C-A-pital Blobs.
To pretend otherwise would indicate a grasp of history.
And the Titanic is still unsinkable. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 04:37:00 -
[439] - Quote
Anabella Rella wrote:RubyPorto wrote:
...Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced.
Right, like that's even possible. You guys seriously need to stop pushing the lie that your mega-alliances can ever be dethroned. You have had years of all the advantages of income, organization, super capital blobs, etc to ever be taken down via in-game mechanics. The only way a mega-alliance will go down is via metagaming or internal dissent. To pretend otherwise is either naive in the extreme or intellectually dishonest.
Which one does "whine on the forums" fall under? It seems the forum warriors have been trying that one for a while now but no level of "nerf goons" has worked so far. Its all just "you're organized and we're not so we can't beat you in a game about organizing" and lots of navel gazing. Certainly somebody out there is capable of more than that, just not from inside Jita 4-4. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3067
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 04:50:00 -
[440] - Quote
David Cedarbridge wrote:Which one does "whine on the forums" fall under? It seems the forum warriors have been trying that one for a while now but no level of "nerf goons" has worked so far. Its all just "you're organized and we're not so we can't beat you in a game about organizing" and lots of navel gazing. Certainly somebody out there is capable of more than that, just not from inside Jita 4-4.
Dude, Check out this sweet lint I found. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
782
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 06:04:00 -
[441] - Quote
So when does the first ThunderdomeGäó match start? Or are you all waiting for TEST to Failscade then hold them? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
951
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 06:13:00 -
[442] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:David Cedarbridge wrote:Which one does "whine on the forums" fall under? It seems the forum warriors have been trying that one for a while now but no level of "nerf goons" has worked so far. Its all just "you're organized and we're not so we can't beat you in a game about organizing" and lots of navel gazing. Certainly somebody out there is capable of more than that, just not from inside Jita 4-4. Dude, Check out this sweet lint I found. why is it always blue? |
dark heartt
I Own Four Sheep Silent Requiem
73
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:59:00 -
[443] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:So when does the first ThunderdomeGäó match start? Or are you all waiting for TEST to Failscade then hold them?
Test is constantly fail cascading. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
3984
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:33:00 -
[444] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production).
This is not really correct. Today EvE ISK per hour reports 4.9M x hour for the best ice. 500 man hours will create 2.450B gross profit, which is less than half of what you say.
RubyPorto wrote:
You can't ice mine and defend a moon at the same time.
Also, we're not comparing them. Just showing that the income derived from each can be competitive.
This is also incorrect. Beginning with the fact that industry characters tend to train well different skill "trees" (and you are not going to see appreciated a PvP character with lots of industry SP), these are usually relegated to be alts. AFK alts, and they can easily be multi-boxed while your main is sitting at a POS to defend, bored as fck.
Been there, done that. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3075
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 14:16:00 -
[445] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote: You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production).
This is not really correct. Today EvE ISK per hour reports 4.9M x hour for the best ice. 500 man hours will create 2.450B gross profit, which is less than half of what you say.
Ok, I'll rephrase: you will never have to spend more than [fixed amount of man hours based only on market price, and not significantly affected by anything the enemy does] to mine Ice (or Mission for ISK+LP, or whatever) worth 5b ISK. I'm using the (many times mentioned) assumption of 10m ISK/hr, because the specific activity used to replace Tech moon income is largely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not it is true that "nobody can compete with Tech income".
Quote:This is also incorrect. Beginning with the fact that industry characters tend to train well different skill "trees" (and you are not going to see appreciated a PvP character with lots of industry SP), these are usually relegated to be alts. AFK alts, and they can easily be multi-boxed while your main is sitting at a POS to defend, bored as fck. Been there, done that.
Then the Ice mining group can do that with the one additional alt that they don't need to have defending a POS. One of the assumptions is similar resources with regards to personnel resources (represented by man-hours), because there's no reasonable reason to expect to compete with an established group without at least a rough parity in numbers. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 09:02:00 -
[446] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote: Then the Ice mining group can do that with the one additional alt that they don't need to have defending a POS. One of the assumptions is similar resources with regards to personnel resources (represented by man-hours), because there's no reasonable reason to expect to compete with an established group without at least a rough parity in numbers.
Reasonable reasons and the reasonable reasoners who reason them. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 10:50:00 -
[447] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Regardless of my own feelings, if I place myself in their shoes for a minute I can see that I would be enjoying the comfort & security of living in a place that is as profitable as sov claimed blue nullsec combined with even greater effective safety than even half of hisec could offer. Moon goo faucets for infinite PLEX and infinite goodies would certainly be a load off my mind, to be sure, and if I had that I certainly would not want it going away. I'd actively fight to protect it. In this instance "fight" actually means CSM block voting for special interest candidates and political manipulations to make sure that nothing ever changes.
Yeah, who wouldn't want to protect it?
So folks moved high sec into null for an acceptable mechanic ingame - making isk.
CCP can't just change that because no one is breaking any rules, they're playing the game as the game was designed to the letter. But folks don't like it because there's some peace in a region that's suppose to be about warfare (let alone fund the PvP war machine).
This was bound to happen when there's a faucet to pay for their 10+ accounts for free, and in the end probably the end of PvP as players want to know it (what is PvP in EvE now? Hiring mercs?); because if it's free playtime vs PvP guess what is going to change? Nullsec wasn't like that years ago, it was territory to be fought over for riches, now it's come in as blue and enjoy the riches, instead.
I'm not going to argue over it, because this was naturally going to happen...economics trumps all. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
291
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 15:13:00 -
[448] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:RubyPorto wrote: You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production).
