These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Mining v. Suicide Ganking: The Solution
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Copine Callmeknau
Dirty Vagrants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#41 - 2012-05-09 00:45:56 UTC
Desert Ice78 wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:

Oh yeh, great wildlands, cool story bro. You must be hardcore to live that 'far' into nullsec Lol


You'll have to go just a little bit further than that.

I'll just leave this here...

Quote:
I found Desert Ice78 for you.
From: xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 2012.05.08 23:31

I've found your sleazebag.

He is in the 1C-953 system, T-W4L3 constellation of the Great Wildlands region.

With regards,

There should be a rather awesome pic here
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#42 - 2012-05-09 00:48:15 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
The root issue has nothing to do with mining or miners.

There is so much disposable wealth in the game that people can afford to lose dozens of ships.

Well if the miners can afford to replace their hulks, meh I guess their risk is actually only when they are on their last hulk wth no money to buy another one ...

I never thought of it that way.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#43 - 2012-05-09 01:14:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
Would think reducing the yield and increasing the defenses of barges/exhumers would be a better solution. Though expanding mining drones wouldn't be bad. I would think that Heavys would yield more then sentries though.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#44 - 2012-05-09 02:30:54 UTC
It is all too soon. The changes in mission loot tables and the loss of drone poop need time to realistically change the market. After THAT then the ideas can come to the table.

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
Conrad Makbure
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2012-05-09 02:38:34 UTC
I fully support buffing the hell out of mining drones and overhauling mining ships for role stats. here, here sir.
Katalci
Kismesis
#46 - 2012-05-09 03:07:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
This is a terrible idea. It serves no purpose -- mining yield/tank are already very well balanced; it's just that miners are too stupid to fit their ships properly.

Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Would think reducing the yield and increasing the defenses of barges/exhumers would be a better solution.

You can already do this by, you know, fitting your ship differently.

Bootleg Jack wrote:
The root issue has nothing to do with mining or miners.

There is so much disposable wealth in the game that people can afford to lose dozens of ships.

The risk model is hosed, people who can afford to lose that many ships are not actually taking any risk.

So essentially you have a part of the population participating in zero risk PvP with another part of the population who are so broke they cannot replace the ship they are flying.

You misunderstand the "risk" part of it. It doesn't matter if the gankers have a very significant risk, because the reward is very slim (in terms of tangible profit), maybe a strip miner or two that'll sell for a few million. (And they do have risk; it's just that the risk is 100% -- you lose your ship every time. What makes you convert 100% to 0%, I have no idea.) It's a very, very low ISK/hour activity, worse than actual mining on average. You also risk failing to gank and get any reward at all.

The risk needs to come to the miners, whose ONLY risk is ganking while they continuously profit.
Achtung Waffle
Nex quod Principatus
#47 - 2012-05-09 04:40:10 UTC
Desert Ice78 wrote:
The whining about the rising cost of minerals and hence everything else has become well-nigh deafening in the past few days. Yet people still want the option of happly ganking miners when and where they please.

Well, no. You can't have it both ways. You all need to accept that either you continue to pay through the nose for everything, or else you let miners be miners and let them get on with their chosen profession.

That is all.



This is an excellent point. Every Hulkageddon raises the prices of anything and just about everything player-made due to the higher mineral costs. I can see the appeal of it but really, one has to be realistic about the consequences.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#48 - 2012-05-09 04:49:31 UTC
Achtung Waffle wrote:
Desert Ice78 wrote:
The whining about the rising cost of minerals and hence everything else has become well-nigh deafening in the past few days. Yet people still want the option of happly ganking miners when and where they please.

Well, no. You can't have it both ways. You all need to accept that either you continue to pay through the nose for everything, or else you let miners be miners and let them get on with their chosen profession.

That is all.

This is an excellent point. Every Hulkageddon raises the prices of anything and just about everything player-made due to the higher mineral costs. I can see the appeal of it but really, one has to be realistic about the consequences.

All the people with tons of accounts out here don't mind so much because their mining isk per hour goes up (even adjusting for maybe being ganked, of course).

Apparently some guy multiboxes 20 hulks... wow

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2012-05-09 04:56:06 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
* miners to mine in battleships


But you already can mine in battleships.
Xython
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2012-05-09 04:57:43 UTC
Achtung Waffle wrote:
Desert Ice78 wrote:
The whining about the rising cost of minerals and hence everything else has become well-nigh deafening in the past few days. Yet people still want the option of happly ganking miners when and where they please.

Well, no. You can't have it both ways. You all need to accept that either you continue to pay through the nose for everything, or else you let miners be miners and let them get on with their chosen profession.

That is all.



This is an excellent point. Every Hulkageddon raises the prices of anything and just about everything player-made due to the higher mineral costs. I can see the appeal of it but really, one has to be realistic about the consequences.


You do realize that's a huge reason why a good number of us are doing this, right? Because driving up prices of everything is a good thing -- when you've stockpiled things to sell.

And hell, 70% of the price of every single Hulk is OTEC Technetium. So we have a distinct economic incentive to kill as many hulks as we can.

In short: Working as intended! :D
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#51 - 2012-05-09 05:33:15 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I like the idea, but there is no kill mails for suicide ganking drones. So you will never get any real support due to that. Make no mistake. They do not suicide gank to deal with bots or any of that. It is all about destroying high costing ships while risking nothing at all. They come for the kill mails and make no effort to distinguish between bots or actual human at the keyboard.

