EVE General Discussion

"ISK wins wars" is a top five clueless hisec forum warrior myth that gets tossed around here a lot.

It is, at best, a secondary factor.

I will never understand why some people on here talk so much about that which they know so little.

1. Whose fault is it that nobody's been trying to take the Tech moons from their owners for those years? (Hint: It's probably not the fault of the owners for defending what's theirs)

2. GSF stopped running mining bounties 6 months ago.

3. Yes, they are supposed to pool their resources if they want to take space from people already established there. That's how independent entities have always gotten their start Nullsec. The members fund their own PvP until the alliance can develop a proper income stream (used to be through taking r64s, but those got nerfed due to whining, resulting in the dominance of Tech).

4. Still never paid my :tenbux: so I'm not sure why you're lumping me in as a Goon.

Ice miner in null will make more than an ice miner in hs. That's a comparison.

Comparing an active income to a passive income doesn't give a meaningful comparison until you turn the hour of effort into a multiplier. While mining ice does make more isk, it requires more effort. So lets say, for argument an ice miner makes 10mil/hour. So that's 166,666 isk per minute of direct effort. What is it for moon goo per hour? 700K? I'll assume 10 minutes of effort a month to unload the silo....hell..lets be generous...1 hour per month. So that's 83.33 mil//min. IDK, sounds like a lot more than 166,666/min.

Where can I make 83mil/min in Eve, not in null?

i'm sorry that we're successful

would you like us to be less successful so that others might actually have a chance at winning

also the best part is where you compared ice mining to moons

see when you lose your mackinaw you don't have to form a fleet to take it back, you just buy another one and continue quasi-botting away, while losing a moon means you have to either scan another moon and tower it or take that moon back

but those are just trivial differences you'll set aside because they don't fit within your narrative right?

No matter what way it is put, top down income needs to die and be replaced with bottom up active mining.

Exactly the same as Sov should be tied to activity.

And one fleet to defend that POS costs a minimum of 250 man hours (more likely 500-750). Something that you conveniently forget.

Direct competition doesn't significantly interrupt an Ice miner (a second Ice miner in the same belt does nothing to affect your procurement of Ice). Direct competition entirely halts moon material production (1d17hrs of production lost any time a POS is RFed, and you have to defend it if you want to keep it) while the winner of the competition is hashed out.

My problem with activity level based Sov is that it seems silly to have Sov be based on PvE grinding*. I guess that works for FW, but I don't think it belongs in Sov Null.


*Basing it on PvP activity has other glaring problems.

Yes, a rat shooting competition for a binary sov/no sov outcome is a terrible idea. The better ideas I've seen have "sov" as a fluid measure of system usage available to multiple groups, that then allows beneficial and vulnerable upgrades based on that fluid "sov" level.

You wouldn't grind rats in blobs until you can plant your flag and walk away. Rather you would use the space because you wanted to, and benefits would accrue from that usage, perhaps without any formal 100% "flag-planting control" ever coming into play (what purpose would that old style "sov" actually serve in this case besides verite map epeen?)

Stations, however, should still be strictly conquerable, and not tied, or not strictly tied, to the users of the system it resides in; and they should be stront timers, not terrible dominion timers.

Of course I'm conveniently forgetting ignoring it. Just like you're conveniently pulling 250 man hours out of your butt. In order to consider how much real effort goes into a moon goo pos you'll need to consider a tad bit more data like all income streams possible by the sov-null alliance and it's players as well as all defensive actions and how many moon goo pos's were attacked, all this over a given period of time before you can even begin to make meaningful comparisons. See, those fleets just aren't sitting around defending moon goo. They're doing other things so there is multiplicity of use you have to consider. Because of that, not just moon goo needs to be considered, since these same fleets will also be generating income from mining, ratting, pewing, defending other infrastructure etc, etc, etc. It would be a rather complex analysis to accurately compare it to a simple activity such as ice mining in HS which is why it is not comparable, imo.

So until someone has that data, I don't, my 83.33mil/min to 166k/min comparison of moon and ice mining, respectively, is at least more valid than your 250 man hours since noone knows where this 250hrs comes from.

But I think I've already stated this, just in another manner so I would gather you're not really following the thread.