This is not really correct. Today EvE ISK per hour reports 4.9M x hour for the best ice. 500 man hours will create 2.450B gross profit, which is less than half of what you say. Ok, I'll rephrase: you will never have to spend more than [fixed amount of man hours based only on market price, and not significantly affected by anything the enemy does] to mine Ice (or Mission for ISK+LP, or whatever) worth 5b ISK. I'm using the (many times mentioned) assumption of 10m ISK/hr, because the specific activity used to replace Tech moon income is largely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not it is true that "nobody can compete with Tech income". Quote:This is also incorrect. Beginning with the fact that industry characters tend to train well different skill "trees" (and you are not going to see appreciated a PvP character with lots of industry SP), these are usually relegated to be alts. AFK alts, and they can easily be multi-boxed while your main is sitting at a POS to defend, bored as fck. Been there, done that. Then the Ice mining group can do that with the one additional alt that they don't need to have defending a POS. One of the assumptions is similar resources with regards to personnel resources (represented by man-hours), because there's no reasonable reason to expect to compete with an established group without at least a rough parity in numbers.
Passive and active streams of income have to many variables to be comparable and competitive (you keep saying it isn't comparable, which goes against the thread because the origination of it was based on comparison!), bar the fact that they both have a "rate".
That's folly to even use that to link the any multitude of income streams that can be chosen! Reason being is that one, using a cartel, allows for a fixed rate and also is controlled by a specific # for availability (not every system has a moon, and the systems that do have moons are extremely hostile, or can be) whereas the active income is performed by menial and manual, actions, to acquire that wealth.
Moons do NOT need to be defended 23/7, only sometimes they MIGHT need to be defended, and not by a fixed number.
Ice mining, using your comparison to prove competitiveness, has to be performed by atleast 1 person to acquire such wealth, every cycle, and can be spread across Eve in a way that only grows exponentially by the # of miners.
Whether you use 500 miners or 500 defenders, the moon goo amounts do not change with # of defenders, but the ice miner #s do impact the amount of ice gained.
Ergo, it is not truly competitive, because of variables.
Moon mining, is fixed as a passive income. Just like PI. You get the same amount of resources per cycle regardless of how many people are there defending it.
You used a bad example. Get over it. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3084
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 22:00:00 -
[449] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Passive and active streams of income have to many variables to be comparable and competitive (you keep saying it isn't comparable, which goes against the thread because the origination of it was based on comparison!), bar the fact that they both have a "rate".
Nope. Started with a statement to the effect: "Nobody can compete with Tech moon income."
The income from Stocks is competitive with the income from Bonds despite the fact that Stocks and Bonds are so different as to be incomparable.
The income a group can earn from Ice mining is competitive with the income from Tech moons, because a group of similar numbers can earn similar incomes. The fact that one may require more effort than the other is irrelevant.
The goal is: "Earn X ISK for the Alliance to support SRP/whatever other alliance expenses." Both income sources can fulfill that goal. Therefore, people without Tech can compete with people who have Tech.
In fact, we have proof of exactly that happening. The DRF (who owned no Tech) stomped the Northern Coalition (who owned most of the Tech) out of their space. Proving, empirically, that you can compete with Tech income without Tech. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Degren
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
2366
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 22:27:00 -
[450] - Quote
Is this DarthNefarius's first threadnaught?
10/10 Hello, hello again. |
|
Eezee Gonozal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 00:02:00 -
[451] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:Regardless of my own feelings, if I place myself in their shoes for a minute I can see that I would be enjoying the comfort & security of living in a place that is as profitable as sov claimed blue nullsec combined with even greater effective safety than even half of hisec could offer. Moon goo faucets for infinite PLEX and infinite goodies would certainly be a load off my mind, to be sure, and if I had that I certainly would not want it going away. I'd actively fight to protect it. In this instance "fight" actually means CSM block voting for special interest candidates and political manipulations to make sure that nothing ever changes. Yeah, who wouldn't want to protect it? So folks moved high sec into null for an acceptable mechanic ingame - making isk. CCP can't just change that because no one is breaking any rules, they're playing the game as the game was designed to the letter. But folks don't like it because there's some peace in a region that's suppose to be about warfare (let alone fund the PvP war machine). This was bound to happen when there's a faucet to pay for their 10+ accounts for free, and in the end probably the end of PvP as players want to know it (what is PvP in EvE now? Hiring mercs?); because if it's free playtime vs PvP guess what is going to change? Nullsec wasn't like that years ago, it was territory to be fought over for riches, now it's come in as blue and enjoy the riches, instead. I'm not going to argue over it, because this was naturally going to happen...economics trumps all.
I always love reading posts about how I get 10+ Plexes every month for my accounts. I could tell you how not even directors get all their accounts paid for, but in your alternate reality, where the CSM is actually blocking CCP from doing anything about moons, we all live in giant villas paid for by RMT.
|
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 02:21:00 -
[452] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Caldari Citizen 1897289768188 wrote:
Do you even live in null? If so do you play with your eyes open or are they shut like your mind on anyone that disagrees with you.
The sea of blue in null is not imaginary just like the response to potential war that was going to happen and replaced with war games.
Its clear you dont live in null.
Can attest to that, seeing him (can't miss the name) in 1.0 space. My first impression was -- bot. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Sentamon
802
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 02:35:00 -
[453] - Quote
This thread makes me want to stab my eyes out. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 02:40:00 -
[454] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This thread makes me want to stab my eyes out.
Monks tend to be blind anyway. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
793
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 05:27:00 -
[455] - Quote
Degren wrote:Is this DarthNefarius's first threadnaught?
10/10
No I've had a few others mostly due to Incursions & WH stuff .... not NULL SEC I think I may have hit a chord here though Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
793
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 05:32:00 -
[456] - Quote
Eezee Gonozal wrote: I always love reading posts about how I get 10+ Plexes every month for my accounts. I could tell you how not even directors get all their accounts paid for, but in your alternate reality, where the CSM is actually blocking CCP from doing anything about moons, we all live in giant villas paid for by RMT.
Are you a Goon director? I heard they all live in Gallente Pleasure Dome/Villas in POS's in DELVE The Goon dregs which I suspect you are live in poverty but at least you get free ships thnx to well TECH funded SRP's providing infinite Drakes Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3084
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 06:14:00 -
[457] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Eezee Gonozal wrote: I always love reading posts about how I get 10+ Plexes every month for my accounts. I could tell you how not even directors get all their accounts paid for, but in your alternate reality, where the CSM is actually blocking CCP from doing anything about moons, we all live in giant villas paid for by RMT.
Are you a Goon director? I heard they all live in Gallente Pleasure Dome/Villas in POS's in DELVE The Goon dregs which I suspect you are live in poverty but at least you get free ships thnx to well TECH funded SRP's providing infinite Drakes
5 Drakes per member, per month. Hooray Infinity! This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
793
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 06:21:00 -
[458] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Eezee Gonozal wrote: I always love reading posts about how I get 10+ Plexes every month for my accounts. I could tell you how not even directors get all their accounts paid for, but in your alternate reality, where the CSM is actually blocking CCP from doing anything about moons, we all live in giant villas paid for by RMT.
Are you a Goon director? I heard they all live in Gallente Pleasure Dome/Villas in POS's in DELVE The Goon dregs which I suspect you are live in poverty but at least you get free ships thnx to well TECH funded SRP's providing infinite Drakes 5 Drakes per member, per month. Hooray Infinity!
To infinity & beyond Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7251
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 07:50:00 -
[459] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Are you a Goon director? I heard they all live in Gallente Pleasure Dome/Villas in POS's in DELVE The Goon dregs which I suspect you are live in poverty but at least you get free ships thnx to well TECH funded SRP's providing infinite Drakes
us directors are mostly rich as hell because we scam people like you, pocketing alliance isk isn't really that lucrative in comparison ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7251
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 07:59:00 -
[460] - Quote
imagine that, not needing to hoard a ton of isk and assets simply because anytime you need isk, there are plenty of chumps lined up to hand it to you with glee
well it owns ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
|
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
294
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 18:34:00 -
[461] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Passive and active streams of income have to many variables to be comparable and competitive (you keep saying it isn't comparable, which goes against the thread because the origination of it was based on comparison!), bar the fact that they both have a "rate". Nope. Started with a statement to the effect: "Nobody can compete with Tech moon income." The income from Stocks is competitive with the income from Bonds despite the fact that Stocks and Bonds are so different as to be incomparable. The income a group can earn from Ice mining is competitive with the income from Tech moons, because a group of similar numbers can earn similar incomes. The fact that one may require more effort than the other is irrelevant. The goal is: "Earn X ISK for the Alliance to support SRP/whatever other alliance expenses." Both income sources can fulfill that goal. Therefore, people without Tech can compete with people who have Tech. In fact, we have proof of exactly that happening. The DRF (who owned no Tech) stomped the Northern Coalition (who owned most of the Tech) out of their space. Proving, empirically, that you can compete with Tech income without Tech.
So Thunderdome is being supported by ice miners because people don't want to fight over those ice belts. Got it.
Guess I had it wrong when I read Mittani talking about any force trying to get into tech moon mining would be hellcamped.
Clearly ice belts, which are strewn across all of Eve, are such indicators as to why Sov and Tech moons are such a big hit.
Oh wait, maybe its because people CAN do both at the same time! You should look into the difference between passive and active.
Since you like using stocks and bonds... you do realize you can buy a savings bond and need to wait for it to mature to get the most out of it while playing the stock market right?
At the same time, which would give you an even GREATER increase, albeit RISK, than if you just had those bonds waiting to mature. But you need to be in contact with that same stock market, or someone on your behalf to do the necessary work, while you sit back and wait for those bonds.
Like I said before; bad example. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3090
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 22:54:00 -
[462] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:So Thunderdome is being supported by ice miners because people don't want to fight over those ice belts. Got it.
Nobody said anything of the sort.
Quote:Guess I had it wrong when I read Mittani talking about any force trying to get into tech moon mining would be hellcamped.
Why wouldn't people want to defend their income sources?
Quote:Oh wait, maybe its because people CAN do both at the same time! You should look into the difference between passive and active.
Show me how you can mine Ice at the same time you're hellcamping someone in reprisal for an attack on a Tech moon with the same account?
If someone's using more accounts than you are to make money, of course they're going to have an advantage. But that advantage has nothing to do with the topic at hand, so we assume account number parity. That is to say: If someone's spending time on one account defending a Tech moon, that is time that he cannot spend on that account mining Ice (this is obviously true, and it's ridiculous that I keep having to spell it out for you).
Quote:Since you like using stocks and bonds... you do realize you can buy a savings bond and need to wait for it to mature to get the most out of it while playing the stock market right?
No, you actually can't do both at the same time with the same resources. Purchasing a Bond means that you cannot use the same money, at the same time, to purchase stocks.
In EVE terms, Defending a Tech moon means that you cannot use the same account, at the same time, to Mine Ice.
Again, all it takes to compete with the combined income from all Tech moons is a group of a similar size to Goonswarm willing to contribute 250m/month to the cause. If you don't have similar numbers, of course each member is going to have to contribute more (again, obvious. Larger groups have advantages over smaller groups because 1+1 > 1).
And, as Empirical Proof that non-Tech owners can kick the pants off of compete with Tech owners, we have the DRF's conquest and eviction of the Northern Coalition. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13429
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 23:03:00 -
[463] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:Oh wait, maybe its because people CAN do both at the same time! You should look into the difference between passive and active. The only difference is that one requires manhours to produce ISK whereas the other requires manhours to produce ISK. Oh wait. That's not a difference.
The only difference is that one is assumed to be passive when it really isn't. Beyond that, they are comparable, competitive, and the complaint that they aren't has on multiple occasions proven to be false. Believing it today, with all to show the exact opposite, is ridiculously ignorant.
