These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CSM7 Dec Summit Topic - Nullsec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2012-12-10 21:15:41 UTC
Blobs controll huge areas of the nullsec... make them concentrate, and free space for small alliances... Revamp The pos system so they don't need Outposts anymore.... so The big alliances would create Player owned starbases big enough to home all thier members....

But for this the source of proffit, that is technétium, must be much more a result of work then a result of location... Planetary ring minning FTW!!!!

And maybe reduce the Titan bridge range....

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
Frying Doom
#82 - 2012-12-10 21:21:50 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
You can take your "depleting moons" idea and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They really need to shove the whole moon mining thing.

Has to be up there as one of the worst things they ever introduced into the game.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#83 - 2012-12-10 21:25:13 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
You can take your "depleting moons" idea and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They really need to shove the whole moon mining thing.

Has to be up there as one of the worst things they ever introduced into the game.


A LOT of very good fights have happened over moon mining.... and in general, having POS assets in space available for assault 24/7 is an interesting mechanic... I don't think "moon mining" itself is the horrible idea you make it out to be....

Frying Doom
#84 - 2012-12-10 21:34:50 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
You can take your "depleting moons" idea and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They really need to shove the whole moon mining thing.

Has to be up there as one of the worst things they ever introduced into the game.


A LOT of very good fights have happened over moon mining.... and in general, having POS assets in space available for assault 24/7 is an interesting mechanic... I don't think "moon mining" itself is the horrible idea you make it out to be....


Having a passive massive income being fed to corp level with bugger all player involvement necessary is a complete rubbish idea.

People want moon mining, great, make it active mining, throw in a few special moon mining ships, If people mine ice they will definitely mine moons. oh and look then you would have more fights as people could gank ships instead of needing blobs to grind structures into boring.

Top down income is a bad thing, Top down passive income has got to be pushing for worst thing ever.

Also if it was such a great mechanic why is it so stagnant. Personally I think more fights would be had if people had to actually go out and mine, in a ship. You know the whole being vulnerable in space thing.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#85 - 2012-12-10 21:49:37 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
You can take your "depleting moons" idea and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They really need to shove the whole moon mining thing.

Has to be up there as one of the worst things they ever introduced into the game.


A LOT of very good fights have happened over moon mining.... and in general, having POS assets in space available for assault 24/7 is an interesting mechanic... I don't think "moon mining" itself is the horrible idea you make it out to be....


Having a passive massive income being fed to corp level with bugger all player involvement necessary is a complete rubbish idea.

People want moon mining, great, make it active mining, throw in a few special moon mining ships, If people mine ice they will definitely mine moons. oh and look then you would have more fights as people could gank ships instead of needing blobs to grind structures into boring.

Top down income is a bad thing, Top down passive income has got to be pushing for worst thing ever.

Also if it was such a great mechanic why is it so stagnant. Personally I think more fights would be had if people had to actually go out and mine, in a ship. You know the whole being vulnerable in space thing.


Most Moon mining operations are not a "massive income."

And while moon mining operations are a passive income, they are also constantly vulnerable assets.
Other passive income mechanics that are reasonable: Trading, Manufacturing, POS reactions, Datacore RP, PI, etc....

Many of these require differing levels of attention, but they are all passive forms of income that require only an initial setup and periodic updates to earn income.

I do agree, flying in space activity should be promoted... but having assets in space constantly vulnerable to assault leaves interesting game play options too.... Balancing the income vs risk is not simple or trivial, and while historically Tech Mining has been a massive income, that has much more to do with balancing issues than "moon mining mechanics" being horrific...

Good fights have undeniable happened over valuable moons, and even major rivalries that break up alliances and coalitions develop from "valuable asset (i.e. moongoo)" infighting...

Really, it needs balancing mechanics, not "just' removal...
Frying Doom
#86 - 2012-12-10 23:09:54 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
You can take your "depleting moons" idea and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They really need to shove the whole moon mining thing.

