EVE Search - Details and update on the Ice Anomaly design

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Science and Industry

Details and update on the Ice Anomaly design

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)
Christopher Caldaris Caldaris Enterprises LLC 8	Posted - 2013.05.19 01:25:00 - [271] - Quote Danni stark wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: Wait, you're telling me I wasted the past few weeks getting my ice mining skills maxed out? Sweet. I only play one mining account. if you mean "did i waste 5 days training a skill that will make me the most isk/hour while sitting in any mining ship other than the venture?" then yeah, totally wasted your time. Not if there isn't any ice to mine... The majority of High Sec ice belts will be mined out within 30 minutes of spawn, if you don't get there within that window you will lose out on ice mining as an ingame activity.
Danni stark 304	Posted - 2013.05.19 10:46:00 - [272] - Quote Christopher Caldaris wrote: Danni stark wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: Wait, you're telling me I wasted the past few weeks getting my ice mining skills maxed out? Sweet. I only play one mining account. if you mean "did i waste 5 days training a skill that will make me the most isk/hour while sitting in any mining ship other than the venture?" then yeah, totally wasted your time. Not if there isn't any ice to mine... The majority of High Sec ice belts will be mined out within 30 minutes of spawn, if you don't get there within that window you will lose out on ice mining as an ingame activity. so if you don't put some effort in you won't get any reward? and this is somehow a problem? Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Christopher Caldaris Caldaris Enterprises LLC 8	Posted - 2013.05.19 14:28:00 - [273] - Quote Danni stark wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: Danni stark wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: Wait, you're telling me I wasted the past few weeks getting my ice mining skills maxed out? Sweet. I only play one mining account. if you mean "did i waste 5 days training a skill that will make me the most isk/hour while sitting in any mining ship other than the venture?" then yeah, totally wasted your time. Not if there isn't any ice to mine... The majority of High Sec ice belts will be mined out within 30 minutes of spawn, if you don't get there within that window you will lose out on ice mining as an ingame activity. so if you don't put some effort in you won't get any reward? and this is somehow a problem? It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today.
Danni stark 305	Posted - 2013.05.19 14:41:00 - [274] - Quote Christopher Caldaris wrote: It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today. no, it's a problem for people who choose to log off like whining spoiled children. it's not a problem for any one else. there's more than one ice belt in the game, and i sincerely doubt all of them will be on an identical respawn timer. Ice Mining Skill Plan.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2013.05.19 14:58:00 - [275] - Quote Christopher Caldaris wrote: It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today. i don't get a 10/10 plex immediately upon login ccp change this unfair nerf to my ability to get exactly what i want with no effort whatsoever
Christopher Caldaris Caldaris Enterprises LLC 8	Posted - 2013.05.19 19:12:00 - [276] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today. i don't get a 10/10 plex immediately upon login ccp change this unfair nerf to my ability to get exactly what i want with no effort whatsoever Not even comparable.
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.19 19:48:00 - [277] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today. i don't get a 10/10 plex immediately upon login ccp change this unfair nerf to my ability to get exactly what i want with no effort whatsoever Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. See why we are complaining? How well are you going to like the game when your null sec ratting areas are now on the same 4 hour timer....your not...your going to moan and whine just like the industrialist are currently doing. Having the ice belts move to anoms is fine. Putting a limit on the ice that appears per belt....again that is fine, we can deal with that. But making it so that the belt can be mined out in 30 mins and doesn't repop for 4 hours isn't fine. Its like saying you want to handicap a golfer so others can compete....fine....but then to install that handicap you cut off the golfers arm....not fine. Now lets say under your argument that you stop doing 10/10 and just log off....it doesn't effect the whole game. The upcoming changes to the ice belts do however. Lots of numbers have gone out....are they correct? Not sure, but one thing is for sure....its not going to work this way. They are putting too much of a limit on specific area of mining that effects the whole universe. Now I am not an elite gamer....I don't play 10 hours a day religiously. If I don't log in one day its not the end of the world for me. However when I do log in I like that I have a lot of choices in the game. I want to mine ore....well I jump in my barges and warp to a belt that hasn't been mined much and I sit there and mine out the whole belt...I don't just grab the 10% variant and move on. If I want to explore a WH, I hop in a scanning ship and go looking (getting exploded in hilarious fashion sometimes). If I wanna mission or rat...I do. The problem is that they are taking out of the game one of my options. What if this mentality spreads? What if like I said the ratting anoms get put on 4 hour timer....or going into more....WH entrance/exit are on a 4 hour respawn....You can only run a mission once every 4 hours.....how about not being able to use a jump drive or jump bridge once every 4 hours. It limits like this that ruin the game for casual players and elite gamers at the same time. I like playing Eve...I just don't want to see them start to alienate a specific playstyle or group. I have seen too many games that started out great until they started gaining a larger player base. They want the elite/hardcore players to have massive content, but at the same time, you want the casual player-base to have the availability of the same content, just on a smaller scale. The problem comes in when you give the hardcore the content they want, but at the cost of the casual gamer by installing in bad ideas like this. Add into that alienation when the casual player rants and whines with no response from the developers about our inputs....274 comments, yet no response that any of our arguments from CCP Fozzie since what page 2? Now a lot of people are tossing out the mathhammer on these changes. I hate this approach because it doesn't factor in a lot of things.....call them variables if you want. Just like saying you can make 30-40m isk per hour per toon mining ABCM ore out in null....guess what...it doesn't happen like that. It doesn't factor in that the roids are going to pop, or you have to redock due to a roam/afk camper (argue this elsewhere), or that you have to dock up to empty your ore hold. When your factoring in how much ice high sec can provide.....your not factoring in that some people aren't going to mine the minmatar ice, or the gallente....whatever. Your not factoring in that some alliances that are suppose to be making up some of the shortages from High Sec are being camped into station, or having to do constant CTA to defend their systems, or even that some of them just are going to horde the ice. It also doesn't factor in that yet again, NO ONE WILL BE MINING IN LOW SEC.....even more so after the nerf bat hits. CCP needs to look at the numbers yes, but stop tossing around the nerf hammer based on the absolute maximum that these ice fields can produce. What is wrong with having High Sec supply 100% of the ice needed to support the Eve universe....nothing...let it. The mining amounts in low and null could do it but they aren't because there is an imbalance of risk/reward in performing null sec mining.....so stop trying to force people into null/low. If you want to stop the botters, you came up with a great way to hinder their operations, use it, but then going further to limit every ice miner in the game, that's going too far. ./rant off
Danni stark 305	Posted - 2013.05.19 20:31:00 - [278] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. pot, meet kettle. Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.19 20:42:00 - [279] - Quote Danni stark wrote: Logit Probit wrote: Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. pot, meet kettle. Hi kettle! In all seriousness tho, the orginial argument wasn't valid, as 10/10 are spawned from Ratting Anoms, which are respawned after completion and allow a chance to spawn a 10/10. The ratting anoms, which are pretty much instant repop after completion, allow for multiple chances to get the 10/10. Now if all anoms were set to the 4 hour respawn, then the comparsion would be valid. However if that is the only troll I get off my rant....well I consider it time well spent.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2013.05.19 20:53:00 - [280] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Christopher Caldaris wrote: It's a problem when people can only play during certain time periods, if you don't get a belt at the start of your play session oh well, looks like you aren't playing today. i don't get a 10/10 plex immediately upon login ccp change this unfair nerf to my ability to get exactly what i want with no effort whatsoever Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. See why we are complaining? How well are you going to like the game when your null sec ratting areas are now on the same 4 hour timer....your not...your going to moan and whine just like the industrialist are currently doing. anoms are a replacement for belt ratting, and are intended to respawn immediately to increase the carrying capacity of the system, this point would be completely defeated by making ratting anoms spawn after a significant delay ice anoms are not a replacement for belt mining, and are intended to provide greater rewards than belt mining but at a cost of not being able to do it at will and needing to compete for a scarce resource, and this point would be completely defeated by respawning immediately exploration is like the latter and not the former so no, my comparison was dead-on and yours was not

EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2013.05.19 20:56:00 - [281] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: Danni stark wrote: Logit Probit wrote: Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. pot, meet kettle. Hi kettle! In all seriousness tho, the orginial argument wasn't valid, as 10/10 are spawned from Ratting Anoms, which are respawned after completion and allow a chance to spawn a 10/10. The ratting anoms, which are pretty much instant repop after completion, allow for multiple chances to get the 10/10. Now if all anoms were set to the 4 hour respawn, then the comparsion would be valid. However if that is the only troll I get off my rant....well I consider it time well spent. wrong this is so mind-numbingly wrong its really difficult to pick a starting point to explain why it's so dumb because picking any one piece implies the rest is not as dumb as that one piece which is simply not true but lets start with that 10/10s are exploration complexes, found primarily through exploration and found through ratting anoms only rarely, mostly as a replacement for officer spawns and the like. even then, they're chance based but the chance is so tiny you would never try to get a 10/10 through anoming, it is a bonus for people who are anoming much like an officer or faction spawn to shake up the dreariness
Danni stark 306	Posted - 2013.05.19 20:58:00 - [282] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: Danni stark wrote: Logit Probit wrote: Okay now that's like comparing apples and oranges...it doesn't work. I tell you what...how about all the havens and sanctums that currently have a 5 min spawn timer, goes to a 4 hour respawn time....now lets not stop there...lets add in all ratting anoms. pot, meet kettle. Hi kettle! In all seriousness tho, the orginial argument wasn't valid, as 10/10 are spawned from Ratting Anoms, which are respawned after completion and allow a chance to spawn a 10/10. The ratting anoms, which are pretty much instant repop after completion, allow for multiple chances to get the 10/10. Now if all anoms were set to the 4 hour respawn, then the comparsion would be valid. However if that is the only troll I get off my rant....well I consider it time well spent. your argument was just as invalid. all rating anoms being moved to 4hr respawns is like ALL mining sites being moved to 4hr respawns which is obviously not true. i'm not trolling, i'm just pointing out you countered apples vs oranges, with apples vs oranges which was just as pointless and terrible. Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.19 22:28:00 - [283] - Quote Danni and Evilweasel.... Putting the comparing of game mechanics aside....answer me these questions.... 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? I can honestly answer no to the first question, because I think that game content shouldn't be based off what time you log into the game. The second question while I would like to say yes, I'm still not buying into it, because its going too far without really adding anything to it. The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting and ISboxer using 50+ accts, increase the value of ice, and to move more ice miners to null and low sec. They are successful in the first two, just by turning the belts into anom. However the third reason I am totally against. Call me carebear....whatever...I don't have the time, desire, nor the drive to move back into null. I think we all agree that mining in low sec is just not worth it, and these changes are making low sec ice mining even worse off. AFK ice mining will be gone, since the belts will despawn once they have been mined out. Gone are the unlimited ice blocks that botters could set a program to warp to, mine for a specific time frame, redock, clear the ore hold, repeat. The limiting of the amount of ice in the blocks available in these belts also add into this because the whole belt can be mined out in 30 mins. ISBoxers will be effected by the limited amount of ice in each roid. You not going to need to undock 70 mackinaws to mine a roid with 25-50 cycles in it. These factors will massively effect the first goal. The second goal is accomplished due to the first change when the amount of ice mined per day is decreased, increasing the value of isotopes/HW/LO. So if those both goals are going to be successful.....why go any further? I'm not saying that all these changes are a bad thing, what I am saying is that the changes go too far.....with the addition of the 4 hour respawn timer being the eyesore out of the changes. Keep the rest yes, but massively reduce or completely do away with the timer.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2013.05.19 22:43:00 - [284] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? it doesn't Logit Probit wrote: 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? see above Logit Probit wrote: The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting and ISboxer using 50+ accts, nope, this is not why the changes are in and that's a dumb Logit Probit wrote: increase the value of ice, and to move more ice miners to null and low sec. 1 not really, it is intended to cause more mining in null which will naturally do this , 2 no: it is generally assumed that the worthless highsec-only carebears won't move. it is to increase the value of mining in null so that more nullsec people mine in nullsec basically you have no idea what you're talking about
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.19 23:48:00 - [285] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: it doesn't How does it not? It removes game content from the game for 4 hours.... EvilweaselSA wrote: see above see above EvilweaselSA wrote: nope, this is not why the changes are in and that's a dumb Really? Dumb to find a way to combat botters without having to track down and ban accounts? I think it was fairly smart of them to change the game content to a system that doesn't allow for a program to be used like this....rather then wasting time by banning accts only to have them reopen a new acct and start the cycle all over again... EvilweaselSA wrote: 1 not really, it is intended to cause more mining in null which will naturally do this I think it will increase the value of the ice prices in high sec....your seeming to lean this way as well. Will it cause more mining in null sec? I think so yes, great another bonus to the change, however its not the only intent. EvilweaselSA wrote: 2 no: it is generally assumed that the worthless highsec-only carebears won't move. it is to increase the value of mining in null so that more nullsec people mine in nullsec Oh come off the worthless high-sec carebear soapbox....what effects them will in turn effect you, that's why its called a sandbox. Again the value increase is a good thing, but the prices will increase in both areas...again we are in agreement. The last part about not knowing what I am talking about.... Absolutely! So since we seem to agree on so many things....here's my number...call me maybe? /sarcasm off...I think I have proven from above that I do know a bit about what I am talking about. But not here to get into chest-beating competition so going to ignore this part...