Actually, there's a second difference too: the supposedly (but not actually) GÇ£passiveGÇ¥ income is actually better described as static, whereas the GÇ£activeGÇ¥ can be dynamically scaled to fit your needs and can trivially outpace the static income if that's what you want. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 23:45:00 -
[464] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Show me how you can mine Ice at the same time you're hellcamping someone in reprisal for an attack on a Tech moon with the same account?
With ISBox greenlighted as an acceptable macro program, and block alliances rolling not only in ISK but RL cash (blobbies), they aren't going to multibox?
A guy made a complaint in the suggestions forum as he saw about 80 bot named pilots in an icefield.
People don't throw that much ISK (500mil x 80...yeah it's funded by someone with a-l-o-t of capital) but ISK farmers. And with PLEX players don't have to buy it.
It's this type of stuff that CCP has to watch out for, because on paper it looks cool that players can be Standard Oil. In practice it's why Standard Oil lost it's monopoly: it's not good for business overall, it stagnates it. Just look at the game and what it turned it into. The ankle biters and mercs being but the PvP (which these blocs help fuel even), and those blue alliances growing by the day.
When I played EvE back in 2010 null was being fought over. Small/medium sized alliances raced to get a piece of the pie. Null had the riches to make it worthwhile.
Today? The blue donut exists.
Do you remember back in 2008 how Goons began and why the blob fleet came into existence (you were new and none skilled). Five years later, you guys turned into the next BoB.
And history tends to repeat itself (especially when revolutions are but three meals away).
"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13430
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 23:56:00 -
[465] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:With ISBox greenlighted as an acceptable macro program, and block alliances rolling not only in ISK but RL cash (blobbies), they aren't going to multibox? GǪwhich still won't let them mine ice while defending a tech moon on the same account.
Quote:When I played EvE back in 2010 null was being fought over. Small/medium sized alliances raced to get a piece of the pie. Null had the riches to make it worthwhile. GǪand the only thing that has changed since then is that people assume that it can't be done and that those who know it can have gotten fed up with a sov mechanic that was getting old already back then. In fact, 2010 was an excellent example of the whole Gǣcan't compete with techGǥ argument is bunk.
Quote:Today? The blue donut exists. GǪexcept that it's, at best, a cheese doodle rather than a doughnut. This isn't something new either.
Quote:Do you remember back in 2008 how Goons began and why the blob fleet came into existence (you were new and none skilled). Five years later, you guys turned into the next BoB. 2008?! I think you need to check your historyGǪ Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:15:00 -
[466] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪwhich still won't let them mine ice while defending a tech moon on the same account.
...he doesn't have too.
Quote:GǪand the only thing that has changed since then is that people assume that it can't be done and that those who know it can have gotten fed up with a sov mechanic that was getting old already back then. In fact, 2010 was an excellent example of the whole Gǣcan't compete with techGǥ argument is bunk.
No, there was a vacuum along the Amarr/Curse border that gave the opportunity (Feb/2010). It was a free-for-all to grab territory, and an opportunity for small/medium sized alliances to get a piece of the pie -- no blue donuts.
Quote:GǪexcept that it's, at best, a cheese doodle rather than a doughnut. This isn't something new either.
It doesn't matter what it looks like at the moment, you know what I meant. You also know that it's PvE in a area designed for PvP (and exists due to resources only). It makes a mockery to a game about 24/7 PvP, just as blobs about "skills matter" (if they don't, just do away with the skills system, it's hypocrisy otherwise).
Quote:2008?! I think you need to check your historyGǪ
The Great War, dear. Same war that the Goons were kicked back to NPC stations, as they were untrained, new and dumb.
And it's about time for another Great War to realign the universe, too. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3090
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:26:00 -
[467] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:...he doesn't have too.
Then the Ice mining alliance has the same opportunity to mine Ice with two accounts to the Tech defender's one. If your complaint is "they make more ISK than me because they work more alts" then that has absolutely nothing to do with Tech.
Quote:It doesn't matter what it looks like at the moment, you know what I meant. You also know that it's PvE in a area designed for PvP (and exists due to resources only). It makes a mockery to a game about 24/7 PvP, just as blobs about "skills matter" (if they don't, just do away with the skills system, it's hypocrisy otherwise).
So much wrong with that paragraph.
1. Blue Doughnut implies that everyone in Nullsec is blue to each other (and has nothing to do with the converstation at hand). But, just for fun, Let's see if that's true: HBC and CFC? Not Blue. HBC and Solar? Not Blue. Solar and CFC? Not Blue.
Ring around the posey, and nobody's blue. People aren't invading each other (well, except the HBC invading Solar) because there's generally no reason to, and there's the huge obstacle of a truly terrible Sov grind system.
Quote:The Great War, dear. Same war that the Goons were kicked back to NPC stations, as they were untrained, new and dumb.
And it's about time for another Great War to realign the universe, too.
So start it. As we've shown, if you get comparable numbers to the GSF working towards the same goal, you can fairly trivially outpace the combined Total Income of All Tech moons.
Remember, Goons were a bunch of Newbies who took down the "too-big-to-fail" BOB. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7258
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:43:00 -
[468] - Quote
yes nobody ran large fleets until 2008
yep, nobody ever sieged towers, which dictated sovereignty, with large fleets, they used 20-man gangs to siege them for 10 hours at a time ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7258
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:45:00 -
[469] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:It doesn't matter what it looks like at the moment, you know what I meant. You also know that it's PvE in a area designed for PvP (and exists due to resources only). It makes a mockery to a game about 24/7 PvP, just as blobs about "skills matter" (if they don't, just do away with the skills system, it's hypocrisy otherwise).
I think we can safely disregard the rest of your post if you subscribe to this idea that gameplay is segregated in such a way when it is not and has never been ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1488
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:51:00 -
[470] - Quote
Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Goddamned American Capitalist wrote:I know, they say they do want it fixed, but I don't see them packing up all of their moon harvesters and ceasing production, do you? Because like pre-nerf highsec incursions & FW mechanics or the current 150m isk/hour Forsaken Hubs, we'd be stupid to not take advantage of it while it's there. This doesn't mean we don't think it should be changed or don't want it changed I call bullshit. You don't want **** changed, if you did you'd do something about it like shooting monuments in Jita until CCP changed it.
