These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just don’t call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#901 - 2013-05-11 20:05:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
xP0nYx wrote:
and btw. just a general question.

which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous?
our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so.
if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour.

at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi

thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png


EvE certainly will be better once it will be even more biased towards huge blobbers, multi-boxers and bot farms! Roll

I mean, who cares for those poor tramps who just have 2 accounts, they should unsub right now!. Ugh

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#902 - 2013-05-11 20:44:40 UTC
nerd friends plz it is unfair that irl social skills provide in game advantage
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#903 - 2013-05-11 20:53:02 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
xP0nYx wrote:
and btw. just a general question.

which one of u guys had the idea that there is no ice mining in 0.0? and that it is far to dangerous?
our ICE Miners have like 40 miners in each sys with retrievers(and that are 4 people with like 10 accounts each). they assist the drones to someone in a BS or so.
if a neutral comes in, we just shoot them. what should they do against our 200 hobbies? and if we loose the retrievers we dont care. cuz we earn them in like half an hour? or even get them free from corp. so all thats happening is damaging crappy 1-2 account miners cuz they have to run around and search for belts where there are no cuz we multiboxer just empty them in like half an hour.

at this moment only one of our ice sys produces about 20000 blocks of Dark glitter a day. just fyi

thats what one of our multiboxers got: http://i.imgur.com/jOObBOE.png


EvE certainly will be better once it will be even more biased towards huge blobbers, multi-boxers and bot farms! Roll

I mean, who cares for those poor tramps who just have 2 accounts, they should unsub right now!. Ugh


I only have 2 accounts :(

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#904 - 2013-05-11 23:08:15 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
nerd friends plz it is unfair that irl social skills provide in game advantage


Multiboxers are certainly masters of social skills. They are as social as your hand when you do self sex.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Lady Areola Fappington
#905 - 2013-05-12 01:06:21 UTC
I doubt the new changes will help multiboxers. Multibox systems pretty much depend on a static environment, like the current non-depleting icebelts.

Hopefully we'll get more people working together on this, what with EVE being a multiplayer game and all.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
yo gen ichi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#906 - 2013-05-12 07:08:22 UTC  |  Edited by: yo gen ichi
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
I doubt the new changes will help multiboxers. Multibox systems pretty much depend on a static environment, like the current non-depleting icebelts.

Hopefully we'll get more people working together on this, what with EVE being a multiplayer game and all.


actually it doesnt.
i take my little small frig to fly one time through te belt ( they are about 70km big) make corpbookmarks every few kms, then warp all retrievers at diffrent spots and start mining. since they all got a big ore hanger i just need to warp to pos every now and then to haul. easy as that. and since my retrievers lock the ice block wich is the closest to them i just need to mine down from close range to further away roids.

that way u can easy multibox the new belts.
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#907 - 2013-05-12 13:34:20 UTC
TijsseN wrote:
As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey.



We would all love to see that.. except there won't be organized mining ops with backup.. Just how often has your own corp assigned 10-15 pilots to guard the miners in null?
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#908 - 2013-05-12 18:05:29 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Kadl wrote:
Welcome back Fozzie.

There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.

I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important.


We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.


So CCP is changing their position on ABC ores in wormhole space? Last I checked, a year ago CCP was OUTRAGED that wspace was generating so much in minerals.
MT Sackett
Looksee Lightbringers
#909 - 2013-05-12 19:06:59 UTC
Messoroz wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Kadl wrote:
Welcome back Fozzie.

There are a number of people asking that you keep the grav sites as signatures (probable), as opposed to converting them to anomalies. I would like to give you two more reasons to avoid making the conversion. First the work to do this can be avoided, leaving happier players. Second, changing this now and then discovering the problems will only cause more difficulties in the future. Of course, the numerous reasons already listed are also important such as the problems that this causes for wormhole miners, a miner considering low sec, and some null sec miners.

I would also like to see the new ice sites as signatures, but keeping the grav sites is more important.


We're quite happy in general with the increased risk associated with the increased reward. Ore sites in lowsec, 0.0 and wormholes (especially lowsec) are getting a whole lot more valuable.