Has to be up there as one of the worst things they ever introduced into the game.


A LOT of very good fights have happened over moon mining.... and in general, having POS assets in space available for assault 24/7 is an interesting mechanic... I don't think "moon mining" itself is the horrible idea you make it out to be....


Having a passive massive income being fed to corp level with bugger all player involvement necessary is a complete rubbish idea.

People want moon mining, great, make it active mining, throw in a few special moon mining ships, If people mine ice they will definitely mine moons. oh and look then you would have more fights as people could gank ships instead of needing blobs to grind structures into boring.

Top down income is a bad thing, Top down passive income has got to be pushing for worst thing ever.

Also if it was such a great mechanic why is it so stagnant. Personally I think more fights would be had if people had to actually go out and mine, in a ship. You know the whole being vulnerable in space thing.


Most Moon mining operations are not a "massive income."

And while moon mining operations are a passive income, they are also constantly vulnerable assets.
Other passive income mechanics that are reasonable: Trading, Manufacturing, POS reactions, Datacore RP, PI, etc....

Many of these require differing levels of attention, but they are all passive forms of income that require only an initial setup and periodic updates to earn income.

I do agree, flying in space activity should be promoted... but having assets in space constantly vulnerable to assault leaves interesting game play options too.... Balancing the income vs risk is not simple or trivial, and while historically Tech Mining has been a massive income, that has much more to do with balancing issues than "moon mining mechanics" being horrific...

Good fights have undeniable happened over valuable moons, and even major rivalries that break up alliances and coalitions develop from "valuable asset (i.e. moongoo)" infighting...

Really, it needs balancing mechanics, not "just' removal...

So a POS is vulnerable, so me and a couple of mates can go kill it in destroyers or is it a boring grind requiring comparatively huge assets and not really adding anything to the game.

While some fights have occurred over moon goo, this number would be tiny compared to the ability of small gangs to harvest tears from moon mining ships.

As I said one of the worst mechanics ever introduced into eve, as for the others yes data cores are passive for R&D agents and just got nerfed into the stoneage, as for PI that requires a lot more interaction to keep it running and it is on a player not corp level so it is still providing funding for corps by player actions, unlike top down funding.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#87 - 2012-12-11 00:04:16 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

So a POS is vulnerable, so me and a couple of mates can go kill it in destroyers or is it a boring grind requiring comparatively huge assets and not really adding anything to the game.

While some fights have occurred over moon goo, this number would be tiny compared to the ability of small gangs to harvest tears from moon mining ships.

As I said one of the worst mechanics ever introduced into eve, as for the others yes data cores are passive for R&D agents and just got nerfed into the stoneage, as for PI that requires a lot more interaction to keep it running and it is on a player not corp level so it is still providing funding for corps by player actions, unlike top down funding.


My PI farm, nets about 250-500m a month per character, requires me log into game 1/day, to "export" goods from each planet about 1/week, and I don't bother picking stuff up but maybe twice a month... It's extremely passive... and requires extremely little "flying in space".

You act like all moon mining operations yield 10b a month... when the reality is most moon operations yield closer to PI level income, and require similar work, more logistics, and most importantly, more corporate level trust (i.e. more corporate risk!)! Only the truly valuable moons are "alliance/corp level" assets, whereas most moon operations are run by small groups of pilots that make reasonable income.

And catching "moon ring miners..." Your forum character's PvP history seems to be centered on gate camping in syndicate, so I must ask... do you roam through sov nullsec? There's no way catching nullsec mining operations, given the current state of local, can, nor ever will, compare in any manner to the massive destruction of entire fleets that have already happened in fights over valuable moons...

I LOVE small gang PvP, and am 100% for increasing small gang PvP activities... but I think you're whine against moon harvesting operations is unfounded and unrealistic. You probably didn't read my post few pages back, but I think rather than "removing" POS activities like moon mining, reactions, manufacturing, et al... Instead, I think CCP should introduce new devices/mechanics, easily utilized by small roaming gangs, that disrupts in-system activities enough that locals form up and fight.... i.e. devices that act as a tool for starting fights.