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2013.05.20 00:52:00 - [286] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: How does it not? It removes game content from the game for 4 hours.... content is recurring and will be around all day, just not in the same spot at all times so you have to either put work into finding sites currently around, or figure out when a spawn will be returning and get ready for it your ability to mine ice is not dictated by when you log in. it is dictated by when and where you log in, the actions of the people in EVE that day, and the individual level of effort or ingenuity you will be putting in to get some ice since the supply is being artificially restricted to below what highsec miners wish to supply (a good and desired outcome) any solution will result in some highsec miners being shut out and whining. currently, it is those who wish to expend zero effort and intelligence. Logit Probit wrote: Really? Dumb to find a way to combat botters without having to track down and ban accounts? I think it was fairly smart of them to change the game content to a system that doesn't allow for a program to be used like this....rather then wasting time by banning accts only to have them reopen a new acct and start the cycle all over again... it doesn't stop botting, it wasn't intended to stop botting, and ccp is aware it is a dumb to design game features around being hard to bot instead of being fun and interesting, and so no part of the discussion about if it's a good feature or not should revolve around that Logit Probit wrote: Oh come off the worthless high-sec carebear soapbox....what effects them will in turn effect you, that's why its called a sandbox. Again the value increase is a good thing, but the prices will increase in both areas...again we are in agreement. this appears to be word salad, mixed in with the standard highsec "sandbox means whatever I chose to define it as today" line and does not appear to have a point besides stating a known truism, that ice prices will increase
Lyza Kimbo Cat Scratch Fever 6	Posted - 2013.05.20 03:43:00 - [287] - Quote Aryth wrote: Jita Bloodtear wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: To the extent highsec production is not 80% of all ice mining and we need higher numbers of null miners, that weakens your argument: null mining produces much greater volumes of LO for each isotope mined. The more miners are forced into null, the less likely it is that LO becomes undersupplied and the more likely it is that it actually becomes oversupplied. 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. This is true. When I get home I wanted to take a look at how many nullsec miners will be expected to have to fill the gap to compensate for the lack of isotopes. And then to examine how much ozone that will produce compared to the current estimated supply. But you're right that the more nullsec miners there are, the better the ozone supply will be. So moving this direction will likely hurt my case for an ozone shortage, assuming nullsec adequately compensates with an increase in miners. When I do the post I'll explain every assumption and you can help me refine the analysis. Let me save you the effort. We had already run those numbers weeks ago. Null can easily supply it. Mmmmm, in the interests of self-protection, I think I'd decline to take your word for something like this, given who and what you are. Look at your own sig, and then ask yourself why anyone would believe you about anything.
El 1974 Green Visstick High Green Rhino 83	Posted - 2013.05.20 06:59:00 - [288] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: 1 not really, it is intended to cause more mining in null which will naturally do this , 2 no: it is generally assumed that the worthless highsec-only carebears won't move. it is to increase the value of mining in null so that more nullsec people mine in nullsec I agree for the most part, but there is more to it than this. If CCP just wanted to make mining in nullsec more rewarding, they could have picked other solutions. I mentioned fixing the scarcity of strontium as a possible alternative earlier, but there is a problem with that as well: too much strontium already stocked up in hangars all around Eve. But there's loads of other things they could have done. They could have done the same as they did with the high-end ores: make the improved racial ice contain double the amount of isotopes the normal variant has. That would have much less impact on the hisec community.
