EVE Search - anchoring is messed up

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

anchoring is messed up

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 01:35:00 - [1] I have just tried anchoring a secure cargo container in .7 space. A message just appeared that said to Concord's clean space lane laws updated anchoring software does not allow anchoring of objects in .8 to 1.0 space. this is a .8 system. I am in Ekuenbiron which is clearly .7 what is going on. what did ccp do to the anchoring system please fix this fast. I have also posted in patch review.
Elereth	Posted - 2004.03.13 01:37:00 - [2] Sounds like a rounding problem. I'll show this to the Bug Hunting team ASAP. -------------------- ph34r t3h m0d t34m
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 01:38:00 - [3] thanx
Danton Marcellus	Posted - 2004.03.13 01:41:00 - [4] Ekuenbiron was .8 not long ago, it's .7,something now. Convert Stations
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 01:43:00 - [5] I'm curious to find out when this Concord's clean spacelanes order happened. I hadn't heard about before now. Only because I went to move my cargo container.
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 03:04:00 - [6] I just tried it in Aporlie another .7 system and still did not work.
Istefan	Posted - 2004.03.13 08:42:00 - [7] Same problem in Korama. Also 0.7 space. "It is easier to fight for principles than to live up to them." Alfred Adler
chillx	Posted - 2004.03.13 11:09:00 - [8] Maybe they've stopped anchoring in high sector systems to stop the strip mining.
Fester Addams	Posted - 2004.03.13 11:16:00 - [9] Lets see if I have gotten this right, you are not allowed to anchor containers in 0.8-1.0? If that is right then how are people going to be able to protect themselves from ore thives? Giant and huge secure containers were introduced into the game to cater to the mining comunity, they were to be for the people who does not want to be the victim of ore theft while they mine into cans. I hope I have misunderstood this and that you can still anchor the cans there just it will have a limited lifetime in the 0.8-1.0 systems.
Seradhin	Posted - 2004.03.13 12:00:00 - [10] I think the intention with this is to aid new players mining, these players are most likely not mining to a can but using a small frigate and transporting back to the station when their cargo is full. Thus not allowing secure cans to be anchored in 0.8-1.0 means that the organised, more experienced players can't strip mine it whilst still allowing new players to carry on unaffected. This way the new players should at least have something left to mine. There was a comment on this from the devs buried in the devblog on corp incentives for signing new players iirc, the second phase of this will be to counter mining to a can period (ie non secure cans) in highsec space. Don't think the exact implementation of this second phase has been announced yet though. Personally I think this is a welcome change.
Krast	Posted - 2004.03.13 13:01:00 - [11] God yes, I introduced a friend to the game not long ago. One of his tutorial missions, go get some Veldspar. First roid belt... "what are all these things with red lights everywhere?" Every belt within 2 jumps of his starting point were full of secure containers, not a single roid anywhere. Now if you simply couldn't put anything into an already existing jettison container, mining would be back to the original intent. The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.~Mark Twain
Latinum Smith	Posted - 2004.03.13 14:14:00 - [12] Krast You are so right, all you would have to do is have it as a take all, some or one item, and after breaking the seal the cargo can implodes. This would not happen with secure containers or purchased cargo containers. So yes you could have 600 m3 cargo cans (armagedon cargo space)with ore in for the hauler to collect but remember the time required to create a new can. This would slow mining and improve the sale value of minerals. This would then knock on to the price of equipment and ships making them valued again. But like everything else thats suggested, will never happen and CCP will carry on doing their own thing. Have a nice day.
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 16:19:00 - [13] What this has done is basicly make industrials worthless. They are slow have one high slot and preety much defenseless. I hope they change it back to atleast ways being able to put them in .7 space.
Seradhin	Posted - 2004.03.13 16:24:00 - [14] Quote: What this has done is basicly make industrials worthless. They are slow have one high slot and preety much defenseless. I hope they change it back to atleast ways being able to put them in .7 space. The message given would certainly imply they only intend to restrict 0.8-1.0 Most likely what is happening is some 0.7 systems have an internal status of say >0.75 which is wrongly being rounded up to 0.8, the devs should be able to fix that fairly trivially.
Nyphur	Posted - 2004.03.13 16:32:00 - [15] Quote: Thus not allowing secure cans to be anchored in 0.8-1.0 means that the organised, more experienced players can't strip mine it whilst still allowing new players to carry on unaffected. This way the new players should at least have something left to mine. Personally I think this is a welcome change. It's a nice change, but it doesn't do what you ay it does. I'm a member of Dreamscape (I'm leaving it during this war so i can actually play... I'm a new player and of no use in a war, but I'll join back up after the war) and as far as I can tell, corporations can easilly strip-mine belts without using secure cans. We stripped tons of belts using only jettison cans, a bunch of miners and a bunch of haulers. Judging by the number of secure cans about there, though, there's been a lot of mining going on that there now won't - something I'm glad for.
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.13 16:35:00 - [16] Thing is this is not preventing the cans that are already anchored just the ones that are now in your hold. And as you say the corps that strip mine do not use anchoring of the cans. They just jettison them. So this patch is now useless and is only affecting the solo miners like me.
chillx	Posted - 2004.03.13 18:48:00 - [17] I think cans should be restricted to 0.4 and lower. By the time your mining into a can you should have moved beyond the 0.5 Omber fields.