Please think about it... When will a mining Op EVER turn around and fight a roaming gang?? You'll have some luck with group PvE combat situations, but never, ever with mining ops....
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2012-12-11 00:10:27 UTC
yarr I shall mine you to death, foul pirate!

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Frying Doom
#89 - 2012-12-11 00:31:57 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

So a POS is vulnerable, so me and a couple of mates can go kill it in destroyers or is it a boring grind requiring comparatively huge assets and not really adding anything to the game.

While some fights have occurred over moon goo, this number would be tiny compared to the ability of small gangs to harvest tears from moon mining ships.

As I said one of the worst mechanics ever introduced into eve, as for the others yes data cores are passive for R&D agents and just got nerfed into the stoneage, as for PI that requires a lot more interaction to keep it running and it is on a player not corp level so it is still providing funding for corps by player actions, unlike top down funding.


My PI farm, nets about 250-500m a month per character, requires me log into game 1/day, to "export" goods from each planet about 1/week, and I don't bother picking stuff up but maybe twice a month... It's extremely passive... and requires extremely little "flying in space".

You act like all moon mining operations yield 10b a month... when the reality is most moon operations yield closer to PI level income, and require similar work, more logistics, and most importantly, more corporate level trust (i.e. more corporate risk!)! Only the truly valuable moons are "alliance/corp level" assets, whereas most moon operations are run by small groups of pilots that make reasonable income.

And catching "moon ring miners..." Your forum character's PvP history seems to be centered on gate camping in syndicate, so I must ask... do you roam through sov nullsec? There's no way catching nullsec mining operations, given the current state of local, can, nor ever will, compare in any manner to the massive destruction of entire fleets that have already happened in fights over valuable moons...

I LOVE small gang PvP, and am 100% for increasing small gang PvP activities... but I think you're whine against moon harvesting operations is unfounded and unrealistic. You probably didn't read my post few pages back, but I think rather than "removing" POS activities like moon mining, reactions, manufacturing, et al... Instead, I think CCP should introduce new devices/mechanics, easily utilized by small roaming gangs, that disrupts in-system activities enough that locals form up and fight.... i.e. devices that act as a tool for starting fights.

Please think about it... When will a mining Op EVER turn around and fight a roaming gang?? You'll have some luck with group PvE combat situations, but never, ever with mining ops....

Instead of saying closer to PI income levels how about you give a concete example, you know they moon mine this, with this small POS setup and get....isk

As to diverting moon goo production again, I am against passive income like that and moon goo does not make you log in on every character every day to keep the isk flowing.

It should be made an active income stream and bottom up. Yes you want to keep your easy to defend passive income, I understand that but it is not really good for the game or the areas the towers are in.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#90 - 2012-12-11 01:47:36 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:

Instead of saying closer to PI income levels how about you give a concete example, you know they moon mine this, with this small POS setup and get....isk

As to diverting moon goo production again, I am against passive income like that and moon goo does not make you log in on every character every day to keep the isk flowing.

It should be made an active income stream and bottom up. Yes you want to keep your easy to defend passive income, I understand that but it is not really good for the game or the areas the towers are in.


Fine, here are some concrete examples:

When I PI, I do a lazy extract and process single-planet operations, usually running 3x Advanced processors producing a net 15 units of a random Tier 2 product ever hour. These sell for 5-10k isk / unit, meaning I produce 2-4 m in PI goods per day per planet.. A single player can have 6 planets per character, and make quite a bit of isk in PI. When I log in to do a daily PI extraction process, that character doesn't leave station, it's not a target, and it in no way helps small gang PvP...

In comparison to Moon Mining, since you asked for numbers:

A Fuel Block is ~13k per block, and a small POS requires 240 per day, which is roughly 3m isk per day to operate...
A large tower, which is needed for valuable moons, is closer to 12m per day to Operate

Look at an R16 Moon Harvesting setup.... A moon harvester extracts 100 units of a material per hour...
Cadmium is 2.5 k / unit, harvesting about 6m isk worth a day... netting about 3m isk per day...
Vanadium is 2.5 k / unit, harvesting about 6m isk worth a day... netting about 3m isk per day...
Chromium is 3.5 k / unit, harvesting about 8.4m isk worth a day... netting about 5m isk per day...
Platinum is 8 k / unit, harvesting about 19m isk worth a day... netting about 16m isk per day...

If you move up to the R32:
Caesium, 2.5k / unit, 3 m net per day...
Technetium, 77k / unit, 150 m net per day... <-- This is the bottleneck super-goo everyone talks about, currently poviding 4.5b / month...
Hafnium, 2k / unit, 2 m net per day...
Mercury, 6k / unit, 10 m per day...

If you look at top ends R64:
Promethium, 4k / unit, 6m net per day...
Dysprosium, 9k / unit, 18 m net per day...
Neodymium, 32k / unit, 60 m per day... <-- This is nice, but under 2b / month...
Thulium, 1.5k / unit, 0.5 m per day...

So, with the exception of only a few materials: primarily Neodymium and Technetium, Moon mining produces pretty much the exact same income as PI. And like PI, it allows players to log in and spend their time Pewpewing rather than spending countless hours shooting NPC's in anomalies and missions...

I don't think we need to eliminate moon mining.... instead just need ideas to disrupt passive income activities.

Example: Imagine if you could carry some small, relatively inexpensive, device in your dessie's hold (think medium mobile warp disruptor in terms of size and HP). You come into a system, anchor it, start onlining it, at which point it creates a beacon everyone can warp to along with a 10 minute countdown timer. If it finishes onlining, all PI activity, all Moon mining activity, and any other passive income activity (manufacturing, S&I, whatever) is suspended for several hours or perhaps even the day... Now, those industrialists that "got safe" the moment you entered system have a good reason to form up and kick you out... Realize this is a rough, imperfect idea, only listed as an example, but it's stuff like this that encourages small gang PvP.... It's easy to deploy, easy to destroy, motivates people to fight, and is a good starting point for escalations.
Blastil
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#91 - 2012-12-11 01:54:53 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Blastil wrote:
You're making the assumption that the changes I suggest should happen in a vacuum. I suggest no such thing. In addition to 'miniaturizing' 0.0, you would need to also include a change to resource distribution, either making moons 'deplete' or altering moon-goo harvesting, as well as redistributing the weight of these materials. The method by which It should be done is a debatable subject, but is ancillary to the point that it SHOULD and MUST happen.


When you keep saying something "should" and "must" happen, you have to actually demonstrate why that is. You know, with words and sentences and stuff. I've already explained why I think that the mechanics of moon mining aren't an issue (certainly not a major one anyway). Maybe it's high time you explain why it SHOULD and MUST happen, rather than just insisting over and over again that it does?

To quote one of the Eve Radio DJ's during the Mittens-Riverini debate: "Go ahead, use your words".



I did use my words in my previous posts. I would suggest you read them instead of asking people to type things over again.

in brief:
Nullsec is essentially entirely locked up by larger alliances because the system that exists only benefits top down financial gain, rather than bottom up. It is essentially impossible for new entities to enter 0.0 or to confront existing 0.0 alliances. This is a deterant for new players to move out to 0.0. Improving the health of 0.0 will require an entire reworking of the way 0.0 income works.
Frying Doom
#92 - 2012-12-11 02:00:38 UTC
Thank you for the example rather informative

The only thing you missed was the fact that 6 planets over an account equates to effectively 6 months training all up for the 3 alts while chucking a tower up requires only a few hours training or a couple of days at most with the secondary skill amarr industrial and astrometics for instance.

but other than that thanks

But I still prefer pew pew over grind grind.

And I still think top down funding is crap.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2012-12-11 02:14:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Blastil wrote:
in brief:Nullsec is essentially entirely locked up by larger alliances because the system that exists only benefits top down financial gain, rather than bottom up. It is essentially impossible for new entities to enter 0.0 or to confront existing 0.0 alliances. This is a deterant for new players to move out to 0.0. Improving the health of 0.0 will require an entire reworking of the way 0.0 income works.


Not only is that not what you said earlier (that moon materials NEED to be completely changed without question), it's also leaving out the fundamental problem of the "suggest a specific nerf and then halfassedly mention some vague potential buff that should go with it" - the nerf is the only part that has any thought put into it (and in the case of it having anything at all to do with moon materials, is barking up the wrong tree). Your thought went into a nerf that would only affect 1/4 of null instead of something that would also benefit the remaining 3/4, and that's just backwards as hell.

Frying Doom wrote:
The only thing you missed was the fact that 6 planets over an account equates to effectively 6 months training all .


Try 3 months and change with a respec and +3's.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#94 - 2012-12-11 02:15:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Blastil wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Blastil wrote:
You're making the assumption that the changes I suggest should happen in a vacuum. I suggest no such thing. In addition to 'miniaturizing' 0.0, you would need to also include a change to resource distribution, either making moons 'deplete' or altering moon-goo harvesting, as well as redistributing the weight of these materials. The method by which It should be done is a debatable subject, but is ancillary to the point that it SHOULD and MUST happen.


When you keep saying something "should" and "must" happen, you have to actually demonstrate why that is. You know, with words and sentences and stuff. I've already explained why I think that the mechanics of moon mining aren't an issue (certainly not a major one anyway). Maybe it's high time you explain why it SHOULD and MUST happen, rather than just insisting over and over again that it does?

To quote one of the Eve Radio DJ's during the Mittens-Riverini debate: "Go ahead, use your words".



I did use my words in my previous posts. I would suggest you read them instead of asking people to type things over again.

in brief:
Nullsec is essentially entirely locked up by larger alliances because the system that exists only benefits top down financial gain, rather than bottom up. It is essentially impossible for new entities to enter 0.0 or to confront existing 0.0 alliances. This is a deterant for new players to move out to 0.0. Improving the health of 0.0 will require an entire reworking of the way 0.0 income works.


I disagree that the system that exists "only benefits top down financial gain". I think there are several bottom up financial gain aspects to living in nullsec, specifically in terms of ratting anoms. Those also encourage flying in space, and really bolster in-system activity.

At the same point in time, I do feel much of nullsec is "locked up" by larger allliances because Sov battles consist entirely of alarm clock structure shoots, in which a smaller entity really just can't compete.

@ Flying Doom: It takes 2-3 weeks to train all PI skills to level 4, and it takes another 4-6 weeks to train CCU and IPC V (which help but you don't truly need). It is a skill investment, but you get what you put in.

And I very much understand the desire to pew pew over grind grind... Few people like to grind down towers, Few people like to grind LvL 4 missions, Few people like to grind anomaly rats, Few people like to mine belts. In many ways, passive incomes are the antithesis of the grind grind!
Theodoric Darkwind
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2012-12-11 02:19:03 UTC
Bottom up alliance income would be nice, especially for those without tech moons.

moon mining is fine ....... but there should be other sources of moon minerals to ease up the tech bottleneck (ring mining anyone).

Right now you have 2 options for nullsec income, you either own tech moons, or you have renters, if you dont have one of those two you dont hold sov .... period.

The other problem is most of the suggestions for "fixing" nullsec would directly nerf bottom up alliance income. You remove local and everyone stops ratting uses highsec mission/incursion alts and thus contribute nothing to the alliance in a bottom up system, you also kill off mining in basically any form, so any efforts to improve nullsec industry are made useless.