So CCP is changing their position on ABC ores in wormhole space? Last I checked, a year ago CCP was OUTRAGED that wspace was generating so much in minerals.




the ore changes will have little use to those not in null space, most worm hole miners are not there to mine more trit and other low end minerals. do you really need to haul trit to hi sec with all the logistical dangers ? not a lot different for low sec, that is if you are willing to mine in low sec which will probably be the most dangerous mining you can do.
Alexander DeKine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#910 - 2013-05-12 19:38:56 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Leana Darkrider wrote:
got a few questions about these changes:

Ice anomolies have to be found through scanning I presume?

Why are the ice belts going to replaced with anomolies except for Amarr space? Why not all empires? Do you want all the iceminers to be moving to Amarr space?


They're being replaced by anomalies everywhere, it's just that Amarr space isn't getting anomalies in every system that currently has the belts.



In regards to the amount that you populated onto the test system, are the new ice fields only gonna have about 100-150 blocks per roid with about 20 roids in each belt ?
Xylorn Hasher
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#911 - 2013-05-13 07:38:05 UTC
Nice changes, however:

- Making Gravi sites d-scanable is bad idea that will make mining in lowsec FAR TOO DANGEROUS. This will make opposite effect that far less ppl will mine them.

CCP leave them as they are - probable with probes only.
We probe whole systems anyways, so Its not big issue for pirates ,but it will encourage bears more to come and mine. As they at least will feel more safe.

- Ice Gravis spawn only in systems that had Ice belts before change. - It is also bad idea.
It would be far better for ppl to actually roam around and look for Ice gravis than just sit in same system and wait for spawn.

Where is exploration in this? Hit D-scan and warp to belt? LoL

I would make Ice gravi sites spawning in random locations, more ppl would have equal chances to find them, not actually camp them with fast mining setups like Orca + 3 Macs.

All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana consumption.
Xylorn Hasher
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#912 - 2013-05-13 07:49:31 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:

Right now, mining in WHs is only barely safe by virtue of your opponents needing to get probes out to find you, and an experienced prober can still find you with the probes only being visible on dscan for less than 30 seconds. But that still gives the victim--I mean, miner--a small chance to spot the probes and GTFO before it's too late.

With grav sites being anoms, you have only a few seconds' window to spot the attacker (if their incoming wh is within dscan range, the short period between wh cloak and true cloak), or no window at all. There is no reasonable room for pilots to "practice vigilance" outside of gimping your yield by replacing one of your strip miners with a scan probe launcher. A 50% yield loss makes it a waste of time.

The rest of the changes look good, but mining in WHs will become significantly more dangerous in Odyssey if ore sites become anomalies.

So, mining in WH becomes almost as dangerous as mining in NO high-sec? Don't see the problem... :)


There is a big problem. This change will kill mining in WH. As they will have completly no chancess to escape.

All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana consumption.
Xylorn Hasher
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#913 - 2013-05-13 08:09:46 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Aria Ning wrote:
Right. The probing bought you additional time to get out of dodge if you saw someone out with combat probes on your D-scan. But this systems just makes it even riskier to mine. In fact I think the scanning system itself may defeat the ore redistribution's purpose, meaning you're getting more reward but a lot more risk, the risk might even outweigh the reward.


It takes ~30 seconds for me to get to an anomaly from the time I jump in to the time that I drop out of warp in the anomaly, even if the anomaly is particularly close to my in-gate (less than 1AU). That's the time necessary to run the system scanner (10 seconds), during which I d-scan to determine the range they're at, the time to choose the anomaly (2-3 seconds), and then the time to enter and exit warp. If they're further away, they're safer. On top of that, gravimetric anomalies are a hell of a lot larger than ratting anomalies and the warp-in point for an intruder may not actually be anywhere near the points you'd sit miners at to mine from, adding extra safety.



What? Child its 21st century.
We use cloaky ships and cloaky neutral warpins thease days.
Also you can warp your cloaky alt first at 100km then you can warp your cloaky pirate to alt at another 100km so he will be 200km from grid center able to warp to any rock out there.

Learn how to play this game pls.