Danni stark 309	Posted - 2013.05.20 08:53:00 - [289] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? works fine with normal asteroids, and this new system is more friendly than the current way asteroids work and regular asteroids seem to work perfectly fine. in short, people are just crying because they might have to put some effort in and totally ignore the fact that ice mining is now the most lucrative activity you can do sitting in a mining ship sans venture. Logit Probit wrote: 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? it's not a limited game mechanic, and yes ice prices will go up, it already has. Logit Probit wrote: The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting wrong. this entire post reads like an en24 article. sensationalised crap based on incorrect assumptions. Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Sir Marksalot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 473	Posted - 2013.05.20 19:32:00 - [290] - Quote But guys this means I might actually have to move around to make vastly superior money compared to I used to make WHERE DID MY CONTENT GO CCP??

EgoweaselSA 0	Posted - 2013.05.21 01:57:00 - [291] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? everything you say is wrong. i dont need proof or evidence to validate my asertions Logit Probit wrote: 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? how dare you question me. do u even see what alliance im in? Logit Probit wrote: The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting and ISboxer using 50+ accts, your logical deductions challenge my ego therefore you must be wrong Logit Probit wrote: increase the value of ice, and to move more ice miners to null and low sec. theres enuff ice in lowsec to supply the hole galaxy. u just dont understand game mechanics. i will continue to insult anyone who brings logical well reasoned arguments to the forum, and get all my alts to do the same. there si concenses that im right without any evidence basically you have no idea what you're talking about
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.21 04:06:00 - [292] - Quote above post is great...lol. Not even worth my time trying to argue with these 2. Any opinion that differs from their own is met with cries of "your dumb, you don't have any clue what your talking about, or your opinions don't matter".... I am against a mechanic that creates a limited game play environment....call me crazy, I just don't like to see a game that I enjoy playing going into that type of an area like several other MMORPGs that I have played in the past. Enjoy the alarm clocking game.... CCP wants to install a limiting game mechanic like this, go for it, just like SOE...they have done so well with every other game they have gotten their hands into.
Sir Marksalot GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 475	Posted - 2013.05.21 04:48:00 - [293] - Quote EgoweaselSA wrote: Logit Probit wrote: 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? everything you say is wrong. i dont need proof or evidence to validate my asertions Logit Probit wrote: 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? how dare you question me. do u even see what alliance im in? Logit Probit wrote: The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting and ISboxer using 50+ accts, your logical deductions challenge my ego therefore you must be wrong Logit Probit wrote: increase the value of ice, and to move more ice miners to null and low sec. theres enuff ice in lowsec to supply the hole galaxy. u just dont understand game mechanics. i will continue to insult anyone who brings logical well reasoned arguments to the forum, and get all my alts to do the same. there si concenses that im right without any evidence basically you have no idea what you're talking about Quoting this so you can't delete it. Probit, are you seriously that space-mad about being wrong that you made a fake account to poorly troll Evilweasel?
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 11	Posted - 2013.05.21 05:49:00 - [294] - Quote Quote: Quoting this so you can't delete it. Probit, are you seriously that space-mad about being wrong that you made a fake account to poorly troll Evilweasel Actually that wasn't me...not my style. But your probably not going to believe me...so think what you want.
Strom Crendraven DYNAMIC INTERVENTION ORPHANS OF EVE 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 09:00:00 - [295] - Quote EgoweaselSA wrote: Logit Probit wrote: 1. Do you believe that installing a limiting game mechanic into the Universe that will exclude a person's ability to participate in that activity based solely on the time that they enter the game is a good idea? If so, why? everything you say is wrong. i dont need proof or evidence to validate my asertions Logit Probit wrote: 2. Do you think that installing this limited game mechanic that decreases game content will make that content more enriching to those that do have the ability to participate in it? how dare you question me. do u even see what alliance im in? Logit Probit wrote: The changes are being made to stop afk ice botting and ISboxer using 50+ accts, your logical deductions challenge my ego therefore you must be wrong Logit Probit wrote: increase the value of ice, and to move more ice miners to null and low sec. theres enuff ice in lowsec to supply the hole galaxy. u just dont understand game mechanics. i will continue to insult anyone who brings logical well reasoned arguments to the forum, and get all my alts to do the same. there si concenses that im right without any evidence basically you have no idea what you're talking about Wow, that's funny.