When you are looking at the possibility of removing local you are basically looking at it in a vacum with the current system. However, removing local doesn't hurt tech holders at all, they can still get their moon goo, but you do shut down those who run renters.

So if you removed local under the current system here is what your sov map would look like

The north - unchanged except the ratters transform into highsec mission alts, you dont hurt alliance income, you do hurt the income of the rank & file member.

The south - completely dead, the south depends heavily on renter income, you shut down ratting, you shut off their income

Everything you have suggested for nullsec with the exception of bottom up alliance income is a nerf , to something that is already nerfed to hell. In its current form L4 highsec missions are more profitable than basically all nullsec PvE with the exception of certain anom types and certain very specialized ship setups.

TL;DR: bottom up income is good, but dont kill it by chasing all the ratters and miners away by making it impossible to rat or mine in any reasonable way. Buff nullsec industry so that the highsec industrialists will actually want to move to null in search of juicy profit.
Theodoric Darkwind
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2012-12-11 02:27:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Theodoric Darkwind
Blastil wrote:


in brief:
Nullsec is essentially entirely locked up by larger alliances because the system that exists only benefits top down financial gain, rather than bottom up. It is essentially impossible for new entities to enter 0.0 or to confront existing 0.0 alliances. This is a deterant for new players to move out to 0.0. Improving the health of 0.0 will require an entire reworking of the way 0.0 income works.


New entites enter nullsec by joining larger entities. The best way to get into nullsec as a new player is to join an existing nullsec corp. The best way for a small group to enter nullsec is to join an existing alliance as a corp.

If you want to confront an existing nullsec alliance and contest their sov then you need to be able to match their strength. A 30 man pirate corp is not and should not be an existential threat to an entity like TEST or Goons, but that 30 man corp is certainly capable of being a really annoying thorn in the side of a huge alliance even under the current mechanics if they know what/where/when to strike (i.e. money moons can be RFd in 1 cycle by a small fleet of dreads, faster than the owner can react usually, time your RF correctly and you can get the timer into the owners weakest TZ and possibly take the moon).
Frying Doom
#97 - 2012-12-11 02:36:10 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Blastil wrote:
Snow Axe wrote:
Blastil wrote:
You're making the assumption that the changes I suggest should happen in a vacuum. I suggest no such thing. In addition to 'miniaturizing' 0.0, you would need to also include a change to resource distribution, either making moons 'deplete' or altering moon-goo harvesting, as well as redistributing the weight of these materials. The method by which It should be done is a debatable subject, but is ancillary to the point that it SHOULD and MUST happen.


When you keep saying something "should" and "must" happen, you have to actually demonstrate why that is. You know, with words and sentences and stuff. I've already explained why I think that the mechanics of moon mining aren't an issue (certainly not a major one anyway). Maybe it's high time you explain why it SHOULD and MUST happen, rather than just insisting over and over again that it does?

To quote one of the Eve Radio DJ's during the Mittens-Riverini debate: "Go ahead, use your words".



I did use my words in my previous posts. I would suggest you read them instead of asking people to type things over again.

in brief:
Nullsec is essentially entirely locked up by larger alliances because the system that exists only benefits top down financial gain, rather than bottom up. It is essentially impossible for new entities to enter 0.0 or to confront existing 0.0 alliances. This is a deterant for new players to move out to 0.0. Improving the health of 0.0 will require an entire reworking of the way 0.0 income works.


I disagree that the system that exists "only benefits top down financial gain". I think there are several bottom up financial gain aspects to living in nullsec, specifically in terms of ratting anoms. Those also encourage flying in space, and really bolster in-system activity.

At the same point in time, I do feel much of nullsec is "locked up" by larger allliances because Sov battles consist entirely of alarm clock structure shoots, in which a smaller entity really just can't compete.

@ Flying Doom: It takes 2-3 weeks to train all PI skills to level 4, and it takes another 4-6 weeks to train CCU and IPC V (which help but you don't truly need). It is a skill investment, but you get what you put in.

And I very much understand the desire to pew pew over grind grind... Few people like to grind down towers, Few people like to grind LvL 4 missions, Few people like to grind anomaly rats, Few people like to mine belts. In many ways, passive incomes are the antithesis of the grind grind!

I was calculating to lvl 5 for planetary command centers and Interplanetary consolidation as you said "A single player can have 6 planets per character, and make quite a bit of isk in PI."
to have 6 planets you need level 5 and I use command center6 because it is very much worth the training time.

I was not talking about anoms, ratting or anything other than the moon goo top down system, the rest are fine top down is crap and needs to die horribly.

As to sov I have said many times Sov needs to be governed by usage not a pile of isk and a blob that comes twice to gain sov and never returns until someone tries to take it back.

Moon mining is just an isk investment and SP is the most precious thing we have in this game. Isk you can by with a credit card, you cannot just by SP and stuff it on your character however.

Oh I actually like mining btw, I dont mind pew pew, and I absolutely hate mission running.

But I still believe moon mining is one of the dumbest thing ever put into this game and I would actually go moon mining in a ship that and the number of players who mine would probably split between the 2 types so Null mineral prices would probably go up. Oh and I would like to see moon mining in Null, low and WH space.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#98 - 2012-12-11 02:41:21 UTC
Oh as to ring mining, personally it seems like another CCP pipe dream, much like WiS.

In the mean time why not let us have a special miner we can fit on a barge and go at it.

We scan the moon, find out what it has, see if it makes us enough cash.

Then we mine it till it is done till next DT or someone ganks us for going to have a coffee.

Easy done easy fixed. No more top down passive welfare checks.

Lots of targets for gankers

It makes people do things for income again in Null.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
raskonalkov
Tie Fighters Inc
#99 - 2012-12-11 02:53:02 UTC  |  Edited by: raskonalkov
Frying Doom wrote:
Oh as to ring mining, personally it seems like another CCP pipe dream, much like WiS.

In the mean time why not let us have a special miner we can fit on a barge and go at it.

We scan the moon, find out what it has, see if it makes us enough cash.

Then we mine it till it is done till next DT or someone ganks us for going to have a coffee.

Easy done easy fixed. No more top down passive welfare checks.

Lots of targets for gankers

It makes people do things for income again in Null.


CCP would have to reduce the requirements of tech needed to make modules and ships if they did that. Look at how much minerals prices went up after drone region and mission loot nerf.

Most players wouldn't want to spend EVE time mining in that amount. (Just though mineral prices would go up as well, since miners would mine moons and not asteroids.) (CCP could reinstate the drone region alloys, then make tech moons mineable, perhaps with some of the classic moon mining for tech, unless they wanted to reduce the amount needed). I would almost risk going to low sec to mine moons, but I doubt I could do it very long, with the danger involved.

Or perhaps, CCP could allow moons to be minded by POS as well as miners or just low sec moons mineable. The amount of miners would probably be small, so prices might not be too affected, give fights, as well as fun to mine them.
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#100 - 2012-12-11 03:12:44 UTC
my personal recommendation to resolving the tech bottleneck etcc.. is to look at the problem the other direction.

tech is much lauded over because it is possibly the most shared component to making anything particularly desirable and cost effective in eve, why an r32 moons resources has become this i do not know, but the bottleneck is there not because of location of the moons but due to the fact practically all races need tech by-products in order to make things.

There are 4 different types of r64 moons, 4 types of r32, 4 types of r16 moons and so on... and there are 4 major races and racial technology types in the game, coincidence? i think not. Someone somewhere had the idea correct before it skewwed off on a random tangent but we need to re-align manufacturing of t2 items to using the racial resources that their space is abundant in.

that will free the bottleneck of tech being rediculous in price... it'll force conflict drivers and create new treaties, itll shape and mould large alliances fleet doctrines etc...

ring mining and moon mineral depletion are all a fix of a symptom of a much wider and grander problem that needs to be addressed.