These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 New Citizens Q&A

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Mining Help
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Black Pedro
Mine.
#21 - 2015-11-23 12:01:42 UTC
Kira Kaliandra wrote:
Nowdays ganking miners is a much bigger problem than before, with CODE. running around shooting ppl (and other entities that do this).

Back then I never had a tank fitted mining ship, never had any need for it. Now, I would not leave a station without the best tank i could fit onto my mining ships.

This is just a thing for returning and new miners to keep in mind ...
Now, I'm not saying tanking your ships and paying attention is a bad idea - it is very good advice to new and returning players, but there is no evidence that ganking is a bigger "problem" than before. As was alluded to above by Loyd, Dr. EyjoG said in an economic report: "For reasons that are left as an exercise to the reader, Exhumers are now blowing up at historically low rates." (Dec 2012 CSM minutes, pg 104) referring to the insurance nerfs, EHP/CONCORD response time buffs for miners, and other changes that hit gankers hard earlier that year. Since then, Exhumers are still exploding at similar rates to 2012 suggesting there has been no increase, certainly no "exponential" increase, off those historic lows.

CCP has buffed both the Procurer and the Skiff to the point they are bump-proof, and completely uneconomical to gank meaning every player now has easy access to a ship that will make them immune to almost all efforts to engage in PvP with them and allow them to pay no attention to safety. So OP, for AFK mining, your choice of the Procurer was indeed the correct one.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#22 - 2015-11-23 15:24:16 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Now, I'm not saying tanking your ships and paying attention is a bad idea - it is very good advice to new and returning players, but there is no evidence that ganking is a bigger "problem" than before. As was alluded to above by Loyd, Dr. EyjoG said in an economic report: "For reasons that are left as an exercise to the reader, Exhumers are now blowing up at historically low rates." (Dec 2012 CSM minutes, pg 104) referring to the insurance nerfs, EHP/CONCORD response time buffs for miners, and other changes that hit gankers hard earlier that year. Since then, Exhumers are still exploding at similar rates to 2012 suggesting there has been no increase, certainly no "exponential" increase, off those historic lows.

Then they and you are not going far enough back because comparing 2012 numbers to 2015 numbers you are still comparing post hulkageddon situations.
In 2009 through 2012 on various characters I used to run mining fleets for a larger corp at the beginning it was not uncommon to have 25 - 30 hulks plus Orca and transport support and we would strip all of the belts in multiple systems in a single session and never saw anything but the occasional can flipper. As we progressed through the hulkageddon era things got worse and there was a definitive increase in the number of gankers in the belts to the point where ship replacement made the larger fleets impractical to continue to use.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#23 - 2015-11-23 16:40:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Donnachadh wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Now, I'm not saying tanking your ships and paying attention is a bad idea - it is very good advice to new and returning players, but there is no evidence that ganking is a bigger "problem" than before. As was alluded to above by Loyd, Dr. EyjoG said in an economic report: "For reasons that are left as an exercise to the reader, Exhumers are now blowing up at historically low rates." (Dec 2012 CSM minutes, pg 104) referring to the insurance nerfs, EHP/CONCORD response time buffs for miners, and other changes that hit gankers hard earlier that year. Since then, Exhumers are still exploding at similar rates to 2012 suggesting there has been no increase, certainly no "exponential" increase, off those historic lows.

Then they and you are not going far enough back because comparing 2012 numbers to 2015 numbers you are still comparing post hulkageddon situations.
In 2009 through 2012 on various characters I used to run mining fleets for a larger corp at the beginning it was not uncommon to have 25 - 30 hulks plus Orca and transport support and we would strip all of the belts in multiple systems in a single session and never saw anything but the occasional can flipper. As we progressed through the hulkageddon era things got worse and there was a definitive increase in the number of gankers in the belts to the point where ship replacement made the larger fleets impractical to continue to use.
I'm not saying that things have not changed - the post-Hulkageddon pressure from gankers may have forced miners into tankier hulls for example, but the absolute number of exhumer ganks is still near an all-time low. We are not in the middle of some "super-gank" era where suicide ganking is occuring at unprecedented rates. In fact, all evidence points to ganking, especially of mining ships, being at some of the lowest rates in the history of the game which is consistent with the fact that highsec has never been mechanically safer, nor has ganking ever been more costly.

