Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nobues
Gallente Nomadic Wayfarer Syndicate Carpe Universitas
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 15:06:00 -
[1]
so CCP with the ever growing eve one will think your unlock moon mining where ever you can place pos's at. This will I'm sure, clear up alot of issue.
Like people moon mining for profit, and not for control of space. It also rewords people who does missions and gives everyone a chance of getting moons and not just people or a group with enough isk. Webhosting, teamspeak and Killboard for you, your corp, and your Alliance Click me for more info |
Kane Kaldorei
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 15:29:00 -
[2]
In 0.4 maybe but never in high sec. Unless the prices of all the minerals crash substantially, probably to the extent that the POS's become unprofitable to run, you would have a risk free cash cow, which is unbalanced and unfair. Asides from ruining the hard work of many alliances who have fought and lost billions of isk for resources, as their moons would now just be risky and unprofitable.
|
Shintai
Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 17:48:00 -
[3]
Highsec moon mining is fine. If they just would fix the workaround of game mechanics with Highsec POSes. Like something along with not enough faction standing=offline POS. Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
Clansworth
Point-Zero SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 20:15:00 -
[4]
Or perhaps, mining in highsec would require a significant increase in charter usage, as yo are now not just getting a charter to park your tower there, but to actually extract valuable materials from the moon (which, belongs to the faction).
New Prospector Class |
Kaaii
Caldari PixelJuice Design Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 23:47:00 -
[5]
no
Quote: his will I'm sure, clear up alot of issue.
saying something with conviction does not make it true
According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there. kieron Director of Community Relations,
|
Thenoran
Caldari Knights of MADD Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 00:00:00 -
[6]
Moon Mining in High-sec would be limited, say you can only use a special Moon Miner which gives half of the yield to the Faction in which space the POS is in (nice backstory for making it half yield).
At the very least one should be able to react and refine in a High-sec POS... ------------------------
Mining over 4000m3 per cycle...with a Rokh |
Kuzya Morozov
Gallente The Older Gamers R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:10:00 -
[7]
Hehe, guess you guys are moving to hisec now? :)
|
Newbear
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 02:27:00 -
[8]
Meh, I doubt ccp will do this. Prices are high but not as high as when when t2 bpos was the only way to build ships and mods. Maybe when ships and mods hit the pre invention values, .4 moon mining will be allowed.
Click here for my High Security POS Service
|
adriaans
Amarr Ascendant Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 12:29:00 -
[9]
/signed for 0.4 moon mining
high sec...maybe...we'd maybe need some ships in high sec that can kill the towers a bit better than needing a fleet of battleships to do it remotely effective. -sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
|
Qvaaa
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 13:14:00 -
[10]
So u guys found some fat moons in 0.4, and wanna choke the pyton there.
|
|
Gimpb
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 21:05:00 -
[11]
They'd have to make high sec POSs easier to get rid of, right now it's so difficult to kill one that the first people to throw up towers would have too big an advantage.
|
Guvante
GALAXIAN
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 23:13:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Shintai Highsec moon mining is fine. If they just would fix the workaround of game mechanics with Highsec POSes. Like something along with not enough faction standing=offline POS.
Yeah because people can't use alt corps to hangle the POSes /sarcasm
The mechanic that is a problem is someone having to war dec you to destroy your POS, and even then they can't bring in Dread support to take it down, making it much easier to defend.
|
Bloody Rabbit
Jita Miners
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 03:02:00 -
[13]
Moon mining should never go into Empire space (.5+). But there is no real reason not to have moon mining in .4 as the cap ships can come and fubar the pos.
Sorry but I don't buy in on this POS can be attacked in empire. With one or two trained chars working a deathstar in empire there is no chance to bring it down without cap support.
Originally by: Radcjk PvP in eve can be sort of rough. It's closer to bad sex. Usually an hour of two of foreplay followed by 5 minutes of disappointment. And the surprise at the end.
|
dunston thorbald
Tasman Universal Industries Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 10:36:00 -
[14]
0.4 yes
0.5 and above - Gases only and no reactors??
