These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Details and update on the Ice Anomaly design

First post First post
Author
Asturiax
Arctodus Mining
#261 - 2013-05-18 13:37:09 UTC
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.
Danni stark
#262 - 2013-05-18 14:06:31 UTC
Asturiax wrote:
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.


all 500+ null sec ice systems?
and i thought 40 accounts for mining ice was excessive.
Asturiax
Arctodus Mining
#263 - 2013-05-18 14:24:42 UTC
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.


all 500+ null sec ice systems?
and i thought 40 accounts for mining ice was excessive.


Not all..wth.:D
But i can tell you that there wont be much ice mining in low and null.
Who wouldnt want to keep a alliance starving for fuel?
And with 1 cloaky camper you can do that just fine.
I bet 10-20 macks are a target worth chasing.


Danni stark
#264 - 2013-05-18 14:54:20 UTC
Asturiax wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.


all 500+ null sec ice systems?
and i thought 40 accounts for mining ice was excessive.


Not all..wth.:D
But i can tell you that there wont be much ice mining in low and null.
Who wouldnt want to keep a alliance starving for fuel?
And with 1 cloaky camper you can do that just fine.
I bet 10-20 macks are a target worth chasing.




that's because nobody mines in low.
and people will be mining ice in null.

cloaky campers don't stop any one mining.
Asturiax
Arctodus Mining
#265 - 2013-05-18 15:03:59 UTC
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.


all 500+ null sec ice systems?
and i thought 40 accounts for mining ice was excessive.


Not all..wth.:D
But i can tell you that there wont be much ice mining in low and null.
Who wouldnt want to keep a alliance starving for fuel?
And with 1 cloaky camper you can do that just fine.
I bet 10-20 macks are a target worth chasing.




that's because nobody mines in low.
and people will be mining ice in null.

cloaky campers don't stop any one mining.


I think im making myself misunderstood..would you take out your hulk in null/low whatever if u would have a cloaky cyno camper in sistem?
Danni stark
#266 - 2013-05-18 15:39:41 UTC
Asturiax wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
Asturiax wrote:
Cant wait the ice changes move.
Ill go place a cloaky afk camper in every ice sistem.
Ahahahaha go mine ahead.


all 500+ null sec ice systems?
and i thought 40 accounts for mining ice was excessive.


Not all..wth.:D
But i can tell you that there wont be much ice mining in low and null.
Who wouldnt want to keep a alliance starving for fuel?
And with 1 cloaky camper you can do that just fine.
I bet 10-20 macks are a target worth chasing.




that's because nobody mines in low.
and people will be mining ice in null.

cloaky campers don't stop any one mining.


I think im making myself misunderstood..would you take out your hulk in null/low whatever if u would have a cloaky cyno camper in sistem?


no i'd take a barge instead of an exhumer.
a retriever costs about the same as a t2 fit cruiser and people don't seem to have any qualms about losing those either.

cloaky campers don't stop people mining.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#267 - 2013-05-18 15:44:44 UTC
a instacane to immediately pop your bomber costs like peanuts
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#268 - 2013-05-18 15:46:47 UTC
El 1974 wrote:
Danni stark wrote:
but as i just demonstrated by basic mathematics, you can do that.

IF there are few others mining that asteroid, which - as I stated before - I don't expect.

Edit: your 'proof' wasn't very convincing to me.

when math isn't convincing to you the problem isn't with math it's that space between your ears.
Christopher Caldaris
Caldaris Enterprises LLC
#269 - 2013-05-18 21:49:31 UTC
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.
Danni stark
#270 - 2013-05-18 23:44:29 UTC
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.
Christopher Caldaris
Caldaris Enterprises LLC
#271 - 2013-05-19 01:25:46 UTC
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
#272 - 2013-05-19 10:46:18 UTC
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?
Christopher Caldaris
Caldaris Enterprises LLC
#273 - 2013-05-19 14:28:05 UTC
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
#274 - 2013-05-19 14:41:54 UTC
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.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#275 - 2013-05-19 14:58:02 UTC
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
#276 - 2013-05-19 19:12:36 UTC
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
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#277 - 2013-05-19 19:48:13 UTC
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
#278 - 2013-05-19 20:31:05 UTC
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.
Logit Probit
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#279 - 2013-05-19 20:42:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Logit Probit
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
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#280 - 2013-05-19 20:53:04 UTC
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