I guess you can claim Dr.EyjoG was wrong or mistaken, but he clearly said "historic lows" which does imply the lowest number of Exhumer ganks in the whole history of Eve was at the end of 2012. Maybe some day CCP Quant can give us some updated statistics on the historic rates of industrial ship loss in highsec.

But this is all off-topic and this is the New Citizen's forum. The OP correctly identified the Procurer as the mining ship most suited for his needs and appears to be happy with his choice.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#24 - 2015-11-25 14:08:17 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
I'm not saying that things have not changed - the post-Hulkageddon pressure from gankers may have forced miners into tankier hulls for example, but the absolute number of exhumer ganks is still near an all-time low. We are not in the middle of some "super-gank" era where suicide ganking is occuring at unprecedented rates. In fact, all evidence points to ganking, especially of mining ships, being at some of the lowest rates in the history of the game which is consistent with the fact that highsec has never been mechanically safer, nor has ganking ever been more costly.

The problem that I see with the "evidence" or "information" if you rather that has been presented is it is all in actual number of ships ganked and not a percentage of that type of ship in use. These are not real numbers here or even a guess, they are simply placed as a example of what I am saying. If 1,000 exhumer class ships are in use and 100 are ganked that is 10%. If 10,000 are in use and 100 are ganked that is only 1% and these would tell a radically different story on the state of ganking.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2015-11-25 22:35:17 UTC
Overall statistics are not overly relevant to new solo player anyway.

Scenario 1) Newish Player in a tanked Procurer who runs Level I security missions in 0.9 or higher space and then mines them for the rocks that spawn in the mission - very unlikely to get ganked. Who is going to bother scanning down a single Procurer behind a deadspace mission gate in a high security system and go kill it?

Scenario 2) Newish Player in a generic Retriever in a generic asteroid belt visible on overview in a 0.5 CODE infested system like the pipe between Dodi and Hek - highly likely to get ganked.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2015-11-26 03:19:09 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
the absolute number of exhumer ganks is still near an all-time low. We are not in the middle of some "super-gank" era where suicide ganking is occuring at unprecedented rates. In fact, all evidence points to ganking, especially of mining ships, being at some of the lowest rates in the history of the game which is consistent with the fact that highsec has never been mechanically safer, nor has ganking ever been more costly.

I guess you can claim Dr.EyjoG was wrong or mistaken, but he clearly said "historic lows" which does imply the lowest number of Exhumer ganks in the whole history of Eve was at the end of 2012. Maybe some day CCP Quant can give us some updated statistics on the historic rates of industrial ship loss in highsec.

But this is all off-topic and this is the New Citizen's forum. The OP correctly identified the Procurer as the mining ship most suited for his needs and appears to be happy with his choice.

I don't know that statistics that you are quoting within the context that you are referring. However what I hear you saying is "Exhumer ganks". What we were talking about is the hostile environment for miners. You have heard many reports from players that used to be in massive fleets of hulks in high sec on large mining Ops. Today I don't even know anyone that will fly an exhumer. People fly barges and the fact that the newer faction frigates do so well at mining at such low skills I think has added a lot of cheaply replaceable competition.

I've said this before and I will say it again. If you had mined in 2009 or earlier you would not even be arguing. It is such a stark difference that it is not even a question. There used to be huge Exhumer fleets in high sec and now if you have more than 3 barges in one system in the same corp mining together that corp will be war deced within 24 hours. Be it war decing or ganking or what ever Hulkageddon created a hostile environment for miners that borders on hatred. The effect of which is that large mining corps and large exhumer fleets in high sec are almost a thing of the past.

So again I don't know the context of the statistics that you are quoting but so far the only people that I have heard in this post try and tell me that it's not worse now are people that have only been playing since about 2012 or after. All the people that have played 2009 or earlier are in agreement.

So we can side with personal experience or cherry picked stats taken out of context.

To be more precise what I am taking issue with is you quoting a stat about "exhumers" and then saying "mining ships" in the next sentence. Exhumers are very expensive tech 2 mining barges. Mining barges are much cheaper tech 1 versions. Also O.R.E. frigates are not even exhumers nor barges.