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 11:08:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Kane Kaldorei In 0.4 maybe but never in high sec. Unless the prices of all the minerals crash substantially, probably to the extent that the POS's become unprofitable to run, you would have a risk free cash cow, which is unbalanced and unfair. Asides from ruining the hard work of many alliances who have fought and lost billions of isk for resources, as their moons would now just be risky and unprofitable.
Wardecs
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 11:16:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Bloody Rabbit Moon mining should never go into Empire space (.5+). But there is no real reason not to have moon mining in .4 as the cap ships can come and fubar the pos.
Sorry but I don't buy in on this POS can be attacked in empire. With one or two trained chars working a deathstar in empire there is no chance to bring it down without cap support.
1) Controlling guns in empire was disabled, has it been re-enabled?
2) Easy to add a limitation on the guns available in high sec.
3) Moon mining in high sec empire should be taxed or require more charters.
4) Way less systems (and so less moons) and generally less good. Probably it would be competitions for the low end moon minerals, not for the high end (and the low end are already crashing, it is only the high end that are rising in price).
The only real doubt is what will be the effect of a POS siege in a already congested high sec system.
|
Nexus1972
Pat Sharp's Potato Rodeo
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 12:00:00 -
[17]
Yes to moon mining in 0.4 No to 0.5 and above
At the moment 0.4 Poses have none of the benfits and all of the risks associated with 0.3. The benefits of any PVE/PVP activity should reflect the risk, and could help to improve on ice prices due to increased fuel requirements should a whole bunch of new 0.4 POS'es get put up.
-------------------------------- CEO of Cosmos Operations
Building COSMOS Minmatar BPC's and supplying Sleeper components |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 12:11:00 -
[18]
No. If you put a large faction POS at a dysprosium moon, fit a harvesting array and then fit it up with guns and hardeners for the rest, you can't take it down with just battleships, I'd imagine.
Since dread's aren't allowed in highsec, it's just not viable. It's virtually risk-free when dreads arent allowed in.
|
Lord Fitz
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 04:47:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Guvante The mechanic that is a problem is someone having to war dec you to destroy your POS, and even then they can't bring in Dread support to take it down, making it much easier to defend.
Why is a wardec a problem ? With the way stront is etc, if you put their POS into reinforced they have about 7 hours to notice (which may not happen on an alt corp), and get someone to counter-wardec or they have to defend the POS themselves. If anything the wardec is a problem for the defender more so than the attacker, especially if you sneak a wardec through around an extended downtime.
The absence of dreads make it hard to take down a POS that is defended by a few POS gunners and a handful of people, but this is fine so long as highsec POS's aren't holding valuable moons. If they were though, it would be a real problem, as you would see towers that were impossible to take, now that may be the case, but given that any moon is of equal value it's not currently a big deal. |
AdmiralDovolski
Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 05:52:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Lord Fitz
Originally by: Guvante The mechanic that is a problem is someone having to war dec you to destroy your POS, and even then they can't bring in Dread support to take it down, making it much easier to defend.
Why is a wardec a problem ? With the way stront is etc, if you put their POS into reinforced they have about 7 hours to notice
stront timers go for 1 day 17 hrs if fueled correctly
im in ur system, incapping ur cynojammer |
|
Uncle Mo
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 06:20:00 -
[21]
If .4 mining is allowed, then all .4 moon materials should be 'rerolled'.
|
Lord Fitz
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 10:16:00 -
[22]
Originally by: AdmiralDovolski stront timers go for 1 day 17 hrs if fueled correctly
There's some debate about correctly, if you wanted it to come out of reinforced 1 hour before it was attacked you would have to do 23 hours, 22, 21 etc. Once you want it 7 hours or more you have the choice of 17 hours, or 1 day 17 hours etc. When they doubled stront usage they removed the option to 'time' stront for a good number of people. So people just max it out instead, which means it's highly predictable and puts the timing back in the hands of the attacker, who simply chooses a time of the day 7 hours after they want it to come out of reinforced.
