These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Not another high sec miner thread.....Oh yes it is

Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-06-26 20:43:00 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.

With gank ships being cheap, and on top of that being paid back and more, combined with the potential of high value salvage providing plenty of incentive to gank these ships, further evidenced by the number of people doing so, how do you conclude that the risk is too low for the reward?


You cannot profitably gank a properly tanked Hulk.

EDIT: And you can't gank a properly attentive and prepared miner at all.

Without knowing the cost of a successful gank on a properly fit miner, I have to ask, doesn't 10mill + drops and salvage not cover a sufficient number of gank destroyers to take out a tanked hulk?
Betrinna Cantis
#22 - 2012-06-26 20:51:46 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.

With gank ships being cheap, and on top of that being paid back and more, combined with the potential of high value salvage providing plenty of incentive to gank these ships, further evidenced by the number of people doing so, how do you conclude that the risk is too low for the reward?


You cannot profitably gank a properly tanked Hulk.


EDIT: And you can't gank a properly attentive and prepared miner at all.

I SOOO love it when they try. They quickly find out that "Opps, I shoulda checked local" hehe.Blink

Alts have been changed to protect the Innocent. You may have mistaken me for someone who cares.....
Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#23 - 2012-06-26 21:04:33 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
…such as mining aligned


I have to question what this means exactly.

My understanding of ‘aligned’ is that you should be pointed towards your destination and moving at 70% of your maximum velocity so that when someone appears on the overview, you can insta-warp.

Now assuming that a Hulk moves at max about 65 m/s, that means that at 70% speed, you’re moving at approximately 46 m/s.

Also assuming that you start mining at 0 distance from your asteroids and with a laser range of 15km, it would take you about 326 seconds or just over 5 minutes to move out of range.

Even assuming you start at the extreme edge of your laser range at 15km distant and move past the asteroids to a distance of 15km, it would take you just under 11 minutes to move out of laser range.

Given the above, how are miners suppose to mine while aligned?

And no, mining while stationary and pointed towards your destination does not count as mining aligned.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus
Stellar Artois
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2012-06-26 21:21:36 UTC
posting in a troll thread.
Pipa Porto
#25 - 2012-06-26 21:21:44 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.

With gank ships being cheap, and on top of that being paid back and more, combined with the potential of high value salvage providing plenty of incentive to gank these ships, further evidenced by the number of people doing so, how do you conclude that the risk is too low for the reward?


You cannot profitably gank a properly tanked Hulk.

EDIT: And you can't gank a properly attentive and prepared miner at all.

Without knowing the cost of a successful gank on a properly fit miner, I have to ask, doesn't 10mill + drops and salvage not cover a sufficient number of gank destroyers to take out a tanked hulk?


Nope. Not that the 10m bounty's relevant to game design.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#26 - 2012-06-26 21:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
…such as mining aligned


I have to question what this means exactly.

My understanding of ‘aligned’ is that you should be pointed towards your destination and moving at 70% of your maximum velocity so that when someone appears on the overview, you can insta-warp.

Now assuming that a Hulk moves at max about 65 m/s, that means that at 70% speed, you’re moving at approximately 46 m/s.

Also assuming that you start mining at 0 distance from your asteroids and with a laser range of 15km, it would take you about 326 seconds or just over 5 minutes to move out of range.

Even assuming you start at the extreme edge of your laser range at 15km distant and move past the asteroids to a distance of 15km, it would take you just under 11 minutes to move out of laser range.

Given the above, how are miners suppose to mine while aligned?

And no, mining while stationary and pointed towards your destination does not count as mining aligned.


Webs, get your Webs here!
Fresh and blue webs are here!!!
Wiggle jiggle, slow mid slot,
thats the best of what you are.
Blue and helpful, fill the center,
cozy keeping from cracking a shell
Aligning and minerals in you.
Oodles of the safety, too!
Oodle doodle!
Popular and perfect and so complete in every way!
I love you webs webs!
Come into my Hulkey, oh so very lovely.
Slow, Slow, Slow!
Chribba Chribba away your veld and come to me!
Get your Webs! I love you!
Fresh Webs! I love you!
Blue Webs! Really really love you so!
Webs fresh Blue webs.
Webs I really love you like the sky~ above!
Webs are the best! I love you!
Fresh Webs! I love you!
Blue webs! Really really love you so!
Webs fresh blue webs!
365 days I really love you so!
I really love you so! mmm! Yummy!

Oh, and besides that, you can align to strategically placed safespots allowing you to effectively orbit the roid, or you can do drivebys (start 15k off in one direction and end 15k off in the direction you're aligning)

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-06-26 21:28:58 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Nope. Not that the 10m bounty's relevant to game design.

Doesn't have to be relevant to design. Risk originates with player activity, not game design. Also this means that there are conflicting accounts of profit. Some have said in other threads that it is profitable. Either way, if you are being passed on because you are tanked then you are sacrificing potential yield and all is working well.
Alaya Carrier
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-06-26 22:35:54 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.


Since when you need "skill" to play EvE? Had EvE had true twitch PvP, line of sight, terrain elevation tactics and so on, then it would. As of now all the skill you need is to press F1 F2 F3.
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2012-06-26 22:36:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Schneider
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
I have to question what this means exactly.

My understanding of ‘aligned’ is that you should be pointed towards your destination and moving at 70% of your maximum velocity so that when someone appears on the overview, you can insta-warp.

Now assuming that a Hulk moves at max about 65 m/s, that means that at 70% speed, you’re moving at approximately 46 m/s.

Also assuming that you start mining at 0 distance from your asteroids and with a laser range of 15km, it would take you about 326 seconds or just over 5 minutes to move out of range.

Even assuming you start at the extreme edge of your laser range at 15km distant and move past the asteroids to a distance of 15km, it would take you just under 11 minutes to move out of laser range.

Given the above, how are miners suppose to mine while aligned?

And no, mining while stationary and pointed towards your destination does not count as mining aligned.

You do know that ships can realign to a different align point, like say, something at a relatively opposite direction after you hit that align button? Unless, you just want to be afk, if that's the case, staying aligned won't help you in any case.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Josef Djugashvilis
#30 - 2012-06-26 22:38:10 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.

With gank ships being cheap, and on top of that being paid back and more, combined with the potential of high value salvage providing plenty of incentive to gank these ships, further evidenced by the number of people doing so, how do you conclude that the risk is too low for the reward?


You cannot profitably gank a properly tanked Hulk.


EDIT: And you can't gank a properly attentive and prepared miner at all.


Is that because the miner is docked up?

This is not a signature.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#31 - 2012-06-26 22:41:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Corina Jarr
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
…such as mining aligned


I have to question what this means exactly.

My understanding of ‘aligned’ is that you should be pointed towards your destination and moving at 70% of your maximum velocity so that when someone appears on the overview, you can insta-warp.

Now assuming that a Hulk moves at max about 65 m/s, that means that at 70% speed, you’re moving at approximately 46 m/s.

Also assuming that you start mining at 0 distance from your asteroids and with a laser range of 15km, it would take you about 326 seconds or just over 5 minutes to move out of range.

Even assuming you start at the extreme edge of your laser range at 15km distant and move past the asteroids to a distance of 15km, it would take you just under 11 minutes to move out of laser range.

Given the above, how are miners suppose to mine while aligned?

And no, mining while stationary and pointed towards your destination does not count as mining aligned.

4 to 10 (depending on how paranoid you are for ganks) off grid bookmarks, set up around the roids. You can keep moving and maintain near 75% speed throughout, limiting risk of gank to near zero and being able to have a max yield fit.

This works for solo mining with station emptying (though that isn't very efficient, but better than getting killed) and works very well with Orcas (just fit a tractor on the Orca). Only time it isn't useful is when can mining solo... which is just stupid anyway.

Edit: webs help too :)
Pipa Porto
#32 - 2012-06-26 22:44:21 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Nope. Not that the 10m bounty's relevant to game design.

Doesn't have to be relevant to design. Risk originates with player activity, not game design. Also this means that there are conflicting accounts of profit. Some have said in other threads that it is profitable. Either way, if you are being passed on because you are tanked then you are sacrificing potential yield and all is working well.


Inclusive of the 10m bounty, a properly tanked Hulk is, at best a breakeven proposition. That means using several Catalysts with chap fittings (~5m apiece). Getting 5-6 of those to gank one tanked Hulk for a breakeven is harder than having the crew run 3 ganks of untanked Hulks and making a profit.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#33 - 2012-06-26 22:45:03 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.

With gank ships being cheap, and on top of that being paid back and more, combined with the potential of high value salvage providing plenty of incentive to gank these ships, further evidenced by the number of people doing so, how do you conclude that the risk is too low for the reward?


You cannot profitably gank a properly tanked Hulk.


EDIT: And you can't gank a properly attentive and prepared miner at all.


Is that because the miner is docked up?


Nope.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Price Check Aisle3
#34 - 2012-06-26 22:45:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Price Check Aisle3
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
Given the above, how are miners suppose to mine while aligned?

It's 75% of max speed to stay aligned. As others have suggested, get a fast frigate with a perma-MWD, warp to belt, fly perpendicular parallel (!) to the belt out to about 400km or something (off-grid, really), bookmark, warp back to belt and before you stop hit the accel and MWD and fly the other direction off-grid, bookmark.

While mining, align to bookmark 1 at 75% speed, before you hit max range on the lasers align to bookmark 2, rinse, repeat.

Bonus: poop out cans and tractor them in from your indy or Orca (Orcas have that great range bonus, yeah?)
  • Karl Hobb IATS
betoli
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-06-26 22:50:20 UTC  |  Edited by: betoli
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.


So if CCP were to provide, say L4'sh mining income, with L4'ish missioning risk, would that settle the debate?

Thought not - though I'd like to see CCP publishing the relative fatality rate through incursions/missioning/mining for 300m losses.

IMO. The problem with highsec mining, isn't, er, highsec mining, its the lack of progressive choices for players that promotes the risk averse style of play - give the miners a sensible risk/reward improvement if they **** off out of HS.
Price Check Aisle3
#36 - 2012-06-26 22:51:24 UTC
betoli wrote:
IMO. The problem with highsec mining, isn't, er, highsec mining, its the lack of progressive choices for players that promotes the risk averse style of play.

Why would CCP want to promote risk-adverse styles of play?
  • Karl Hobb IATS
Pipa Porto
#37 - 2012-06-26 22:53:47 UTC
betoli wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.


So if CCP were to provide, say L4'sh mining income, with L4'ish missioning risk, would that settle the debate?

Thought not - though I'd like to see CCP publishing the relative fatality rate through incursions/missioning/mining for 300m losses.

IMO. The problem with highsec mining, isn't, er, highsec mining, its the lack of progressive choices for players that promotes the risk averse style of play.


If Mining took the effort that L4 missions take (and didn't lend itself to multiboxing the way mining currently does), then it would likely produce a very similar income to L4 missions.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
betoli
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-06-26 23:12:16 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
betoli wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.


So if CCP were to provide, say L4'sh mining income, with L4'ish missioning risk, would that settle the debate?

Thought not - though I'd like to see CCP publishing the relative fatality rate through incursions/missioning/mining for 300m losses.

IMO. The problem with highsec mining, isn't, er, highsec mining, its the lack of progressive choices for players that promotes the risk averse style of play.


If Mining took the effort that L4 missions take (and didn't lend itself to multiboxing the way mining currently does), then it would likely produce a very similar income to L4 missions.


I don't think missions take much more once you've been through them, plopped into a 300m AFK ship and, have read eve-survival through.

As a separate issue, I do think that missioning scales badly compared to mining. 2 x miners is pretty much 2 x isk/hour, missioning with an alt (or a corpmate) gets you far worse than that isk-wise.
Pipa Porto
#39 - 2012-06-26 23:15:29 UTC
betoli wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
betoli wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Protip: You aren't making a lot of money, just more than you should be for the risk involved and the "skill" required.


So if CCP were to provide, say L4'sh mining income, with L4'ish missioning risk, would that settle the debate?

Thought not - though I'd like to see CCP publishing the relative fatality rate through incursions/missioning/mining for 300m losses.

IMO. The problem with highsec mining, isn't, er, highsec mining, its the lack of progressive choices for players that promotes the risk averse style of play.


If Mining took the effort that L4 missions take (and didn't lend itself to multiboxing the way mining currently does), then it would likely produce a very similar income to L4 missions.


I don't think missions take much more once you've been through them, plopped into a 300m AFK ship and, have read eve-survival through.

As a separate issue, I do think that missioning scales badly compared to mining. 2 x miners is pretty much 2 x isk/hour, missioning with an alt (or a corpmate) gets you far worse than that isk-wise.


Missioning for profit requires dealing with LP stores, warping through systems, dealing with triggers, etc.

Mining involves dragging a stack of ore to another window once every 2-4 minutes, then selling the ore once a week or so.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
betoli
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-06-26 23:28:58 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

Missioning for profit requires dealing with LP stores,
[]
warping through systems, dealing with triggers, etc.

Mining involves dragging a stack of ore to another window once every 2-4 minutes, then selling the ore once a week or so.


LP can be a now and again thing, as can dealing with a mineral stack ;-)

But really give the miners a more adventurous rewarding (but with more risk) option.