These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Moon mineing (O-Tec) needs a "balance"
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2012-05-25 21:50:19 UTC
I agree the moons...and i mean ALL of them need to be looked at but sadly the ideas that CCP has i feel will not come into affect till winter expansion.......and that's if we a freakin lucky.

We all know that the Tech moons were the answers to the R64 moons. North vs South moons. what CCP did is that who ever it was got an ego trip and hilmar went along with as they both had their heads up each other's ass.

what should have been done is simple. I know they got a program that auto seeds the moon and sets in the data base. makes life easy. Reset the moons where there is a balance of moon goo and and Tech moons in all of 0.0 space, easiest fix they can do now and **** off all the 0.0 alliances at the same time.

when the winter expansion rolls around and the new bling bling of shield statics when there is an impact on them will be an awsome time to implement Ring Mining.....yes be an awsome way to remove the risk of moon mining to a risky mining operation with the Exhumers.

Yes that means you 0.0 carebear cousins would need to find miners to gather this. I will have no problem mining the stuff but i am not paying you to be there or be blue. you are paying me!
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#22 - 2012-05-25 21:50:54 UTC
Needs removal.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
SetrakDark
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-05-25 21:53:04 UTC
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
This is less of a Technium problem and more of a moon goo problem...


Yup, that pretty much sums it up. Goo in general is in need of a retooling. Too much single-point value isn't great for the game. It puts too much wealth in the hands of too few (in terms of ceos and directors etc). There definitely needs to be more of a shift in value to average muppets in space pulling it out of belts or whatever. You do want to maintain some single-point rewards for good organizational leadership, but right now it is unbalanced.

CCP know all this, and it is the direction they are aiming their fixes, ironically suggested by some of the current biggest tech holders who were also the first to point out that tech was broken.

However, all of that aside, the state of moon goo has nothing to do with incursions, which were a terribly broken risk/reward arrangement desperately in need of a fix.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#24 - 2012-05-25 21:54:48 UTC
I like the goons.

But if you don't you should stop buying T2 modules and ships. Use best named and boycott the goons and OTEC.

But that would require effort.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
ModeratedToSilence
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2012-05-25 21:55:41 UTC
Tinnin Sylph wrote:
Devious Relation wrote:


Let me guess, you own a tech moon?


I'm mining a tech moon right now. Does that make you mad?


Mining some tech in my osprey. Laughing at dumb scrubs who are going to buy my tech for the equivalent of 500mil an hour.
Arch Stanton's Neighbour
Forceful Resource Acquisition Inc
#26 - 2012-05-25 21:55:51 UTC
All you stupid whiners have two ways to solve the tech "problem".

1 - Band together and take the moons

2 - Find another resource and monopolize it

So quit whining
Devious Relation
Obsessive Compulsive Disasters
#27 - 2012-05-25 22:00:04 UTC
Tinnin Sylph wrote:
Devious Relation wrote:


Let me guess, you own a tech moon?


I'm mining a tech moon right now. Does that make you mad?



Not at all proves my point with the risk vs isk. Hey go take a nap, go for a walk sure that moon will still be there when your back, raking in the cash
Mandy Stafford
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-05-25 22:04:22 UTC
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:
Yes that means you 0.0 carebear cousins would need to find miners to gather this. I will have no problem mining the stuff but i am not paying you to be there or be blue. you are paying me!

Ahahahahaha, renters will never be relevant.
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2012-05-25 22:54:01 UTC
Mandy Stafford wrote:
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:
Yes that means you 0.0 carebear cousins would need to find miners to gather this. I will have no problem mining the stuff but i am not paying you to be there or be blue. you are paying me!

Ahahahahaha, renters will never be relevant.


Your out of order! and to help you understand


watch?v=W3abMUH_P1E]
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-05-25 23:10:48 UTC
Devious Relation wrote:
So CCP have "balanced" incursions due to "risk vs isk" or thats the stand they will take on this, not going to go into details.

I have recently just been made aware of this "O-Tec" agreement between TEST, Raiden, CFC, PL, NCDot which basicaly means, who ever owns the tec moons currently will keep them. Now this simple agreement has completely removed the risk from owning such moons and therefore needs adressing.

The only reason incursions became relativly "risk free" was because of the awsome communitys made. THAT IS ALL

Now this o-tec agreement is in place, i think that should be nuked from orbit


This agreement effects 90% of the tech moons, how are new commers, the smaller corps/alliances ment to even get started?
Its things like this that put new people off and eventualy will be the death of the game

Do your research correctly before you post.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#31 - 2012-05-25 23:25:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
This is less of a Technium problem and more of a moon goo problem.