Also worth noting is that with the rebalancing I don't think that exhumers are as big of, or at least not clearly as big of an upgrade as they were before hand.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2015-11-26 03:49:27 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:

Then along came the sharp nerfs to ganking, and those made a degree of professionalization of ganking necessary to pull it off. Hence the formation of CODE.

If my memory is correct on this the "nerfs" to ganking were more of a leveling out. Previous to that CCP had introduced what were then called "tier 3" battlecruisers along with some "rebalancing" done to destroyers which had the result of making ganking much much cheaper and more affordable. So, at least from the dev blogs of the day, what I understood to be the intent was to set ganking back to around where it used to be as far out of pocket cost of replacement compared to damage output before concord finished it's job.

So yes CCP did nerf ganking by removing insurance payouts for concord deaths but only after introducing ships like the Tornado which could do Battleship Alpha damage at a cost that was double digit millions instead of triple digit millions.

I've never used insurance before so I don't know how it works but my guess is that a Tornado hull is probably close to or less than what insurance would have cost for a Battleship which would make the so called nerfs really just a wash.

At the very least that is how I recall the dev blogs explaining it.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2015-11-26 16:36:30 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
I've said this before and I will say it again. If you had mined in 2009 or earlier you would not even be arguing. It is such a stark difference that it is not even a question. There used to be huge Exhumer fleets in high sec and now if you have more than 3 barges in one system in the same corp mining together that corp will be war deced within 24 hours.

Definitely 100% correct.


Quote:
Be it war decing or ganking or what ever Hulkageddon created a hostile environment for miners that borders on hatred. The effect of which is that large mining corps and large exhumer fleets in high sec are almost a thing of the past.
Hulkageddon was a testing program presented as a contest. It's intention was to log and record Concord response times and set up the cheapest ship fit required to achieve the gank in the least amount of time.

Afterwards the results were presented and thus CODE became active. Their mantra is definitely based on discrimination, harassment and hatred towards those who engage in a specific game play activity under the guise of roleplaying and creating player driven content.

Quote:
So again I don't know the context of the statistics that you are quoting but so far the only people that I have heard in this post try and tell me that it's not worse now are people that have only been playing since about 2012 or after. All the people that have played 2009 or earlier are in agreement.

Agree 100%.

Quote:
Also worth noting is that with the rebalancing I don't think that exhumers are as big of, or at least not clearly as big of an upgrade as they were before hand.

The Mining ship re-balance was nothing more than a smokescreen to quell the angry outcry and resentment from the Mining community. With that re-balance also came the change to Ice Fields and Cosmic Signature Ore sites which were turned into Cosmic Anomalies. That basically removed any chance of advance warning with D-scan for probes and made it even easier for ganking.

I'm not a miner, I'm an explorer who actually had a very lucrative side business of selling Cosmic Signature Ore (Grav) sites to Hulk / Orca Fleets but thanks to those changes that career died.


DMC



'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2015-11-26 22:30:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Hasikan Miallok
DeMichael Crimson wrote:


Afterwards the results were presented and thus CODE became active. Their mantra is definitely based on discrimination, harassment and hatred towards those who engage in a specific game play activity under the guise of roleplaying and creating player driven content.




The roleplay is necessary to provide a loophole to comply with the EULA. In reality CODE are favored children of CCP doing there bit to reinforce the image of EVE as a harsh and unforgiving place so do not need to do much roleplay to avoid the ban hammer. They have the Devs on side.

CODE is actually quite successful at their unoffical and unspoken goal of getting "unsuitable" players who mine to quit the game. I know of quite a few who have quit. One of my ALTs is the sole remaining player in a previously largish corp who generally were casual players with young kids or other commitments who needed to be AFK at a moments notice and henced mined. ( Ironically the guys in that particular corp had formed it with the longterm plan to move to blusec renter space once they got financial. )

CODE has its place - even if they are annoyingly smug and superior for a group that basically does PvE (ganking an NPC controlled AFK autopiloted freighter is not really PvP)
Black Pedro
Mine.
#30 - 2015-11-27 10:02:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:


Afterwards the results were presented and thus CODE became active. Their mantra is definitely based on discrimination, harassment and hatred towards those who engage in a specific game play activity under the guise of roleplaying and creating player driven content.




The roleplay is necessary to provide a loophole to comply with the EULA. In reality CODE are favored children of CCP doing there bit to reinforce the image of EVE as a harsh and unforgiving place so do not need to do much roleplay to avoid the ban hammer. They have the Devs on side.