"Act like pubbies for change 2013"
All of you saying "Well if you hate it so much why do you continue to reap the rewards" lack a certain level of pragmatism. You knew an incursion nerf was coming down the pipe, did you say "Well ok I guess I had best just stop doing this until CCP fixes it because taking this money would make me dirty." or did you build up to a frenzy to build an isk stockpile before it hit?
If I knew tomorrow that CCP would be removing all meta module drops from the game and only legacy modules would continue to exist, I'd be sitting in an anom with my vindicator and my alt in a noctis this very second, while my Jita alt bought as much stockpile as I could before the hit.
I mean look no further than our last several CSM platforms to see our opinion on the subject, but we'd be fools not to abuse it while it's in the game. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7258
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:52:00 -
[471] - Quote
beyond that ablooblooblooooo goons hellcamp people into their stations when they start sieging their moons, why don't they let others simply take moons from them
gotta say, this thread is p. hilarious ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1488
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 02:56:00 -
[472] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote: Do you remember back in 2008 how Goons began and why the blob fleet came into existence (you were new and none skilled). Five years later, you guys turned into the next BoB.
And history tends to repeat itself (especially when revolutions are but three meals away).
I love revisionist history. |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1488
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 03:11:00 -
[473] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:You never have to spend more than 500 man hours to mine Ice worth 5b ISK. Some months you might have to defend a Moon more times than you'd planned for (not to mention the fact that each time you've been forced to defend a moon, you loose 300m ISK worth of production).
Also, the fact that Ice mining can be done individually, on their own time, is a huge advantage for Ice mining. If you have variation on participation for your Tech moon defense fleets, you may well lose the moon (loosing all the income, not just part of it). Then you need at least 2 successful fleets in a row to get it back.
The original claim was that "nobody can compete with Tech moon income." The fact that a similar sized group to goonswarm could produce an income greater than the entire combined income of all Tech moons by having its members donate only 250m/month to the war effort (be that through 25hrs/month of mining, 5hrs/month missioning, 2hrs/month running incursions), means that that claim is entirely discredited.
Nobody has said that Passive = Active. Just that they can compete with each other as income sources, and that Tech moons are only as passive as the enemies of the owners let them be. In other words, if you don't like the fact that Tech moon income is as passive as it is, form up some bomber alts and keep them permanently reinforced.
To back this statement up, back when lowsec incursions was a "Thing" that goons did, our incursion squad (And we generally only had one squad of 10 running at any given moment) was making more alliance income via taxes than a tech moon. So a roving gypsy band of about 20 or so total goons was making more ALLIANCE isk than a single tech moon. This is discounting personal income which allowed many of us to create a stable of ships, buy capital characters and hulls etc.
Now for pretend numbers because there is no real easy way to tell, lets say half of the alliance is alts, or can't be multiboxed for some reason.
9917 / 2 = 4958 (rounding down)
Break them into gangs of 20 and send them off to do incursions, granted this is a theoretical because at most each incursion could support about 80 goons running them.
We'd produce as much isk as about 248 tech moons, give or take a decimal.
Now right now you can make about 80M an hour ratting in a naga, it's very unfun and takes a bit of concentration, but it's doable. It's taxed at the same rate. If the same number of goons logged in and ratted at the same rate and swath of time we were doing incursions we'd see our membership generating about 198~ tech moons worth of income.
Unfortunately most goons find ratting to be terrible (Because it is) and have found other methods of generating income (Faction warfare/scamming), that is not only non taxable, but has dividends that make incursion running look rather paltry. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
34
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 03:30:00 -
[474] - Quote
SmilingVagrant wrote:I love revisionist history.
I love actual history...
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Band_of_brothers#Operation_Goonicide
Quote:Operation Goonicide
Operation Goonicide was an operation in which Band of Brothers (BoB) attacked Goonswarm, trying to remove them from The Syndicate. Many other alliances joined BoB to exact "revenge" from Goonswarm.
The conflict was triggered by the claims of BoB's leadership that Goonswarm alliance had displayed a disrespectful attitude to the EVE Community, and is the root cause of the long-standing animosity between Goonswarm and Band of Brothers and its subsequent reincarnations.
Band of Brothers attacked and defeated the early Tech I Goonswarm fleets, who simply chose to hide waiting for a better time, or rolled untrained 'VCBee' alts to repeatedly suicide into gate and station camps in free rookie ships. This conflict was ultimately inconclusive; BoB left Syndicate after three weeks, with a heavily favourable kill:death ratio and claiming that they had destroyed Goonswarm's military and industrialassets, Goonswarm responded that as their alliance was based in conquerable NPC 0.0 at the time and their pilots mostly flew fully insurable tech 1 ships, they had little in terms of valuable assets or fleets to destroy. The claims that Band of Brothers (Player alliance) destroyed Goonswarm's morale or ability to fight were also proven untrue when, shortly after this war, Goonswarm moved to the South East and destroyed the Southern Coalition alongside Red Alliance and Tau Ceti Federation.
After this short conflict, Goonswarm changed its vision and goal in EVE, with Goonswarm and Band of Brothers being each other's sworn enemies, to the point that Band of Brothers chose to side with their old enemies Against All Authorities to fight Goonswarm once again.
(Greene Lee got what support again?)
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Operation_Goonicide
Quote:Operation Goonicide
Operation Goonicide saw BoB drive Goonswarm from their home region. At the time, Goonswarm were a new alliance in New Eden, priding themselves on their obnoxious behaviour and use of numbers to counter their lack of experience and poor equipment. They had settled into an NPC region just north of Delve, after several successful wars in the east. BoB;s leaders used an incident as an opportunity to start a propaganda war against Goonswarm, leading to Operation Goonicide - in which BoB resolved to remove Goonswarm from New Eden, even going so far as to claim "There are no goons".
