|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
pmchem
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
470
   |
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jita Bloodtear wrote:This is like a council of men voting that abortion should be illegal.
It's more like a bunch of white guys in Congress voting for the Civil Rights Act, freeing thousands of highsec ice miners everywhere from the shackles of 23/7 slavery for their wages. Empowering thousands more non-ISBoxing Minmatar in lowsec and nullsec to have new opportunities where doors were closed before. TEARING DOWN THAT WALL, MISTER GORBACHEV.
Also, jesus your numbers are wrong there will be plenty of ozone and ice belts will respawn in primetime. |
pmchem
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
473
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:
If you're arguing null mining just won't pick up as much as desired, then it's odd to focus on LO: it's going to be a general ice problem.
It is less odd if you assume he's being disingenuous, and is trying to drive speculative purchases of LO because he's been running 50 ISBoxer dark glitter miners for years and has literal mountains of waste LO piled in nullsec stations, not worth the effort to export. Unless the price goes up pre-patch.
But, you know, that's only if you assume he's being disingenuous. |
pmchem
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
480
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
Are you just making stuff up and seeing what sticks? You say that only 60% of highsec ice will be mined out, and then put up a picture that has everyone but a small part of AU TZ with an 'excess' of highsec miners, unable to mine ice because it's all mined out. I did not realize that 1/2 of your fictional AU TZ is now 40% of the entire eve day. Not to mention that you just totally made up values for the y-axis magnitudes and cutoff. And that in many posts you greatly underestimate the ability of EVE players to change their activities to optimize their isk/hour.
Jita Bloodtear wrote:
One could even argue that lowsec is far more dangerous than nullsec (due to easy accessibility, npc stations that let your enemies accumulate, higher traffic, etc), and thus the risk/reward should be greater than that of nullsec.
Yeah, one could argue that. And be ridiculed. Lowsec risk/reward should be greater than nullsec? Really? As if it wasn't much riskier, expensive and dangerous to acquire and defend nullsec sov in the first place, compared to just, well, taking a gate and docking in a lowsec npc station? Tell us more about your game design ideas.
Or rather, tell me more about how mad you are that your fleet of 3-4 dozen ISBoxer ice mining alts can't sit AFK in a dark glitter belt 23/7 anymore. Because, you know, that is such great gameplay and conducive to the long-term success and good health of EVE. Because you're desperately grasping for anything which will help prolong that situation. |
pmchem
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
524
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 23:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Seems like there's a glut of ice and plenty of stockpiles. Prices are not rising and basically no icefields in low/null are used.
@pmchem on twitter || GARPA || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
|
|
| |
|