CODE is actually quite successful at their unoffical and unspoken goal of getting "unsuitable" players who mine to quit the game. I know of quite a few who have quit. One of my ALTs is the sole remaining player in a previously largish corp who generally were casual players with young kids or other commitments who needed to be AFK at a moments notice and henced mined. ( Ironically the guys in that particular corp had formed it with the longterm plan to move to blusec renter space once they got financial. )

CODE has its place - even if they are annoyingly smug and superior for a group that basically does PvE (ganking an NPC controlled AFK autopiloted freighter is not really PvP)

What does any of this speculation and discussion have to do with the OP's question on which type of mining is most advantageous for his situation? This is the New Citizen's Q&A forum, not the CCP Conspiracy Theory forum.

But for the benefit of any new players reading this forum, I will take a minute to point out that there is no "loophole" in the EULA that CODE. or anyone else is taking advantage of to shoot miners. Eve Online has been designed from the bottom up to facilitate conflict between players everywhere. CCP describes this game in the New Pilot FAQ (which as a new player you should read) as "the essential core concept of EVE Online is that it is full time PvP in a sandbox environment". You are intended to always be at risk to other players, and always have been since the beginning of the game.

Whether you choose to gank a miner as part of an extensive protection racket like CODE., or to drive competitors away from "your" system, or simply just for direct profit from the loot drops, it is all intended behaviour. Eve is a sandbox, so such emergent gameplay like this is desired and encouraged by CCP as it is the content of this game, unlike more traditional MMOs where content is scripted and written by the developers. That shooting miners in highsec is somehow a EULA violation or harassment is a meme popular among carebears that has no basis in reality. It probably grew out of the cognitive dissonance common among Eve players where they say they are all for ganking industrials but act all aghast and look down on players when someone actually does it (and often start demanding "consequences" for players engaging in intended game play), and perhaps players who have conflated the extra steps James 315 took to document his original miner bumping campaign, with ganking. The ganking of miners has never been a EULA violation, except in the minds of players who are upset over the loss of their barge.

So of course the game developers are "on side" with the gankers as it is the very game play they intended for Eve when they designed this game. CCP spent much time coding and balancing Crimewatch, CONCORD and the security status systems to allow criminals to operate while providing significant safety to the residents of highsec to allow emergent gameplay to develop. But highsec is not "safesec" and you are not suppose to be safe - nowhere in the EULA does it say that you are entitled to be left alone. It is not a "loophole" to shoot a miner nor is it "harassment" and it never has been in this history of this game.

New players would do best to ignore the plaintive (mis?)remembering of the good ol' days certain posters are engaging in here and be more like the OP and deal with the reality of this competitive PvP sandbox game. There are plenty of ways to make yourself almost perfectly safe, or at least a non-lucrative target, in highsec (fly a Procurer is a good start). Better to learn those and protect yourself from other players, than to spend your time complaining on the forums how it is "harassment" that other players can shoot you in this game about shooting spaceships or pining for a past that is long gone.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Helicity Boson
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#31 - 2015-11-27 10:18:48 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hulkageddon was a testing program presented as a contest. It's intention was to log and record Concord response times and set up the cheapest ship fit required to achieve the gank in the least amount of time.

Afterwards the results were presented and thus CODE became active. Their mantra is definitely based on discrimination, harassment and hatred towards those who engage in a specific game play activity under the guise of roleplaying and creating player driven content.


Man, you have literally no idea what you are talking about.

I never had (nor ever will) have any interest in "testing concord response times". We were very well aware of what was needed to pop a hulk before you got your face blasted.

I also have nothing to do with CODE at all, I never did.

I created Hulkageddon, because it was really f-ing funny to me, and it allowed all of my piratical friends to have a sort of space christmas full of joy and cheer and tears.
Broject
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2015-11-27 14:03:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Broject
Helicity Boson wrote:


I also have nothing to do with CODE at all, I never did.

I created Hulkageddon, because it was really f-ing funny to me, and it allowed all of my piratical friends to have a sort of space christmas full of joy and cheer and tears.

This man speaks the truth.