All my posts are made shortly after Marihuana consumption.
Loan--Wolf
Ace's And 8's
#914 - 2013-05-13 19:20:51 UTC
with this new scanning system and my skill and experience at scanning if your in a wh and did not see me pop in the wh and your mining you are dead meat you no long have to run dscan and system scanner it updates with a hud shows ever sig in the system in a few seconds after your in. even if the graves was scanned by probes the new systems cuts the time in half its hit a button re-size the probes to 32 or 64 depending on the probes scan and re-size scan

Baric Doomstalker
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#915 - 2013-05-14 02:46:03 UTC
I was wondering if with these new ice changes would there be a fire lit under miners to clear belts for re spawn, but with these re spawns would there be at least one massive ice from another region IE a blue ice in amarr space or if the null and low sec ones will get a little of all here and there the faster they are mined?
MT Sackett
Looksee Lightbringers
#916 - 2013-05-14 04:33:21 UTC
Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.

What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?

Thanks

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#917 - 2013-05-14 09:19:21 UTC
MT Sackett wrote:
Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.

What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?

Thanks



We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#918 - 2013-05-14 10:12:08 UTC
Roids and ice and all this stuff is surely interesting to some people, but what about the drone fixes?

.
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#919 - 2013-05-14 13:17:49 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
MT Sackett wrote:
Ok I think I have read every post in dozens and dozens of pages in several threads, I have yet to see a CCP comment or reason on making the grav sites into anoms. There are plenty of ores in belts to mine in all but wormholes, so its not a lack of mining areas. Wanting to make wormhole mining easier ? Worm hole life is supposed to be hard. Wanting to make more parts of game easy to acess? Well if that is the reason, wow. How about putting on a probing module and go look. Exploring is supposed to be a bigger deal ? Now the grav sites will be on your screen and one click away ? That is not exploring.

What is the purpose of the change of grav sites to anoms ?

Thanks



We'd rather have the challenge provided by other players than by us.



How is making it easier to find a defenseless mining ship in a WH supposed to provide a challenge? Or better yet, how is the miner supposed to provide the challenge? If all the grav site generations is the same code in the game, whether it's low/null/WH then I understand the change since you can't separate it into an anom in 1 space type and a signature in another. Otherwise, this change in a WH is just a plain "We don't want you guys to mine in WHs"
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#920 - 2013-05-14 14:03:42 UTC
Soko99 wrote:
TijsseN wrote:
As an PVP player i see opportunities for more fights if more mining is done in unsafe space. instead of the lonely miner or ratter, which is pos'ed up when a roaming gang arrives, would love to engage an organized mining op with backup. At least I know where the fights will be post odyssey.



We would all love to see that.. except there won't be organized mining ops with backup.. Just how often has your own corp assigned 10-15 pilots to guard the miners in null?


^^ THIS IS THE BIG PROBLEM.

PVPers do not and will not sit in a belt baby sitting miners just in case a gank fleet shows up.

How many times have goonswarm PVPers shown up to protect miners in there space? More likely they will show up to gank their own blues just because they are mining, than actually protect them.

This change will not result in large mining fleets with escorts for null sec gankers to hunt down. It will result in a massive drop in null sec mining, and a massive increase in the value of high end minerals. once the turbulence in gone and every thing settles out null sec mining may be one of the highest income activities in game as it will have to be to of set the risk enough for nullbears to risk the constant ganks in such an easily accessed belt.

Not that miners having a high income is a problem, but when that high income is a result of excessively high prices for high end minerals we will see a much wider gap between established characters and new characters trying to get a foot hold. This goes against the goal of making EVE more accessible for new players.

Why put this added risk on the null sec miners? the rewards for null sec miners are not currently high compared to the risk. If it was we would see far more miners in null sec than we currently do. Drastically increasing the risk while only slightly increasing the reward will not draw new miners into null, but it likely will drive some existing null sec miners out. No matter hopw you look at it this change is a drastic increase in risk for null sec miners. If this is CCPs idea of encouraging null sec industry then someone needs a smack upside the head.

In order for this to work players have to play the game the way CCP envisions it, large mining ops, supported by large PVP fleets for protection. Sounds great, except that the PVPers are not going to be forced into this role of babysitting the nullbear miners. Without those PVP babysitters null sec mining will have a risk vs reward comparable to what we currently see in low sec, how much mining happens there? If null sec mining drops off so will the supply of high end minerals. What happens to EVE when the bottleneck of high end minerals stops a large amount of high sec production? CCP can not dictate to players how to play the game. Trying to force players into these roles will not end well.