EVE General Discussion

Never said EVERY SINGLE ONE of them are. But 40% of Miners have stopped. That's kind of a lot of miners who have stopped due to a small increase in risk.

They would do it less if it was running at a loss (proof in the tanked Hulks who are mostly overlooked). Therefore profit is a motivator.

The only numbers we have are for the first week of HAG. I don't see any reason to believe mining activity has increased since then. Show me some evidence that suggests that mining has increased since the first week of HAG (or that the gank rate has skyrocketed), and you'll be showing evidence that miners are no longer irrationally risk averse.

Also, generalizing is the order of the day when you're talking about demographic issues. Like the 40% decrease in mining attributed to HAG.

Never said it wasn't. If you'd been paying attention to what I've been saying when I post on the subject, you'd see that Tanking your freaking Hulk has been one of my 17 patented suggestions for how to deal with HAG. I said that UNTANKED Hulks (which make up most of HAG's KB) are easy to kill with 2 cheapo Catalysts (or a stiff beeze) profitably.

The fact of the matter is that highsec miners are driven solely by their risk-averse nature. Unwilling to accept any sort of risk, unwilling to factor risk into their business plans, they engage in an activity that cannot create a real loss of isk (merely an opportunity cost) without intervention from other players. As a result, one can herd them like sheep merely by demonstrating the potential for loss: hulkageddon works because as highsec miners a are risk-averse they are unable to process the likelihood of a risk, and we see that constantly. Trying to explain to a highsec miner how he can reduce his risk of being ganked is often like trying to teach a dog calculus: it simply won't process it. The highsec miner will be told he can buffer tank - but will respond it is still possible to gank him therefore the buffer tank offers no advantage.

We see forms of this argument constantly. It doesn't matter to a highsec miner if he can easily make it so it requires three catalysts (or more) to gank him: since it's possible, it's the same as only needing one catalyst to gank him. To the thinking man, of course, these are different: you may have, on any particular day, a 5% chance of a loss of 300m if you are untanked while a .5% chance of a similar loss if you are, meaning your daily loss to ganking is reduced from 15m to 1.5m - an absolutely huge increase. However, to the highsec miner, all that they see is "300m loss". They can't deal with this, and therefore bleat that it must be made impossible to gank them. Now, many have processed this is unacceptable in this game, but the thrust of their argument is clear: they should not be exposed to risk and anything that does expose them to anything more than "asteroid hitting earth tomorrow" levels of risk is unacceptable. If it's reduced to that, well, they're willing to compromise.

it don't matter how and why right or wrong
keep posting
keep ganking