When BoB attacked, Goonswarm were beaten back by their more skilled players in expensive Tech 2 (T2) ships. This was effective due to the relative youth of most of the players in Goonswarm, as at the time T2 snipers could not be countered easily with T1 ships. Goonswarm fell back to S-U where BoB camped them down until they moved back east, to wait out the BoB attack in their NPC stations.
Hmmm, where did docking games come from again?
"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7258
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 03:35:00 -
[475] - Quote
if we were the first ones to come up with tactics like "stay docked" and "outnumber the enemy" well damn that says a lot about the eve community ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 04:37:00 -
[476] - Quote
Andski wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:It doesn't matter what it looks like at the moment, you know what I meant. You also know that it's PvE in a area designed for PvP (and exists due to resources only). I think we can safely disregard the rest of your post if you subscribe to this idea that gameplay is segregated in such a way when it is not and has never been
Who are you to dictate what another says/believes/reads, dear?
Now in your corp you may choose to brainwash all you like, but outside the game you're but anyone else with a butthole.
"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Sentamon
802
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 04:44:00 -
[477] - Quote
SmilingVagrant wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote: Do you remember back in 2008 how Goons began and why the blob fleet came into existence (you were new and none skilled). Five years later, you guys turned into the next BoB.
And history tends to repeat itself (especially when revolutions are but three meals away).
I love revisionist history.
Truth hurts. Go cry. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7259
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 05:11:00 -
[478] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:Who are you to dictate what another says/believes/reads, dear?
Now in your corp you may choose to brainwash all you like, but outside the game you're but anyone else with a butthole.
i'm stating facts, such as "no, there are no separate PvP areas" because well the whole game is "the PvP area" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 06:49:00 -
[479] - Quote
Andski wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:Who are you to dictate what another says/believes/reads, dear?
Now in your corp you may choose to brainwash all you like, but outside the game you're but anyone else with a butthole. i'm stating facts, such as "no, there are no separate PvP areas" because well the whole game is "the PvP area"
One word: Jita.
And all other major trade hubs.
That idea of "the whole game is 'the PvP area'" is moot. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
803
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 06:53:00 -
[480] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:Andski wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:Who are you to dictate what another says/believes/reads, dear?
Now in your corp you may choose to brainwash all you like, but outside the game you're but anyone else with a butthole. i'm stating facts, such as "no, there are no separate PvP areas" because well the whole game is "the PvP area" One word: Jita. And all other major trade hubs. That idea of "the whole game is 'the PvP area'" is moot.
Hmmm I consider Jita market to be PvP, but in many ways with all the Market BOTS 0.01 ISKing it may be more PvB Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
|
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 07:31:00 -
[481] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:One word: Jita. Can I **** someone over in Jita? Yes, yes I can. Can I shoot them? Yes, as soon as they undock. Is it a PVP area? Why yes, yes indeed.
Ace Uoweme wrote:And all other major trade hubs. Are there any special circumstances to other "major trade hubs"? Why no, no there aren't.
And now, the weather. It appears to be raining pubbie tears. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3094
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 07:32:00 -
[482] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:One word: Jita.
And all other major trade hubs.
That idea of "the whole game is 'the PvP area'" is moot.
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Jita
The 541 people who lost their ship in Jita today might tend to disagree with you. Also the 452 people who lost their pods. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Super spikinator
Hegemonous Conscripts Hegemonous Pandorum
126
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 10:05:00 -
[483] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:One word: Jita.
And all other major trade hubs.
That idea of "the whole game is 'the PvP area'" is moot. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Jita The 541 people who lost their ship in Jita today might tend to disagree with you. Also the 452 people who lost their pods. Just because you can't smartbomb the undock does not mean it's not a PvP area (you cannot smartbomb any station's Undock).
more's the pity. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 10:45:00 -
[484] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote: Hmmm I consider Jita market to be PvP, but in many ways with all the Market BOTS 0.01 ISKing it may be more PvB
Okay, PvP of markets.
But it's still off limits to wonderful things like a Kamikaze dive into about 15 ships at the naval station.
So PvP here is quite selective. If the trade hubs are protected why the spotty protection in high-sec is "okay"? Jita is in high-sec afterall.
If EvE is a sandbox game players can be creative in taking down targets, and the targets are no different in Jita than 2 jumps away in a 7.0 system. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
35
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 10:59:00 -
[485] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Just because you can't smartbomb the undock does not mean it's not a PvP area (you cannot smartbomb any station's Undock).
It's conditional PvP in a game suppose to be ABOUT 24/7 PvP.
I didn't have any conditions throwing 100000000000000000000000001 nades down a titan hallway.
I didn't have any conditions perched on a ledge throwing 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 nades smack on top of heads of whole squads.
I didn't have any conditions using grenade launchers and killing scores at a time.
I didn't have any conditions planting APMs, C4 or RDX. Pod in, drop, BOOM!
But somehow I can't smartbomb a dock with the same ships seen and used all over EvE. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Lord Zim
2308
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 11:02:00 -
[486] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:DarthNefarius wrote: Hmmm I consider Jita market to be PvP, but in many ways with all the Market BOTS 0.01 ISKing it may be more PvB
Okay, PvP of markets. But it's still off limits to wonderful things like a Kamikaze dive into about 15 ships at the naval station. So PvP here is quite selective. If the trade hubs are protected why the spotty protection in high-sec is "okay"? Jita is in high-sec afterall. If EvE is a sandbox game players can be creative in taking down targets, and the targets are no different in Jita than 2 jumps away in a 7.0 system. I can suicide gank people going to/from the station. Them being "trade hubs" doesn't make it safe in those systems. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
295
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:16:00 -
[487] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:So Thunderdome is being supported by ice miners because people don't want to fight over those ice belts. Got it. Nobody said anything of the sort. Quote:Guess I had it wrong when I read Mittani talking about any force trying to get into tech moon mining would be hellcamped. Why wouldn't people want to defend their income sources? Quote:Oh wait, maybe its because people CAN do both at the same time! You should look into the difference between passive and active. Show me how you can mine Ice at the same time you're hellcamping someone in reprisal for an attack on a Tech moon with the same account? If someone's using more accounts than you are to make money, of course they're going to have an advantage. But that advantage has nothing to do with the topic at hand, so we assume account number parity. That is to say: If someone's spending time on one account defending a Tech moon, that is time that he cannot spend on that account mining Ice (this is obviously true, and it's ridiculous that I keep having to spell it out for you). Quote:Since you like using stocks and bonds... you do realize you can buy a savings bond and need to wait for it to mature to get the most out of it while playing the stock market right? No, you actually can't do both at the same time with the same resources. Purchasing a Bond means that you cannot use the same money, at the same time, to purchase stocks. In EVE terms, Defending a Tech moon means that you cannot use the same account, at the same time, to Mine Ice. Again, all it takes to compete with the combined income from all Tech moons is a group of a similar size to Goonswarm willing to contribute 250m/month to the cause. If you don't have similar numbers, of course each member is going to have to contribute more (again, obvious. Larger groups have advantages over smaller groups because 1+1 > 1). And, as Empirical Proof that non-Tech owners can kick the pants off of compete with Tech owners, we have the DRF's conquest and eviction of the Northern Coalition.
You are so flawed it isn't even funny. Hellcamping in reprisal does not equal passive income.
Take the time to reread the thread. You are losing focus.
"I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami No Value
295
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:22:00 -
[488] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:Oh wait, maybe its because people CAN do both at the same time! You should look into the difference between passive and active. The only difference is that one requires manhours to produce ISK whereas the other requires manhours to produce ISK. Oh wait. That's not a difference. The only difference is that one is assumed to be passive when it really isn't. Beyond that, they are comparable, competitive, and the complaint that they aren't has on multiple occasions proven to be false. Believing it today, with all there is to show the exact opposite, is ridiculously ignorant. Actually, there's a second difference too: the supposedly (but not actually) GÇ£passiveGÇ¥ income is actually better described as static, whereas the GÇ£activeGÇ¥ can be dynamically scaled to fit your needs and can trivially outpace the static income if that's what you want.
Well, considering you don't need seperate man hours to produce at the same time....
It's all in the rate isn't it? What's the cycle time on a moon mining pos, let's do this per hour like you were fond of....
How much moongo is cycled per hour, and how how many of those hours do you need to be online for it to cycle? "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url]-á for details. |
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3106
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:25:00 -
[489] - Quote
Murk Paradox wrote:You are so flawed it isn't even funny. Hellcamping in reprisal does not equal passive income.
Take the time to reread the thread. You are losing focus.
Well, now that you're calling Moon Mining an active income source, we can certainly see how it competes with other active income sources like Ice Mining. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Lord Zim
2315
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:32:00 -
[490] - Quote
When you manufacture, you can setup 30+ days worth of manufacturing. Nerf manufacturing, it's a passive income.
When you buy/sell at the market, you can setup buy/sell orders that last for 90 days. Nerf buying/selling, it's a passive income. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
|
Frying Doom
2117
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:34:00 -
[491] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:When you manufacture, you can setup 30+ days worth of manufacturing. Nerf manufacturing, it's a passive income.
When you buy/sell at the market, you can setup buy/sell orders that last for 90 days. Nerf buying/selling, it's a passive income. And these create resources out of thin air how? We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7273
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:36:00 -
[492] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:It's conditional PvP in a game suppose to be ABOUT 24/7 PvP.
Seems you misunderstood "hyper-competitive PvP environment" as "a fragfest like Darkfall" ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Lord Zim
2315
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:37:00 -
[493] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:When you manufacture, you can setup 30+ days worth of manufacturing. Nerf manufacturing, it's a passive income.
When you buy/sell at the market, you can setup buy/sell orders that last for 90 days. Nerf buying/selling, it's a passive income. And these create resources out of thin air how? They create resources in the same manner moonmining does. You insert POS fuel, out poops moongoo. You insert minerals to a manufacturing slot, out poops various stuff. You insert isk into buy orders, out poops various stuff. You insert various stuff into sell orders, out poops isk. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Frying Doom
2117
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:39:00 -
[494] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Lord Zim wrote:When you manufacture, you can setup 30+ days worth of manufacturing. Nerf manufacturing, it's a passive income.
When you buy/sell at the market, you can setup buy/sell orders that last for 90 days. Nerf buying/selling, it's a passive income. And these create resources out of thin air how? They create resources in the same manner moonmining does. You insert POS fuel, out poops moongoo. You insert minerals to a manufacturing slot, out poops various stuff. You insert isk into buy orders, out poops various stuff. You insert various stuff into sell orders, out poops isk. Ok if you believe they are the same thing.
Not that it matters I think Odyssey will butcher moon mining, or at least redistribute the number of moons holding any mineral, so they will not be worth much anyway.
Now if they stop them being top down income as well the better it will be lol We all thought CSM 6 was a war crime with it's massive Null Presence CSM7 topped it by selling out our Council to CCP, don't let it happen again. Vote or next time Incarna is your fault. Stupid Signature Broke
|
Lord Zim
2315
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:41:00 -
[495] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Ok if you believe they are the same thing. They're the same thing, but different. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13437
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 23:41:00 -
[496] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:It's conditional PvP in a game suppose to be ABOUT 24/7 PvP. There's nothing conditional about it, so no.
Quote:But somehow I can't smartbomb a dock with the same ships seen and used all over EvE. Your point being?
Murk Paradox wrote:Well, considering you don't need seperate man hours to produce at the same time.... GǪoverlooking the fact that you do need to spend man-hours to produce. Wait. Why should I consider a scenario that has no connection to reality again?
Quote:It's all in the rate isn't it? What's the cycle time on a moon mining pos, let's do this per hour like you were fond of....
How much moongo is cycled per hour, and how how many of those hours do you need to be online for it to cycle? Oh dear. Maybe you should go and have a look at how moon mining arrays actually work. It's not something I'm GÇ£fond ofGÇ¥ GÇö it's how the game works. You should probably also go back in the thread and look at what it is we're counting and what type of hour we're counting byGǪ
It cycles 168 times a week, and in that time, by your account, you need to spend just under 1,000 man-hours to ensure that it does. So if that's how you want to break it down: you need to spend ~5.5 hours online for every hour of moon mining. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 02:38:00 -
[497] - Quote
Tippia wrote:There's nothing conditional about it, so no.
There are conditions. Just look where you can't use smartbombs.
Read above.
When I play PvP I use every and any high damage AoE I can find. L-o-v-e blowing up masses. If I can't get in due to whatever block, I'll find a way to rig up a vehicle with explosives and run it into the enemy's defensives. If I can't get a vehicle in, I'd pod or whatever in and drop them.
Can't do that in EvE, there's conditions on what can be used and where.
Carebear PvP.
Study warfare. Those generals and admirals didn't play by the book, they reinvented the book instead. They didn't wait for the President to give the order, they used their noodle and improvised as needed. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 02:41:00 -
[498] - Quote
Andski wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:It's conditional PvP in a game suppose to be ABOUT 24/7 PvP. Seems you misunderstood "hyper-competitive PvP environment" as "a fragfest like Darkfall"
What's competitive with Goons camping gates again?
What's competitive with blob fleets?
What's competitive when or where you can even use a weapon?
Nothing "hyper" there but hype. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Lord Zim
2315
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 02:50:00 -
[499] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:There are conditions. Just look where you can't use smartbombs. I suggest you remove that condition and see what happens. I'm sure we'll make good use of that on, say, the jita undock. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 02:54:00 -
[500] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I suggest you remove that condition and see what happens. I'm sure we'll make good use of that on, say, the jita undock.
I can't without getting sanctioned or permabanned.
But go ahead, Zim. I'm sure you can fly a bigger ship than I with a massive bomb that can crater the naval station, right?
"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
|
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3106
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 02:55:00 -
[501] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:Andski wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:It's conditional PvP in a game suppose to be ABOUT 24/7 PvP. Seems you misunderstood "hyper-competitive PvP environment" as "a fragfest like Darkfall" What's competitive with Goons camping gates again?
Anyone who wants to compete with them for control of the gate.
Quote:What's competitive with blob fleets?
Anyone who wants to compete with them for the space they're controlling.
Quote:What's competitive when or where you can even use a weapon?
That's not a comprehensible sentence.
Every game has mechanics. One of the mechanics in EVE is that you cannot use AOE damage weaponry in range of a station (Bombs and Smartbombs). If you want to kill people on an undock, use targeted weaponry. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 03:14:00 -
[502] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Quote:What's competitive when or where you can even use a weapon? That's not a comprehensible sentence. Every game has mechanics. One of the mechanics in EVE is that you cannot use AOE damage weaponry in range of a station (Bombs and Smartbombs). Just like you cannot warp to 200 or target our past 250km. How you can compete with someone has no bearing on whether you're allowed to compete with them. In Chess, you cannot move a pawn 4 spaces forward on the first move. Does that make Chess "not competitive"? If you want to kill people on an undock, use targeted weaponry. There's nothing stopping you from doing that.
It's comprehensive enough, because the conditions are when or where you can even use your weapons.
EvE isn't chess. EvE is a space shooter. It's more aligned with a FPS game in space with a missing WASD. This is probably why you're confused to why CONCORD = Protection. CONCORD is like the guards in Stormwind, slow/off attacking the enemy, and you will die as someone tanks them while attacking you. You know darn right CONCORD isn't much of any protection, or your Goons wouldn't be gatecamping in high-sec. "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3106
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 03:16:00 -
[503] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:It's comprehensive enough, because the conditions are when or where you can even use your weapons.
1. Comprehensible. Not comprehensive. Two entirely different words.
2. That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not there can be competition in those areas (as in, you can use other weapons or bump your target until you can use Smartbombs on them).
Quote:EvE isn't chess. EvE is a space shooter. It's more aligned with a FPS game in space with a missing WASD. This is probably why you're confused to why CONCORD = Protection. CONCORD is like the guards in Stormwind, slow/off attacking the enemy, and you will die as someone tanks them while attacking you. You know darn right CONCORD isn't much of any protection, or your Goons wouldn't be gatecamping in high-sec.
3. CONCORD cannot be Tanked.
4. Never said how much protection CONCORD provides, just that that is the service it provides. Just like the fact that a Bulletproof vest does not provide perfect protection does not indicate that protection is not the service that it provides. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 04:00:00 -
[504] - Quote
RubyPorto wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:It's comprehensive enough, because the conditions are when or where you can even use your weapons. 1. Comprehensible. Not comprehensive. Two entirely different words.
Nearly 12am and I'm the only one posting to you.
Going back to YouTube. It's at least more interesting than exchanging word definitions...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWkOeK5AmI8 "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
RubyPorto
Sniggwaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
3107
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 04:38:00 -
[505] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:It's at least more interesting than exchanging word definitions...
That was tangential to the point of my post. (But you hang on to that thin thread of a reason to dodge the point.)
Either way, the conditions of when and where you can use specific weapons have nothing to do with whether or not those areas can be host to competition. This is EVE - Everybody Versus Everybody.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
806
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 07:56:00 -
[506] - Quote
Gotta say this thread " Welcome to ThunderdomeGäó" was ineresting from all the discusion brought up... especially since maybe beacuse of it ( or not ) ThunderdomeGäó" never happened: has there been any staged NULL fights between CFC & HBC yet worth mentioning? Its looking like before a single NULL ThunderdomeGäó fight being started what we're going to get is a Jita burns staged in HI SEC again
Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an ex-goon? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one page] |