  • This is less of a moon-goo problem and more of a power-projection problem, which in turn is caused by the extreme low cost of jump and bridge mechanics. Without this, OTEC simply can't protect all it's moons effectively.

    • Yes, I know this is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but anyone who's played EVE since the beginning has seen how null changed and what caused this. And it annoys me to no end if I see players encouraging CCP to go and mess with symptoms, ignoring the real causes.

I have no problem with players coming together and creating something like OTECH. Eve is, after all, a sandbox and OTECH is a sand castle build out of Technium. Actually, I'm surprised someone hasn't done this sooner.


  • Actually this has been done before, or at least attempted. But never very as successful as now, likely the result of CFC dominance (again, without easy and low cost power-projection, a NAP-train this size would fall to boredom-rot and bickering in a matter of months.


That being said, I object to the conditions that allow OTECH to exist:

1) Moon goo is only obtainable via one faucet. This allows a few people to own all the buckets.


  • Don't forget: the grass at the neighbor should always be greener in null. And perhaps it takes only a few people to own those buckets, but it takes a lot more to defend them as well. These faucets are paying for ship-replacement programs, backbone logistics and system development. I sincerely doubt many Tech moons are used solely as a personal ATM


2) The pervasiveness of Technium. This is CCPs fault as they built the game to require so much of it.

  • I'm no MF-geek, but as I understand correctly from Akita's threadnought on this matter, the Tech bottleneck is indeed unbalanced. A good look at this matter, perhaps some additional reactions, also making other moongoo a bit more valuable in the process, would be welcome. That said, I think expensive T2 is a good thing. In EVE MMO-powercreep comes in the form of prices dropping and T1 and meta should remain viable by its affordability over T2.


3) Moon goo income is a top-down income source. Unfortunately, this is really the only income source Alliances currently have. That won't change until CCP changes how Alliances make money.

  • Only source of income? Aren't you forgetting renters and station taxes? I bet a lot of alliances collect contributions from their member corporations as well.

Anyone could do this to any of the moon goo sources. It's not specifically restricted to Technium. It's just that Technium is the most valuable. So in order to do away with OTECH, or the possibility of OTECH-like entities to exist, a few things need to happen:

  • The only thing wrong with OTEC is their capability to project the power of their massive NAP-train. How long do you think that will last if it becomes too expensive for CFC to find their weekly fun beyond all their blue neighbors? How long will CFC be able to keep NC. in check if their southern allies start to balk at the price-tag of running all the way north every time a remote Tech-moon is threatened?

    • Boredom-rot & bickering kill more coalitions then wars do.



1) Change how Alliances make money. Bottom up automated member taxes, 'rent' in the form of automated fees (kind of like Station rental bills).
2) Once that is done, make moon goo obtainable from a variety of sources
3) change T2 blueprints so that the require a wider variety of resources to manufacture t2 goods.

  • [i]An automated alliance tax on top of the automated corp tax isn't such a bad idea. And it wouldn't be bad for moongoo to have a secondary labor-capped source (like future ring-mining) or even tertiary source (like reactions or 5% yield W-moons) to set a limit to the power of cartels (though null-moons should remain the primary source of moongoo, because alliances NEED a good source of passive income as a foundation and something to squabble over).

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-05-25 23:30:28 UTC
passive moon goo mining has been a broken idea for a long time.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#33 - 2012-05-25 23:39:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
OTEC is merely following the real world examples of production cartels like OPEC & the Medellín Cartel, it's price fixing by means of distribution control and is common national and business practice, it is the way that most big businesses/ countries with rich natural resources stay on top of the pile.

The solution also follows real world examples, you can pay exorbitant prices for a controlled flow of resources, or you can engage in diplomacy, wangle deals to get access to cartel goods, if all else fails invade to get what you want. Recent history shows that military might is all to often involved in the scramble for resources in the real world, why should Eve be any different? It just so happens that OTEC probably have more military might than anybody else.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Devious Relation
Obsessive Compulsive Disasters
#34 - 2012-05-26 08:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Devious Relation
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
OTEC is merely following the real world examples of production cartels like OPEC & the Medellín Cartel, it's price fixing by means of distribution control and is common national and business practice, it is the way that most big businesses/ countries with rich natural resources stay on top of the pile.