And people need to stop attempting rewriting history, especially when it's full of bias and inaccuracies.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2015-11-27 14:25:58 UTC
Helicity Boson wrote:


I never had (nor ever will) have any interest in "testing concord response times". We were very well aware of what was needed to pop a hulk before you got your face blasted.

I also have nothing to do with CODE at all, I never did.

I created Hulkageddon, because it was really f-ing funny to me, and it allowed all of my piratical friends to have a sort of space christmas full of joy and cheer and tears.

What ever your reason, I don't think anyone could come up with anything that anyone else has come up with ( Including Devs ) which has changed the game more.

While I realize that your intent may have been simple, the result is a legacy. I tip my hat to you Ms. Boson. All the videos that CCP produces to show off this game they talk again and again about one player being able to do something that effects everyone. You are probably the epitome of that. A literal poster child so to speak.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Helicity Boson
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#34 - 2015-11-27 15:04:59 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Helicity Boson wrote:


I never had (nor ever will) have any interest in "testing concord response times". We were very well aware of what was needed to pop a hulk before you got your face blasted.

I also have nothing to do with CODE at all, I never did.

I created Hulkageddon, because it was really f-ing funny to me, and it allowed all of my piratical friends to have a sort of space christmas full of joy and cheer and tears.

What ever your reason, I don't think anyone could come up with anything that anyone else has come up with ( Including Devs ) which has changed the game more.

While I realize that your intent may have been simple, the result is a legacy. I tip my hat to you Ms. Boson. All the videos that CCP produces to show off this game they talk again and again about one player being able to do something that effects everyone. You are probably the epitome of that. A literal poster child so to speak.


That's probably a lot more praise than I deserve, but yes if anyone ever says "one person can't do anything in EVE" they are demonstrably wrong.

I'm not special. Anyone can accomplish massive things in EVE, if it's an idea people can get on board with, and you have the drive and charisma to support it.

The most perplexing thing I learned during Hulkageddon is how extremely unwilling the average high sec dweller is to ally with others and organize. The punchline was always "pirates are antisocial never-do-wells", but the reality is that the inherent antisocial nature of the Hisec playstyle is pretty much what allowed my event to succeed as it did.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#35 - 2015-11-27 17:15:00 UTC
Helicity Boson wrote:
The most perplexing thing I learned during Hulkageddon is how extremely unwilling the average high sec dweller is to ally with others and organize. The punchline was always "pirates are antisocial never-do-wells", but the reality is that the inherent antisocial nature of the Hisec playstyle is pretty much what allowed my event to succeed as it did.

Helicity there have been many things on my mind since Hulkgaddon and perhaps now some of them can make it to you.

First even as a player that was a miner at the time I want to congratulate you on a wonderful example of how a player or players can set up and run an extremely popular event it was something to see and I enjoyed following the tales of destruction.

Also on a personal level I want to thank you, that series of events was the kick in the butt that got me out of mining ships and into a lot of things in the game that captured and still hold my interest today. If I had stayed in the mining part of the game I know for sure that I would not be here on these forums today.

I tend to agree with your statement above and I also believe that the majority of the high sec players would not band together I still have to make a few counter points from the other side of the fence.

In point of fact the rules of engagement in high sec at the time made it impossible for anyone but the victims to fight back without suffering a standings hit, and to the indy players of high sec at the time those standings hits were a more important consideration and overrode all desire to and even the willingness to fight back.

Rules of engagement prevented any "proactive" destruction of potential threats to your mining assets again because of standings hits combined with the expense of the ship losses.

And in the end why waste time trying to kill the pirates and potentially lose even more ships / ISK? When you can sit and let Concord do it for you. So in many cases simply allowing your ship to die was the least costly option.

As I stated earlier there is no doubt that many of the players would have done nothing but complain anyway, but that still ignores the fact that simple game mechanics virtually guaranteed that no one would have fought back.

Moving on to other things we actually go back to an earlier post.
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
CODE is actually quite successful at their unoffical and unspoken goal of getting "unsuitable" players who mine to quit the game. I know of quite a few who have quit. One of my ALTs is the sole remaining player in a previously largish corp who generally were casual players with young kids or other commitments who needed to be AFK at a moments notice and henced mined. ( Ironically the guys in that particular corp had formed it with the longterm plan to move to blusec renter space once they got financial.

The rules of the game allow them to do this, but from a very practical perspective every time they drive on of these players away they are making it more difficult for CCP to continue to develop EvE. Those casual players are the ones most likely to pay subs with cash money, they are also the ones most likely to buy plex for real money putting even more cash into CCP's hands.

The important point here is CASH as in the real money that CCP needs to continue to exist and to continue to develop EvE.
It is highly unpopular but from a cash flow standpoint CCP would do well to make some areas of high sec virtually 100% safe simply as a way of attracting and holding those casual players as a source of cash to feed development for the rest of the game.
Helicity Boson
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#36 - 2015-11-27 17:24:56 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

And in the end why waste time trying to kill the pirates and potentially lose even more ships / ISK? When you can sit and let Concord do it for you. So in many cases simply allowing your ship to die was the least costly option.


The least costly option would have been to simply cooperate and stick a scout on the gate... which is kinda what I'm getting at.

Aside from the fact that most Hulkageddon victims either never fitted a single defensive mod, or (as in the case of a 1.1 billion isk faction fitted Hulk) never turned them on, the easiest way to not get ganked is quite simply to have someone watching your back.

This could have been performed at zero cost with a day old alt in a noobship even.

EVE will fight you if you are unwilling to adapt to circumstance, or to the influence of other players. Every part of the entire game will actively fight you if you can't, or more likely, refuse to examine your own behaviour and correct it if the outcome of that behaviour has a negative outcome for you.

As Hulkageddon rolled through it's various incarnations, for me personally, it turned from "haha this is really funny" into "This is extremely educational (and also very funny, because this is the 4th time and people still die in droves)"
Abulurd Boniface
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2015-11-27 18:14:59 UTC
I quite liked the Hulkageddon initiative although I would be more on the receiving end of it. I have expressed some thoughts on the event at the time. I have not lost a single ship to Hulkageddon.

People ranting against it fundamentally don't understand the nature of EVE.

By creating Hulkageddon Helicity Boson became a name in EVE. That is one of the main points of the place. To become 'a somebody', to be mentioned and recognised. It is not by making clicks in the interface alone.

In EVE it pays to pay attention. All the people who got caught while Hulkageddon was on were not paying attention.

And that nagging about losing a ship. Wow... I stopped counting after Hulk #10. Not to Hulkageddon but through various other mishaps and calamities. You know what you do? You get another ship and you carry on.

CODE blew up my Mackinaw somewhere in The Citadel. 20 minutes later I was back in the same place with the same ship [and a better fit :-) ].

It's attitude. EVE is rife with risk. Ask yourself what's going on in your life if you can't handle a bit of risk in a wonderful space game. A miner is not poor. They don't get rich quick but they'll get there like the tide comes in. Ore accumulates over time. Get enough ore and you'll make plenty money [but: not quick]. A bit of a miner will lose their ship, get another one and carry on.

Mining is the easiest [and most leisurely] thing you can do in EVE. If you can't even get that right without throwing a conniption fit, you're embarrassing yourself and you're frankly in the way of people who want to move on.

Thanks, Helicity, for making Hulkageddon an occasion. I couldn't make it to the blap fest but I was there in spirit.
Taunrich Kaufmann
Hykkota-Kaufmann Foundaries LLC
#38 - 2015-12-08 17:20:56 UTC
Veldspar is the most profitable HiSec ore iirc.

Caldari Loyalists Facebook page

Concept Corax Kaalakiota CEO Skin
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2015-12-09 02:13:32 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:

Well, let's see, the slot and attribute re-balance done to Mining Barges was pitiful to say the least, the Insurance payout nerf was nothing more than a failed gesture from CCP trying to appease and silence the outrage coming from the mining community. Concord Response times getting buffed ? Only buff I heard about was gankers could no longer jump around on grid destroying multiple ships after Concord showed up.

Let's not forgot to include Destroyers got DPS buff, Tags for Security Increase was implemented, small class ships got buff to agility and warp speed, T3 Battlecruisers and T3 Destroyers were added to the game with increased DPS, Ice Belts were reduced in size and changed into Cosmic Anomaly with spawn life of 4 hrs, Cosmic Signature Grav / Ore sites were changed into Cosmic Anomaly. All ships can now view and warp to Cosmic Anomaly without needing to fit probe launcher.

