There's no such thing as a ship too strong to gank.

Locust swarms, are the players who multibox ice anomalies in hi-sec with 10-20 accounts or more. Usually they are contain a large number of Procurers or Skiffs, a Freighter, and an Orca. These players can make billions daily for just a few hours of play in hi-sec and they do it virtually risk free. That's because Procurers and Skiffs are too strong against gankers, they don't have to worry about losing ships. Even if they did occasionally lose one, it's nothing to the amount of isk they are earning. It also can't be much fun for the other players when many anomalies has one or two of these greedy players around.

Does anyone have a solution to this? I only have two suggestions, one would be to let the gankers sort it out. The ice fields are full of procurers and skiffs, I don't know what percentage they are but I would guess there is 85% procurers/skiffs, 10% rets/macks and 5% hulks/covetors across the ice fields in hi-sec on average. If that's the case, the solution would be to nerf the Skiff and Procurer a bit. It's far too strong, if determined gankers could target this type of player that could be the answer.

The other idea would be to stop isboxer, but I think that alone may not solve this problem. I like the first idea better.

If ccp decides to do something about iskboxing it will probably be to alter game mechanics to make the commonly isboxed activities harder to multibox, as opposed to just "banning" isboxer.

So bombers, for example, might see the return of proximity decloaking for other cloaked ships. Ice miners could see loot spew. You get the idea, the point isn't in what particular mechanic is used to discourage isboxer. Rather, the point is to create gameplay that requires the full attention of the pilot on one character to effectively do the activity.

Does anyone have a solution to this?

If you don't like it then do something about it.

Maybe make ice mining anomalies less predictable and less reliable?...
Personally I favour a complete removal of static belts and all mining moved to anomalies (in their own category different from combat anomalies) and add back in gravimetric sites as the additional spice for explorers....

The way I see it is that they pay for all those accounts and therefore have the right (imo) to do what they like with them.
If they are eating up all your ice then why not war dec them?

That is after all, the way the game is supposed to work.....

Maybe make ice mining anomalies less predictable and less reliable? Like moving them to random spawns in the constellation instead of a system. Or adding ice to some normal belts. Something like this would require the ISBoxer fleets to move around instead of being based in the same system, removing the convenience that comes with it.

Personally I favour a complete removal of static belts and all mining moved to anomalies (in their own category different from combat anomalies) and add back in gravimetric sites as the additional spice for explorers. Some spawned anomalies can then contain ice. Number of guaranteed anomalies per system can be similar to the number of belts. Could even add a depletion mechanic in, spawning only smaller and fewer sites if a system is mined heavily. This would also remove the fixed spawn of ores at downtime.

Has CCP ever mentioned any plans on reiteration on mining and mining sites?

So let me get this straight.

OP says that multiboxers are the problem. Then somehow drifts off into complaining about procs/skiffs being too strong. And the solution to multiboxers "making billions" in High-Sec is to nerf procs and skiffs.

This is all very amusing because there is not even a mention of nerfing spawn rates of ice belts. This would actually be a direct nerf to the High-Sec players who are "making billions" multiboxing.

The OP's suggestion would be an indirect way of nerfing the mean ol' multiboxers that are apparently not abiding by the norm that OP seems to have conjured up in their head.

This is nothing more than a poor attempt of a ganker crying about not being able to gank a 200mil ship in their 2mil Catalyst.

There are too many Procurers and Skiffs being used, almost everyone is using them. Clearly this ship type was made too powerful and an adjustment is needed. In the form of less hitpoints and the skiff should also lose a low slot because that ship has an imbalanced number of slots (too many).

With procurer/skiff multiboxed mining its the orca thats the key to it all, not the miners and not the frieghter. Bump the crap out of the orca so they cant use the orca to move ice around and your fine theyll eventually leave after a few days of this.

Oh and it used to be way worse with the retriever/mackinaws per change. Trust me I used to do it.

Procs/skiffs are needed to mine effectively in null sec with the BS spawns safely. They are a miners weapon so they can actually mine there so I think itd be a mistake to ***** and whine to CCP about nerfing them. They WANTED it not to be so retriever/mackinaw dependent in the belts and now its become that.

Working as intended.