Lidza	Posted - 2004.03.13 18:53:00 - [18] Edited by: Lidza on 13/03/2004 18:56:02 Quote: Thing is this is not preventing the cans that are already anchored just the ones that are now in your hold. And as you say the corps that strip mine do not use anchoring of the cans. They just jettison them. So this patch is now useless and is only affecting the solo miners like me. That have nothing to do with mining to secure cans neither strip mining... But not allowing anchor secure cans in high secure systems have to do with cans being used for advertisement, since the concord billboards are useless. Actually secure cans are pretty useless for experienced players or players that mine on teams... due to their tiny cargo space where even the considered huge ones are tiny
Krast	Posted - 2004.03.13 19:53:00 - [19] I simply don't understand why they have never implemented being able to dump ore directly into the indy next to you. This would make the entire process more realistic. Fill up the indy, it speeds off, next one pulls into place.
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.14 00:17:00 - [20] Edited by: totes6 on 14/03/2004 00:17:58 Have they posted an estimate to when it will be fixed?
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.14 04:52:00 - [21] bump
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.16 23:45:00 - [22] Looking for the new patch notes, but havent been post yet. Does anyone know if this bug will be fixed in the patch?
Serilla	Posted - 2004.03.16 23:46:00 - [23] patch notes for latest build is in patch review. and says there is fix for it there.
Krashtest	Posted - 2004.03.17 11:48:00 - [24] I have 1 thing to add to this topic. The future jettison cans will no longer be 27500 in size, will be more like the size of the ship jettisoning them. Secure containers will no longer be anchorable in 0.8 and above. There will still be a 3 minute timer to jettison (a much smaller can). Think it takes a while to mine enough commons to build a battleship now , just wait and see how long it will take after these changes hit full force. Even the strip miners will not be able to mine much in an hour like they used to do. Your Mega Afocal Pulse Maser I perfectly strikes Asteroid (Veldspar) [R0ME], wrecking for 798.3 damage. Your 425mm Railgun I perfectly strikes Guardian Captain, wrecking for 685.9 damage.
Boo Radley	Posted - 2004.03.17 13:37:00 - [25] In other words, it's another smack in the mush for those peeps who want to make any kind of career (not an exciting one, I'll grant you) out of mining. Secure cans were the only way to protect your ore when solo mining. Now (for noobs esp., but also for independent miners) this will be restrictive. The prob is, imo, CCP see mining as a means to an end, and not a career. Why do CCP hate miners ?
RedElite	Posted - 2004.03.17 14:21:00 - [26] Well, not to long ago about 2-3 patches, all those systems you guys mentioned were .8, then lowered to .7, CCP probally doesnt have thier database's updated for the new sec ratings.
Arthur Eld	Posted - 2004.03.17 15:54:00 - [27] Edited by: Arthur Eld on 17/03/2004 15:56:25 Quote: I have 1 thing to add to this topic. The future jettison cans will no longer be 27500 in size, will be more like the size of the ship jettisoning them. Secure containers will no longer be anchorable in 0.8 and above. There will still be a 3 minute timer to jettison (a much smaller can). Think it takes a while to mine enough commons to build a battleship now , just wait and see how long it will take after these changes hit full force. Even the strip miners will not be able to mine much in an hour like they used to do. Preventing the anchoring of secure cans in 1.0-0.8 systems wont stop strip mining. Large mining teams dont use secure cans as they have low capacity and usually have enough haulers going to keep the amount of mined ore in the field pretty low. Changing jet can capacity to the ships cargo capacity will slow it down but not as much as you might think. Instead of the miner jetting a can to mine to the hauler will do it and the miner will mine to the 15,000 m3 hauler jet can. It still takes a bit of time to fill up a large indy's hold so the 3 minute timer wont make much difference. ____________________ First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire. We deal in lead.
Harisdrop	Posted - 2004.03.17 16:29:00 - [28] Geez back in July of 2003 I had the ability to go from my starting solar system and mine for days, at the same belt. Hurray for this..... -------------------------- Garsh ma it soo cool killing people in there space thingies
totes6	Posted - 2004.03.17 16:29:00 - [29] people keep complaining about not being able to locate minerals in high sec. systems. Take a look at your map people. There has to be at a thousand systems. With at least 500 with 1.0-.8 sec systems. Now with on average say 8 belts per system. That is 4000 belts. Are you telling me that every single roid in those belts are gone. If that is so then ccp definetly screwed up the respawn rate of the roids cause that is alot of roids. I even went to my starting system and there were plenty of roids left. But my complaint is NOT that noobs should have there own mining areas fine. Leave that for them. My complaint is that ccp cant get their coding right. They says all systems .8 and up well what about .7 systems. You still cant anchor in those. And document the changes BEFORE you implement them. This is just going to affect the new players and solo miners. This WAS the only way to PROTECT your ore from ore thieves. And yes new players do use cans. I even did. I would use a couple small secures and just mine into those have a couple bookmarks set and warp between the station and those cans cutting off a good minute or so each trip. Cause cargo expanders do slow you down alot.
Aranox	Posted - 2004.03.17 17:04:00 - [30] IÆm a freelance miner, mainly working alone, and I have worked up to a thorax. I the idea of making jettisoned cans the size of your current cargo hold (thorax around the 250m3 mark) with 5 miner IIÆs is gonna mean me waiting more time for a new can to be available and less time actually mining!!! I have gotten where I am by using the jettisoned cargo pods, as secure cans offer little space. By making the changes to the jettison pods will kill off freelancers like me and so many more! Only teams of players will be able to effectively mine and to strip mine would take a colossal operation. I donÆt see how restricting the cans will have any positive effect on mining, for noobs or the more experienced! I feel for all those who wanna use secure cans in 0.8 systems who have recently joined and wanna venture out farther than 0.1 or 0.9 (where 0.7 is still too dangerous to effectively mine!) and neeeeeed to use secure cans. ThatÆs how I started and with out them I would have had to run the gauntlet of new and experienced players alike in high sec system to mine! Which would have meant it took longer for that next ship and skillà etcà With these changes, so much for getting the mins and money together for a BS!!!!!!

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.