People in the past have exploited things like this by doing such things as attacking POS's just before extended downtimes, meaning by the time the defender notices it has only a handful of hours left, and regardless if you don't notice > 24 hours before you can't get a return war dec going from mercs/friends etc. Even at 1 day 17 hours normally, if you were to say have people logged on once per day, there's a good chance that the POS would have less than 24 hours remaining left before it comes out of reinforced, denying the defender oppertunity to war dec. The flip side is that the attacker must wardec, and that gives another 24 hours warning, but not all attackers will ever go after POS's, and they may keep up a wardec for weeks before going for a POS.
|
Vyktor Abyss
EnTech Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 10:33:00 -
[23]
With Dreads its difficult enough to kill a POS.
Without Dreads in high sec, the towers there would spread like a plague killing the already fragile (lower end) moon mineral markets.
Current mechanics give people the opportunity to have "low risk" moon mining in low sec. Why make it "no risk" since that hardly balances risk and reward?
The guy who just said "No" got it spot on - best post yet.
|
Pwett
Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 14:34:00 -
[24]
Moon mining, outside of dysprosium, will never be an overall profitable process unless they either a) reduce the amount of dirt or b) change the sov mechanics so that people who spam POS to maintain sov or in a sov war don't need to dump their excess minerals as an attempt to offset the cost of POS fuel. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
quickshot89
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 15:05:00 -
[25]
what about a new form of mining outpost? just for mining, nothing else, reactions etc must be taken back to low sec to use, that way, it balances it out, you want to mine high sec moons, but you must either sell the stuff for a low price or risk moving it to low sec where you can get hit??
thoughts?
|
Heartcarver
X Bane X Soldiers Of New Eve
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 18:08:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Lord Fitz
Originally by: AdmiralDovolski stront timers go for 1 day 17 hrs if fueled correctly
There's some debate about correctly, if you wanted it to come out of reinforced 1 hour before it was attacked you would have to do 23 hours, 22, 21 etc. Once you want it 7 hours or more you have the choice of 17 hours, or 1 day 17 hours etc. When they doubled stront usage they removed the option to 'time' stront for a good number of people. So people just max it out instead, which means it's highly predictable and puts the timing back in the hands of the attacker, who simply chooses a time of the day 7 hours after they want it to come out of reinforced.
People in the past have exploited things like this by doing such things as attacking POS's just before extended downtimes, meaning by the time the defender notices it has only a handful of hours left, and regardless if you don't notice > 24 hours before you can't get a return war dec going from mercs/friends etc. Even at 1 day 17 hours normally, if you were to say have people logged on once per day, there's a good chance that the POS would have less than 24 hours remaining left before it comes out of reinforced, denying the defender oppertunity to war dec. The flip side is that the attacker must wardec, and that gives another 24 hours warning, but not all attackers will ever go after POS's, and they may keep up a wardec for weeks before going for a POS.
Last tower we put into reinforced was 2Days 2 hours, and that was Saturday night...
"The point of war isn't to die for your country, it's to make the other bastard die for his" |
Arous Drephius
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 18:31:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Heartcarver Last tower we put into reinforced was 2Days 2 hours, and that was Saturday night...
Faction tower?
|
Lord Fitz
Antares Fleet Yards SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 18:57:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Heartcarver Last tower we put into reinforced was 2Days 2 hours, and that was Saturday night...
0.0 POS's get a 25% reduction on stront usage with soverignty, maximum is 55 hours or 2 days 7 Hours Without soverignty you get a maximum 41 hours, or 1 day 17 hours.
Quote: Faction tower?
On their release, faction towers got a stront usage bonus, of 25%, when they seperated out the fuel and stront bays, they removed this (you would have had silly stront times like 6 days possible at that point). IMO they should have returned this bonus when they doubled stront usage.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |