These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Miners Unite to Fight the New Order!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#321 - 2012-10-29 19:53:16 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Pan Miller wrote:
. If you keep your mining ship moving while you mine (by orbiting your target for example) then the bumper will probably miss you."

This is complete B&%% S&*#!


I suggest nanofiber internal structures, overdrive injectors (don't worry, they wont affect your ore bay!) and polycarb rigs.

Especially if you fit tech 2 rigs and faction modules (republic fleet works well) they'll never be able to hit you, you'll be the most blazin' barge in the belt!

Miners are incapable of common sense or effort. Also, good bumpers can hit even "fast" barges.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#322 - 2012-10-29 19:54:53 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Moonlit Raid wrote:
Shouldn't he be stepped on for encouraging naziism?


Please explain how the New Order is similar to National Socialism? It's not a good comparison, the New Order is not promoting genocide.

BTW you're not the first to compare James315 to the leader of the national socialists, however if you wish to compare him to a genocidal maniac then please use the more recent examples that made the man with the amusing mustache look like a rank amateur, Chairman Mao and Joseph Stalin would be good examples.


Wouldn't i, as Austrian, fit much better anyway ?


No sir, death is a nought but a temporary setback here, also you lack an amusing mustache.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#323 - 2012-10-29 19:55:53 UTC
Moonlit Raid wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Pan Miller wrote:
. If you keep your mining ship moving while you mine (by orbiting your target for example) then the bumper will probably miss you."

This is complete B&%% S&*#!


I suggest nanofiber internal structures, overdrive injectors (don't worry, they wont affect your ore bay!) and polycarb rigs.

Especially if you fit tech 2 rigs and faction modules (republic fleet works well) they'll never be able to hit you, you'll be the most blazin' barge in the belt!

And get shot out of the sky by a full rack of hobgob i's

Edit: ****.

They buffed hobs!?!
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#324 - 2012-10-29 20:09:50 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Asuri Kinnes wrote:




Do you have proof that it was actually the "miners" whining that resulted in this change by CCP? Not trying to be pedantic here, but tbqh - the whole "miner in hi-sec = the devil" seems like a manufactured controversy to me.


No update to barges for over 6 years

Goons do ice iterdictions

Forums explode with miner rants for months

CCP buff barges.


Yea, I cant see any link here...


Your list provides two possible motivations for CCP to buff barges:

1. They thought too many barges were being ganked in hisec.

2. They thought too many miners were complaining about being ganked.

You're choosing option 2, which isn't a bad choice, but option 1 is still out there.

This is a bit unrelated, but it's funny how people link dev comments as if they're holy writ. If someone linked a dev comment backing either option 1, or 2, I probably would pay it only limited heed. This is exactly the kind of thing where I'd expect them to keep their true reasoning somewhat hidden. If they had any interest in explaining exactly how safe they wanted hisec to be, they would have done so by now.

This.

Ironically, it reminded me of a comment by CCP Phantom in a similar thread.

Quote:
Unspecific ranting that we will destroy EVE Online by turning it into a carebear world without providing any examples, specific details or constructive discussions about what we should do better however is neither helpful nor welcome.

'nuff said?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#325 - 2012-10-29 20:16:03 UTC
At least threads like this should only exist for another month or so - after that those that don't want to get bumped can hop in mining frigates and never be hit by a fleet stabber ever again! Twisted

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#326 - 2012-10-29 20:20:35 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Asuri Kinnes wrote:




Do you have proof that it was actually the "miners" whining that resulted in this change by CCP? Not trying to be pedantic here, but tbqh - the whole "miner in hi-sec = the devil" seems like a manufactured controversy to me.


No update to barges for over 6 years

Goons do ice iterdictions

Forums explode with miner rants for months

CCP buff barges.


Yea, I cant see any link here...


Your list provides two possible motivations for CCP to buff barges:

1. They thought too many barges were being ganked in hisec.

2. They thought too many miners were complaining about being ganked.

You're choosing option 2, which isn't a bad choice, but option 1 is still out there.

This is a bit unrelated, but it's funny how people link dev comments as if they're holy writ. If someone linked a dev comment backing either option 1, or 2, I probably would pay it only limited heed. This is exactly the kind of thing where I'd expect them to keep their true reasoning somewhat hidden. If they had any interest in explaining exactly how safe they wanted hisec to be, they would have done so by now.

This.

Ironically, it reminded me of a comment by CCP Phantom in a similar thread.

Quote:
Unspecific ranting that we will destroy EVE Online by turning it into a carebear world without providing any examples, specific details or constructive discussions about what we should do better however is neither helpful nor welcome.

'nuff said?
Speed not taken into consideration for collisions, only mass? That'd work just fine.
Whereas I would prefer the likkle ship flying into a solid object is destroyed as you might expect if you drove your car into a freight train it doesn't seem all that practical for a game.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#327 - 2012-10-29 20:41:35 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
At least threads like this should only exist for another month or so - after that those that don't want to get bumped can hop in mining frigates and never be hit by a fleet stabber ever again! Twisted


Thrashers are still cheap and disposable.

Oh god.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#328 - 2012-10-29 20:51:39 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
At least threads like this should only exist for another month or so - after that those that don't want to get bumped can hop in mining frigates and never be hit by a fleet stabber ever again! Twisted

And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#329 - 2012-10-29 20:54:42 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#330 - 2012-10-29 21:03:22 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And would only be true if it could be proved that miners weren't actually ATK.

I am seeing this AFK Miner to mean ALL miners lately. It's the new meme. I used to spend many, many hours, mining on a multi-screen affair, absolutely ATK while I worked on coding client websites.

Of course, this now raises the spectre of whether I should be allowed to do that, yes?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#331 - 2012-10-29 21:05:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Kainotomiu Ronuken
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And you really think that that's a good way for EVE to go? Allowing miners to sacrifice anything in order to gain the ability to play the game without any interaction at all?
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#332 - 2012-10-29 21:06:01 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And would only be true if it could be proved that miners weren't actually ATK.

I am seeing this AFK Miner to mean ALL miners lately. It's the new meme. I used to spend many, many hours, mining on a multi-screen affair, absolutely ATK while I worked on coding client websites.

Of course, this now raises the spectre of whether I should be allowed to do that, yes?

What do gate camps do? sit finger over F1?

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#333 - 2012-10-29 21:08:32 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Of course, this now raises the spectre of whether I should be allowed to do that, yes?


I dunno, I'm not the Supreme Overlord of high sec. You'll have to ask permission from James 315. Roll

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#334 - 2012-10-29 21:12:54 UTC
what if the miners just formed a fleet and had a blackbird or an ashimmu web their ships or something idk
Buck Badger
Aliastra
#335 - 2012-10-29 21:13:06 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And would only be true if it could be proved that miners weren't actually ATK.

I am seeing this AFK Miner to mean ALL miners lately. It's the new meme. I used to spend many, many hours, mining on a multi-screen affair, absolutely ATK while I worked on coding client websites.

Of course, this now raises the spectre of whether I should be allowed to do that, yes?


Sounds like a fine example of emergent game-play. Blink

"Trust no one.  As soon as God crapped out the third caveman a conspiracy was hatched against one of them."  Hunter Gathers
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#336 - 2012-10-29 21:15:18 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
what if the miners just formed a fleet and had a blackbird or an ashimmu web their ships or something idk


I would love to see this. I strongly encourage miners to fleet up and web eachothers ships.

Oh god.
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#337 - 2012-10-29 21:16:41 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
what if the miners just formed a fleet and had a blackbird or an ashimmu web their ships or something idk

Far too much effort.

Buck Badger wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And would only be true if it could be proved that miners weren't actually ATK.

I am seeing this AFK Miner to mean ALL miners lately. It's the new meme. I used to spend many, many hours, mining on a multi-screen affair, absolutely ATK while I worked on coding client websites.

Of course, this now raises the spectre of whether I should be allowed to do that, yes?


Sounds like a fine example of emergent game-play. Blink

Wait, what? I may be misunderstanding you, but did you just imply that being able to do something else instead of playing EVE and still profit is a fine example of emergent gameplay?
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#338 - 2012-10-29 21:22:09 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
And historically, miners have been eager to sacrifice yield to not get attacked, amirite?


If by attacked you mean having to be at your keyboard, than yes. Cool

And you really think that that's a good way for EVE to go? Allowing miners to sacrifice anything in order to gain the ability to play the game without any interaction at all?

Here's a thing.

This is FACT apparently: A miner spends all day ripping roids isolated from the entire game.

However.....

- He takes it back to station and refines. To get max refine he must have at some point boosted his standings - usually with mates missioning.
- He may take those roids to a POS with all it's infrastructure (that he paid for with isk from?) - this same POS that required a huge amount of missions etc. to get the standings to put it up.
- Somebody made that POS and it's mods. Somebody mined the ice. Somebody did the PI. Each step a potential target.
- He may in fact produce at station. While he uses these slots he is preventing someone else from doing so, maybe YOU.
- He produces his goods from BPO's/BPC's that he purchased from someone.
- He takes his product to a hub and sells them, competing with someone.
- The person who bought his minerals or products earned his isk doing something, possibly with someone.
- Someone buys his goods, goes out and blows up someone else.

And ofc, while he flies his exhumer, Orca, indy, freighter (that he made or purchased from someone) he is wide open to attack at any point - providing targets for YOU maybe?

Thus, we can deduce that MinerMan has absolutely no "interaction" on the game and may as well play purely on a client?

Or do we mean "interaction" in that he does not want to talk to you.

I wonder why.... Roll

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#339 - 2012-10-29 21:23:13 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Wait, what? I may be misunderstanding you, but did you just imply that being able to do something else instead of playing EVE and still profit is a fine example of emergent gameplay?


No, he's saying the enforcement of people being not able to do other things besides play EVE and still profit is a fine example of emergent gameplay.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Hans Zwaardhandler
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#340 - 2012-10-29 21:33:35 UTC
Now, here's an easy and not too complex plan to not have to deal with the New Order.

Step 1:
Find another system.