Katz Meow Corporation Danmark Tactical Narcotics Team 0	Posted - 2013.05.21 09:08:00 - [296] - Quote I really wish that you plan to decress the time it takes to compress ice with the rorqual, because laying there for 4 hours extra just to compress isn't really a 'fun' game mechanic
Danni stark 320	Posted - 2013.05.21 09:10:00 - [297] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: Enjoy the alarm clocking game.... this assumes 2 things that are both terribly wrong. 1) there is only one ice belt, and you know when it will respawn 2) you have to mine the ice. and these terrible and incorrect assumptions are why nobody is taking you seriously. Ice Mining Skill Plan.
Loney CyberDyne R-D 26	Posted - 2013.05.21 09:40:00 - [298] - Quote Katz Meow wrote: I really wish that you plan to decress the time it takes to compress ice with the rorqual, because laying there for 4 hours extra just to compress isn't really a 'fun' game mechanic https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=229506&find=unread
Logit Probit Tristar Interstellar Trading Services Tri-Star Galactic Industries 13	Posted - 2013.05.21 12:11:00 - [299] - Quote Danni stark wrote: Logit Probit wrote: Enjoy the alarm clocking game.... this assumes 2 things that are both terribly wrong. 1) there is only one ice belt, and you know when it will respawn 2) you have to mine the ice. and these terrible and incorrect assumptions are why nobody is taking you seriously. Well I stated what I think about the change, wrong or right. Time will tell. Like with Evilweasel thoughts, I agree on a lot of the things he is saying, but I think its just too much, and will end up with a lot of patches to fix it, and cause some hard feelings for those that can possibly be shut out from this activity. Its like Ice Mining is this huge marble block that CCP wants to make more valuable by turning into a beautiful statue. However, rather then coming in with a hammer and chisel and slowly revamp the block into a statue, they are coming in with a sledgehammer and if they if they take off too much....well they can patch it back up with glue. Both end results are the same....just one way seem to make more sense to me then the other.
Lyza Kimbo Cat Scratch Fever 6	Posted - 2013.05.21 15:26:00 - [300] - Quote Logit Probit wrote: Danni stark wrote: Logit Probit wrote: Enjoy the alarm clocking game.... this assumes 2 things that are both terribly wrong. 1) there is only one ice belt, and you know when it will respawn 2) you have to mine the ice. and these terrible and incorrect assumptions are why nobody is taking you seriously. Well I stated what I think about the change, wrong or right. Time will tell. Like with Evilweasel thoughts, I agree on a lot of the things he is saying, but I think its just too much, and will end up with a lot of patches to fix it, and cause some hard feelings for those that can possibly be shut out from this activity. Its like Ice Mining is this huge marble block that CCP wants to make more valuable by turning into a beautiful statue. However, rather then coming in with a hammer and chisel and slowly revamp the block into a statue, they are coming in with a sledgehammer and if they if they take off too much....well they can patch it back up with glue. Both end results are the same....just one way seem to make more sense to me then the other. Logit, you and Jita Bloodtear are the ones making sense. I have followed this whole wretched 15-page DQ-fest for the last 3 days, and you two are the ones who make sense to me. As far as the position of the goons, let's play a little game of Cui Bono? (meaning, who profits?) 1) We are dealing with the self-identified head of goons' economic warfare unit. 2) Goons are well-known for using psy-ops in support of their market manipulations. 3) If we postulate that goons have taken a long position on Ice and Ice Products, then obviously their investment will only show profits if the price of ice and ice products do in fact rise substantially. 4) Given the law of supply and demand, the more other people hoard Ice and Ice Products, the less the prices will rise, and the less profit goons will make. 5) Therefore, in this scenario, it is absolutely in the goons' best interest to convince everyone that Ice prices are not going to go up. In fact, the success or failure of their entire project could hinge on how successfully they convince others not to take a long position on Ice.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.