These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Gravimetrics in Odyssey

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chester Floyd
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#61 - 2013-05-28 12:21:31 UTC
Amanda Chelian wrote:
mine in order to replenish ammo and other consumables


Flawless
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2013-05-28 12:43:58 UTC
Llewsor wrote:
Not the tools, the number of people who have proudly expressed all their scanning skill levels in their fight to keep DSP and the little numbers for scan strength and, with the CSM's help, prevent anyone else having a more friendly visual scanner.

Again, CCP, please shake up the whole wormhole game and give us some challenges to overcome again. Introduce all you have suggested and even some you haven't mentioned yet! Sure there'll be some rebalancing and lots of tears, but there'll also hopefully be more game and less sheepish following of all the WH guides that are now totally established and therefore stale.

The best years of Apocrypha, in my opinion of course, were when we were all trying to work out what was going on. I think we all know all the maths and game styles now, it's too much like nullsec in that sense. If WH people can't adapt, maybe freeze WH space as it is and introduce a new kind of space for, what shall we call them, explorers? You know what, CCP, maybe this new space should be engineered to make permanent residence even harder still.


Ah that, personally I couldn't care less about DSP's, they're mostly a tool for the null and low sec explorers who have a very narrow scope of what they want. Stuff that would interest wormholers fall into so many bandwidth ranges that it's simply not even convenient way of doing things. Besides, if you're using a proper mapping tool and listing the signatures there like you should (to ease spotting brand new signatures for example), you want to list each and every signature there with at least the signature type in your mapper if not the exact site type.

While some people might feel different about the use of DSP's, I'd be inclined to believe that you're really preaching to the wrong choir with your claims of us not being able to adapt. And no matter what precautions CCP uses to prevent permanent residence, if it is profitable to do so or if the people find other things they wish to find there (pvp for example), people will find a way to live in such space even if it meant living out of an orca or a carrier. or even just cans.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#63 - 2013-05-28 12:52:15 UTC
Llewsor wrote:
Not the tools, the number of people who have proudly expressed all their scanning skill levels in their fight to keep DSP and the little numbers for scan strength and, with the CSM's help, prevent anyone else having a more friendly visual scanner.

once again...the new changes make everything about scanning MUCH easier, not different, not new, most certainly not harder.
so who exactly wants to make scanning easy? it's certainly not us 'elite' scanners.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Galileo Ohaya
Tortuga Coalition 102
#64 - 2013-05-30 00:05:43 UTC
Llewsor wrote:
All I see here is wah wah wah we wormhole snowflakes don't like any change whatsoever, please hand us easy living on a plate wah wah wah.

CCP, make it much more random and give us constant change and more change, please! It should be, "OK what have we been given and how will we handle it", not "CSM this and CSM that please protect us!!".

(My main lives in a wormhole but doesn't have a gigantic blob alliance to rest on as most WH alliances have become)


OK, so you live in a WH. I still don't think you have actually read and understood what folks are saying.

If you have anything intelligent to offer as a counterfpoint to the OPs premise, please share....
Galileo Ohaya
Tortuga Coalition 102
#65 - 2013-05-30 00:12:31 UTC
Amanda Chelian wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:
it isnt just about miners, it's about getting any wort of kills, specifically capital escalation fleets.


Except that I started this thread specifically with miners in mind, it's you guys who pulled a colossal derail on me.P

While I fully agree the new overlay shouldn't give players intel on a silver platter, everyone seems to have conveniently ignored that these changes completely ruin any logical reason to mine ore in w-space. The fix is easy, too, just convert only the k-space gravimetrics into anomalies, and leave the w-space ones as signatures. Because let's be realistic here, if you're in w-space and don't have probes to find a grav belt, you have way bigger problems anyway.


The whole notion of moving Grav sites to anoms is stupid. I've yet to see a cogent explanation from CCP as to why this is a good idea other than to make it easier for new players to find. That explanation doesn't seem to fit with the all the changes to scanning that will make it very easy to scan down sigs.

The change makes WH mining a lost cause. Having the instant intel about new sigs popping up without putting out a probe only increases the miners security if they were able to successfully close all the WHs in a system before mining. That is a huge pain for a wh crew, as it locks your buddies in or out during the mining operations.

It kills wh mining, but makes running anom sites much easier as it means you don't have to have a toon fit with a probe launcher spamming the DSP (oh yeah, they are removing those as well), the combat probe looking for new sigs to pop up.

Seriously, what does CCP have against folks that mine in WHs?
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#66 - 2013-05-30 01:30:12 UTC
Galileo Ohaya wrote:
[quote=Amanda Chelian]The whole notion of moving Grav sites to anoms is stupid. I've yet to see a cogent explanation from CCP as to why this is a good idea other than to make it easier for new players to find.

It's a giant conspiracy to stop me from topping my corp's probing stats. Sad

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Nimrod vanHall
Van Mij Belastingvrij
#67 - 2013-05-30 06:13:35 UTC
G-sus what a bunch of risk averse carebears in here!
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2013-05-30 17:58:57 UTC
Quote:

Seriously, what does CCP have against folks that mine in WHs?

What are you on about? You now have the same or less risk then site runners or any other pve activity in w-space(except ladars and DATA/relic sites).
Even bether then sites where the sleepers scramble !

No local in null sec would fix everything!
Haulie Berry
#69 - 2013-05-30 18:13:32 UTC
Step 1: Go to what is supposed to be the most frontier-like and unsafe class of space in Eve.
Step 2: Complain about how you can't operate safely there without expending a lot of additional effort.

Roll
Anti-social Tendencies
Society for Miner Education
#70 - 2013-05-30 20:34:55 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:
Quote:

Seriously, what does CCP have against folks that mine in WHs?

What are you on about? You now have the same or less risk then site runners or any other pve activity in w-space(except ladars and DATA/relic sites).
Even bether then sites where the sleepers scramble !


Site runners are in ships with weapons. Miners are in ships with mining layers. Huge difference. I run sites in a wh and am fine with the risks. We work hard to mitigate the risks of working anoms because we are easy to locate. Plus unlike the null ears, we have no local to warn of others in the system. I'm not complaining about that as that is what wh life is all about. However, mining is a different story. It already is risky and putting the rocks in an anom just makes it untenable.

"Patience: n, a minor form of despair, disguised as a virtue." - AMBROSE PIERCE