Yeah, sorry but I just don't see that as a buff to the Mining Industry. What I see is a buff to the Ganking Industry.



Several things to add here.

First off, Concord response times were buffed significantly quite a while ago as indicated in an old patch note, so you may not have been around. But yes, this did make ganking significantly more difficult. Heres a thread which discusses this change back in 2008.

http://eve-search.com/thread/858756-0/page/1

CONCORD have gone through multiple changes in organization and effectiveness. The spawn sizes have been reduced to one battleship and two cruisers, however, these ships have increased damage output and a broad range of electronic warfare to prevent escape. In addition the Energy Neutralizing batteries will completely drain a ships capacitor almost instantly. CONCORD will also proceed to eliminate any discarded player Drones. CONCORD response times for aggressing a neutral player in High Security space have also been significantly reduced.

I also dont see what most of your "buffs" have to do with ganking at all. What does T3 battlecruiser/destroyers with increased DPS have to do with ganking? Or ice belts being reduced in size and added spawn rate? Or Ore sites being changed to anomalies and not needing probes to scan them down? Do you honestly think that gankers are more averse to having to scan down a sig than miners, or that this didnt help miners greatly, even more than gankers, in that they are now able to warp directly to the site without having to reship or refit scanners and waste time scanning a site down?

Youre also ignoring several other significant buffs to the mining community, such as +2 warp core strength to ventures, Mining boosts projecting outside POS while warfare links do not, the addition of, and absurd tanking of skiffs and procurers, removal of awoxing, hyperdunking, etc....
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2015-12-09 02:24:26 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
the absolute number of exhumer ganks is still near an all-time low. We are not in the middle of some "super-gank" era where suicide ganking is occuring at unprecedented rates. In fact, all evidence points to ganking, especially of mining ships, being at some of the lowest rates in the history of the game which is consistent with the fact that highsec has never been mechanically safer, nor has ganking ever been more costly.

I guess you can claim Dr.EyjoG was wrong or mistaken, but he clearly said "historic lows" which does imply the lowest number of Exhumer ganks in the whole history of Eve was at the end of 2012. Maybe some day CCP Quant can give us some updated statistics on the historic rates of industrial ship loss in highsec.

But this is all off-topic and this is the New Citizen's forum. The OP correctly identified the Procurer as the mining ship most suited for his needs and appears to be happy with his choice.

I don't know that statistics that you are quoting within the context that you are referring. However what I hear you saying is "Exhumer ganks". What we were talking about is the hostile environment for miners. You have heard many reports from players that used to be in massive fleets of hulks in high sec on large mining Ops. Today I don't even know anyone that will fly an exhumer. People fly barges and the fact that the newer faction frigates do so well at mining at such low skills I think has added a lot of cheaply replaceable competition.

I've said this before and I will say it again. If you had mined in 2009 or earlier you would not even be arguing. It is such a stark difference that it is not even a question. There used to be huge Exhumer fleets in high sec and now if you have more than 3 barges in one system in the same corp mining together that corp will be war deced within 24 hours. Be it war decing or ganking or what ever Hulkageddon created a hostile environment for miners that borders on hatred. The effect of which is that large mining corps and large exhumer fleets in high sec are almost a thing of the past.

So again I don't know the context of the statistics that you are quoting but so far the only people that I have heard in this post try and tell me that it's not worse now are people that have only been playing since about 2012 or after. All the people that have played 2009 or earlier are in agreement.

So we can side with personal experience or cherry picked stats taken out of context.

To be more precise what I am taking issue with is you quoting a stat about "exhumers" and then saying "mining ships" in the next sentence. Exhumers are very expensive tech 2 mining barges. Mining barges are much cheaper tech 1 versions. Also O.R.E. frigates are not even exhumers nor barges.

Also worth noting is that with the rebalancing I don't think that exhumers are as big of, or at least not clearly as big of an upgrade as they were before hand.


All of this seems to be predicated on a misunderstanding on what "Now" and "A while" mean to both of you.

I suppose you could say that ganking has been around and is as popular as it was now, as in right now, these several months to a year, as it has in the past 3-4 years. And for most people, 4-5 years in eve is "A while". But to a 2003 player, i guess 2008 is still "a short while ago".

Plus i think were getting a lot off topic, though im guilty of that as well.
Previous page123Next page