The solution also follows real world examples, you can pay exorbitant prices for a controlled flow of resources, or you can engage in diplomacy, wangle deals to get access to cartel goods, if all else fails invade to get what you want. Recent history shows that military might is all to often involved in the scramble for resources in the real world, why should Eve be any different? It just so happens that OTEC probably have more military might than anybody else.



It is just supprising to me that under the reasoning "risk vs isk" alot of the eve community as well as ccp nuked incursions out of orbit, and now they are rarely ran. Whilst there are things so unbalanced and relativly risk free as moon goo, and this agreement just goes to prove it.

Incursions offere'd soemthing eve greatly needed, an easily accessable group activity open to everyone, be it part time gamer or hard core fanatic. They were relativly unlimited, one dies another spawns.

Moon Gpoo and especialy tech moons are only accessable to people who are either in or run a massive alliance. Meaning they are accesable to very few players, and yet weigh so heavily on the whole ecconomy of eve. If the average joe wanted to get said moon, they would either have to sign their life away to an alliance, griiiiiiiind thier way for a while, be it months or years, to hopefuly be thrown a scrap of moon that the alliance leader didnt deem his own.

CCP have stated mineing needs rebalancing, CCP and even the whole pewpew community want more targets to shoot. Ive seen a few people suggesting moonrings with said minerals/materials in them which require miners, be it hulks or other ships to mine. At first i didnt think this was a good idea, but after considering it all changed my mind, the reasons follow:

It would revamp mineing, giving miners a goal to work towards.

It would add "Risk tm" to a relativly risk free ISK faucet - forcing ships to be activly mineing vulnerably in space, which hopefuly would increase pvp, and even mineing defence fleets - these alliances/ fatcat alliance leaders would have to work for thier precious moon goo.

It would open up the activity to far more players - granted not as many as incursions but more then there are currently.

It would maybe shake up the whole state of 0.0, making more feesable roaming targets, more predictable places to go and fight that isnt ze enemys stagigng system which is full of moms/titans waiting to trolol face roll you.

All in all the moon belt mineing to me, sounds like a feesable solution to a very very old problem. But then again how long did it take for the Fergel bug to be fixed eh Roll
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#35 - 2012-05-26 08:55:21 UTC
I guess you are not aware that CCP is working on rebalancing moon goo by introducing ring mining. CCP Greyscale's visions also include better environment for smaller entities to thrive in null.

As a side note, the Mittani has also advocated for tech rebalancing for quite some time.

.
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din
Commonwealth Vanguard
#36 - 2012-05-26 08:56:28 UTC
I personally own 2 tech moons, all protected under the OTEC agreement, so even if im not online thousands of people will come and defend my personal ISK fountain. I bet that makes you cry into your pillow at night.

Incursions should be totally removed from hisec, you should feel glad we let you keep them at all.

Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing.
Kazacy
BACKFIRE Squad
#37 - 2012-05-26 09:09:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kazacy
To the OP a simple fix:

1) buy a stealth bomber.
2) go AFK cloackie (and ofc from time to time pop some miner/hauler/rating idiot) in a goon/raiden/whatever system until you reclaim back all techentium.
3) PROFIT

FFS it's a sandbox, don't whine and cry you can really do something but seems this is too hard for you eh?
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#38 - 2012-05-26 10:20:03 UTC
Devious Relation wrote:
blah blah blah, troll troll troll.

Seriously if incursinos were changed and people all got behind risk vs isk reasoning. This agreement and tech moons needs sorting



Greetings

The difference you (explicative deleted) is that an agreement between power blocks is what EVE is all about. It is alliances (read groups of players) getting together in mutual agreement on aspects of player driven/ controlled elements of the game. Incursions balancing was due to the fact that they were too easy. I swear its like hitting my head against a brick wall trying to educate the masses about the differences between player driven content and game mechanics, but unlike the unsubbing tools I will not quit trying to make EVE a better place through community outreach posts in the forums.

vr
East

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"
Talon SilverHawk
Patria o Muerte
#39 - 2012-05-26 10:22:09 UTC
Tinnin Sylph wrote:
ABLOO BLOO GOONS WON AT EVE AND I'M MAD ABOUT IT.



Agreed you guys did good, but you should be able to be challenged in game, otherwise boring it will become.

Tal


Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-05-26 10:32:54 UTC
Devious Relation wrote:
And BTL/TDF wern't player made? Didnt stop the huge eve comminity getting behind the risk vs isk crap to get CCP to change them

incursions had no risk to them, and the changes were to curb blitzing the sites.

As someone else said, abloo bloo bloo my cheating got nerfed, I'm going to make 15073498729384 whiny threads about it.

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

RIP Vile Rat