LOL No Risk? They lose their ship every time they gank something. You sound like a moron. Suicide ganking is very dangerous and every time you even try it you lose something even if you are successful or not.


risk =/= business expense.

If its a definite expenditure thats not a risk, thats an expense

you got one part of that right though
Lady Spank wrote:

You sound like a moron.


pointed it at the wrong person tho... try a mirror

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#52 - 2012-05-09 05:36:25 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I like the idea, but there is no kill mails for suicide ganking drones. So you will never get any real support due to that. Make no mistake. They do not suicide gank to deal with bots or any of that. It is all about destroying high costing ships while risking nothing at all. They come for the kill mails and make no effort to distinguish between bots or actual human at the keyboard.

LOL No Risk? They lose their ship every time they gank something. You sound like a moron. Suicide ganking is very dangerous and every time you even try it you lose something even if you are successful or not.


risk =/= business expense.

If its a definite expenditure thats not a risk, thats an expense

you got one part of that right though
Lady Spank wrote:

You sound like a moron.


pointed it at the wrong person tho... try a mirror


The risk they face is the risk of a failed or unprofitable gank. Assuming they're running their ganking as a business.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
AureoBroker
Perkone
Caldari State
#53 - 2012-05-09 09:40:26 UTC
While i hold no hope about honorable engagements and such (it's part of the EVE beauty having the lack of those), it's SUPPLY DISRUPTION, which would be qualified under "market" and not under "pvp".
You're engaging in an activity which is VERY akin to ratting. People won't shoot back in any form. Won't react. The outcome of the activity is expected with less than 1% of variance.
Now, excuse me for that, but i thought pvp was about surviving AND killing. The simple fact that you're interacting with another player does not make it PVP, unless any market activity (be it on the supply or demand side) is considered pvp.
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-05-09 09:56:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
ROFL.
so the solution is not to use barges at all. So when hulkageddon is finished and since suicide on hulk is still gonna go on after, one should only mine from now on on a battleship? You do get it that this renders the barges useless unless you are safe in 0.0 (which is safer than high sec)!
Why dont you ask CCP to remove mining barges from the game then?
This is fundamentally wrong when every ship class besides th barges have received a recent buff.
I am not a miner but i see that this is the wrong way to go around it.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#55 - 2012-05-09 09:59:41 UTC
Andrea Roche wrote:
ROFL.
so the solution is not to use barges at all. So when hulkageddon is finished and since suicide on hulk is still gonna go on, one should only mine from now on on a battleship? You do get it that this renders the barges useless unless you are safe in 0.0 (which is safer than high sec)!
Why dont you ask CCP to remove mining barges from the game then?
This is fundamentally wrong when every ship class besides th barges have received a recent buff.
I am not a miner but i see that this is the wrong way to go around it.



Do you live in hi-sec or 0.0?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-05-09 10:01:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
Malcanis wrote:
Andrea Roche wrote:
ROFL.
so the solution is not to use barges at all. So when hulkageddon is finished and since suicide on hulk is still gonna go on, one should only mine from now on on a battleship? You do get it that this renders the barges useless unless you are safe in 0.0 (which is safer than high sec)!
Why dont you ask CCP to remove mining barges from the game then?
This is fundamentally wrong when every ship class besides th barges have received a recent buff.
I am not a miner but i see that this is the wrong way to go around it.



Do you live in hi-sec or 0.0?


i live in a momment in a wh but i do venture into all parts as you can imagine.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#57 - 2012-05-09 10:03:17 UTC
Andrea Roche wrote:

Why dont you ask CCP to remove mining barges from the game then?


I wouldn't mind them doing this. So long as they replace them with a T3 version that allows customization based off of need.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#58 - 2012-05-09 10:07:02 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I like the idea, but there is no kill mails for suicide ganking drones. So you will never get any real support due to that. Make no mistake. They do not suicide gank to deal with bots or any of that. It is all about destroying high costing ships while risking nothing at all. They come for the kill mails and make no effort to distinguish between bots or actual human at the keyboard.

LOL No Risk? They lose their ship every time they gank something. You sound like a moron. Suicide ganking is very dangerous and every time you even try it you lose something even if you are successful or not.


Risk is when you have the chance of getting away with something.
As soon as you know the outcome and the following loss before the action even took place it isn't a risk but a calculated loss.

Learn what risk is before slapping it on everything.
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2012-05-09 10:12:35 UTC
Killer Gandry wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
I like the idea, but there is no kill mails for suicide ganking drones. So you will never get any real support due to that. Make no mistake. They do not suicide gank to deal with bots or any of that. It is all about destroying high costing ships while risking nothing at all. They come for the kill mails and make no effort to distinguish between bots or actual human at the keyboard.

LOL No Risk? They lose their ship every time they gank something. You sound like a moron. Suicide ganking is very dangerous and every time you even try it you lose something even if you are successful or not.


Risk is when you have the chance of getting away with something.
As soon as you know the outcome and the following loss before the action even took place it isn't a risk but a calculated loss.

Learn what risk is before slapping it on everything.


good point. The outcome is predetermined already.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#60 - 2012-05-09 10:14:42 UTC
yes they should make concord chance-based so that there's "risk" by worthless pubbie standards

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar