These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Most ice miners are bots! *SHOCK* (not really...)

Author
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#21 - 2012-01-12 17:09:03 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Um... Take action before dire need? That doesn't work. If a tanker plans to get you, they will scram or disrupt you. There is no warping. If you mean have time to run a booster, again they usually bring extra ships to compensate. 3 to 4 catalysts will beat a shield boosters.

Better to stay passively aligned to your warp out and run when people arrive at the belt if you are not afk.

As for hulk, remember, the Mack gains a 100% yield bonus for ice mining, but mines a tad slower. Still, for ice mining if you do not use a Mack, then you are hurting your profits more than a gank will.

As for cost... About 1000 units of ice equal 200 mil isk, which is about 21 hours solo mining and with no bonuses. That really is a day of bot mining for a single botting account. (a week if you have limited play time for a normal miner) you would have to kill over a ship per day to hurt their profit.


Active repping (shield boosters) are typically much less efficient against a ganker assault than a buffer tank (Medium Shield Extender). But you do sacrifice your mining efficiency to fit a tank.

A mack gains the bonus for ice yield, but a tanked mack has 20-25k EHP, where a tanked ice mining hulk has 35-45k EHP. These hulks would require more catalysts to bring down (my guess is 3-5 of Smodab's catalysts). From the targets perspective, they can overheat modules to try and survive longer. If your enemy is bringing 3-5 people, do you really think you should be able to thwart them as a solo entity? A group of 10 ice miners can feed all they want on the ice belt buffet, is it unreasonable for one of them to get into a combat vessel and defend the operation? Would you not PAY for such a service? This is NOT a solo game, and we should be able to adapt to the dangers around us!

Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-01-12 17:18:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Smodab Ongalot
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lots of really good stuff.


You sir, are a model of what every miner should be. Instead of just bitching and moaning about this, you've gone and worked on a counter to being ganked. Seriously, good work.

This is all we really want, people to engage brain when playing.

BTW, pithi and gisti small booster macks are really really hard to kill. I encourage these types of fittings.

Medium extender fittings go down just as easy as any other ones. We killed prolly 15 just like this yesterday.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#23 - 2012-01-12 18:08:16 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lots of really good stuff.


You sir, are a model of what every miner should be. Instead of just bitching and moaning about this, you've gone and worked on a counter to being ganked. Seriously, good work.

This is all we really want, people to engage brain when playing.

BTW, pithi and gisti small booster macks are really really hard to kill. I encourage these types of fittings.

Medium extender fittings go down just as easy as any other ones. We killed prolly 15 just like this yesterday.


and give you a chance at good lewt Cool

The worst part about mining in high sec is not the gankers themselves, but rather that one cannot adequately defend themselves (pre-gank the gankers) without CONCORD showing up and putting a real quick stop to that. And you can't go into low without running the gauntlet of supercaps online...

thus, nerf CONCORD -- maybe insofar as replacing them with the navies in 0.5. I'd like to see it that you NEED 2-4 BS sitting in a belt with the miners, in order to give the mining dudes the necessary security to go about their business. In addition to this, hisec ore availability has to be nerfed in general, so as to encourage people to gang together to brave the lower sec space for mins (i.e. remove one or more mineral types from hisec altogether).

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#24 - 2012-01-12 18:12:37 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lots of really good stuff.


You sir, are a model of what every miner should be. Instead of just bitching and moaning about this, you've gone and worked on a counter to being ganked. Seriously, good work.

This is all we really want, people to engage brain when playing.

BTW, pithi and gisti small booster macks are really really hard to kill. I encourage these types of fittings.

Medium extender fittings go down just as easy as any other ones. We killed prolly 15 just like this yesterday.


The increased performance of deadspace and faction gear can't possibly be overstated, and the extra losses you takeattempting to destroy such ships will significantly undermine your profit margins. Why, I bet if all miners fit their ships with these, you'd have to start mining rocks for your PvP ships. I'll shed a tear for the hardships you could be facing.... Cry

People Really should take the time to educate themselves on their Options!
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-01-12 18:17:52 UTC


And if you look closely at the link I posted above, that one bot operation is out 7 Billion isk now. With 4 mackinaws, that's going to take him some 10.5 days of non stop mining to make back.
[/quote]
Did you take into account insurance, if not then your 7billion is only about 1.05 billion, still though a notable sum

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#26 - 2012-01-12 18:20:15 UTC
Why? Why must we be social? This is a sand box game, that does not make it social necessarily. Just because you feel people shoukd play one way, does not make it so or valid.

Other than your desires, i see no reason concord should be removed from .5 sec systems. The system is set such that in .5 concord's response is slow, but still present.

As for "caps online", where did the nasty caps touch you? I played in low sec ample times, no caps. It's all a matter of where you play.

Further more, what makes your suggestion more optimal than say, no caps allowed in .4 sec. Miners could then try to mine done of the rarer ore in low sec, gaining an added profit without as much fear? Still, I think the whole idea of no concord in .5 is just foolish, and is simply a lazy person trying to make kills easier for themselves. If you want social and kills, join a nul sec alliance. It's not all "caps online" as you fear.
Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-01-12 18:58:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Smodab Ongalot
Omnathious Deninard wrote:


Did you take into account insurance, if not then your 7billion is only about 1.05 billion, still though a notable sum


How do you figure that? More than half that number was implants in pods, which are not insurable.

What is the insurance payout on a mackinaw? How many miners actually insure their mackinaws? (more do now, obviously Pirate)



Velicitia wrote:

The worst part about mining in high sec is not the gankers themselves, but rather that one cannot adequately defend themselves (pre-gank the gankers) without CONCORD showing up and putting a real quick stop to that.


Not true at all. We are -10. You can shoot/pod us anytime.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-01-12 19:24:54 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:


Did you take into account insurance, if not then your 7billion is only about 1.05 billion, still though a notable sum


How do you figure that? More than half that number was implants in pods, which are not insurable.

What is the insurance payout on a mackinaw? How many miners actually insure their mackinaws? (more do now, obviously Pirate)



Velicitia wrote:

The worst part about mining in high sec is not the gankers themselves, but rather that one cannot adequately defend themselves (pre-gank the gankers) without CONCORD showing up and putting a real quick stop to that.


Not true at all. We are -10. You can shoot/pod us anytime.

I always insure my mack just in case, and when I did the payout was about 85% at the time, has changed again. But I do say keep up the good work, and try convo the ships, bots will always auto reject.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Velicitia
XS Tech
#29 - 2012-01-12 19:41:01 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:

Velicitia wrote:

The worst part about mining in high sec is not the gankers themselves, but rather that one cannot adequately defend themselves (pre-gank the gankers) without CONCORD showing up and putting a real quick stop to that.


Not true at all. We are -10. You can shoot/pod us anytime.



I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the gankers of opportunity who think they're "leet pee vee pee" pilots for ganking a retriever ... and then spend the next four hours ratting their sec status back up to 0.0 or something.Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2012-01-12 21:14:52 UTC
Velicitia wrote:

I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the gankers of opportunity who think they're "leet pee vee pee" pilots for ganking a retriever ... and then spend the next four hours ratting their sec status back up to 0.0 or something.Cool




Fair 'nuff Lol
Karak Bol
Low-Sec Survival Ltd.
#31 - 2012-01-12 21:19:56 UTC
Just an idea, dont know if its feasible as my grasp about PvP is a bit shaky when it comes to ganking. Lets say a corp mines Ice. 1 Orca, 6 Macks and another pilot in lets say an Arty Trasher with SeBos. Three Catalysts come in. The Trasher doesnt hesitate, locks a Catalyst and blows it out of the sky (As gank ships have absolutely no tank). Yes, the Thrasher may be lost, but the leftover Catalysts have no not enough DPS to crack a Mack so easily. And if the Catalysts are flown by -10 pilots, the Trasher is not even lost.
The question is now: Is the timeframe between out of warp and gank big enough for this?
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#32 - 2012-01-12 21:28:30 UTC
Karak Bol wrote:
Just an idea, dont know if its feasible as my grasp about PvP is a bit shaky when it comes to ganking. Lets say a corp mines Ice. 1 Orca, 6 Macks and another pilot in lets say an Arty Trasher with SeBos. Three Catalysts come in. The Trasher doesnt hesitate, locks a Catalyst and blows it out of the sky (As gank ships have absolutely no tank). Yes, the Thrasher may be lost, but the leftover Catalysts have no not enough DPS to crack a Mack so easily. And if the Catalysts are flown by -10 pilots, the Trasher is not even lost.
The question is now: Is the timeframe between out of warp and gank big enough for this?


TBH probably not, lock times for most gank ships are less than 3 seconds so unless youve got other ships remote sensor boosting the thrasher you probably wont lock them before they can open fire. However it depends on the fit the ganker is using and what the ship is so give it a go and see.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome

Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#33 - 2012-01-12 21:39:02 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:

Medium extender fittings go down just as easy as any other ones. We killed prolly 15 just like this yesterday.


I see two things that are wrong with that Mackinaw's fit.

1. Too much focus on EM resistance. That miner ignored the other damage resists and didn't account for the resistance hole left by the armor.

2. He fitted cargo expanders and optimizers on that ship. Really? Fitting a shield tank with anti-tank mods? Seriously? Might as well fly that Mackinaw with no tank at all and invite the gankers to a feast.

Adapt or Die

Skorpynekomimi
#34 - 2012-01-12 21:41:52 UTC
Smodab Ongalot wrote:
Skorpynekomimi wrote:

Because they want to pretend their suicide ganking has a point beyond increasing demand for minerals.


Didn't realize CCP changed ice mining in Crucible to also give minerals.


Clearly this person bot/afk mines ice.


Read before you post.

Increasing demand for minerals. Not reducing supply. The demand comes from the loss of the mining ships AND the gank ships, all of which are bought again off the market.
It's like how hulkageddon won't ever stop people mining totally. It causes a huge demand around the event, and the lower supply pushes prices even further, luring people out to the belts.

You fail economics and reading comprehension forever.

Economic PVP

Velicitia
XS Tech
#35 - 2012-01-12 21:45:24 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Karak Bol wrote:
Just an idea, dont know if its feasible as my grasp about PvP is a bit shaky when it comes to ganking. Lets say a corp mines Ice. 1 Orca, 6 Macks and another pilot in lets say an Arty Trasher with SeBos. Three Catalysts come in. The Trasher doesnt hesitate, locks a Catalyst and blows it out of the sky (As gank ships have absolutely no tank). Yes, the Thrasher may be lost, but the leftover Catalysts have no not enough DPS to crack a Mack so easily. And if the Catalysts are flown by -10 pilots, the Trasher is not even lost.
The question is now: Is the timeframe between out of warp and gank big enough for this?


TBH probably not, lock times for most gank ships are less than 3 seconds so unless youve got other ships remote sensor boosting the thrasher you probably wont lock them before they can open fire. However it depends on the fit the ganker is using and what the ship is so give it a go and see.


now, if the orca pilot (or thrasher, or someone else off grid) has shield ganglinks going ... it'll help the survivability of the macks (maybe a volley or two, if you're lucky).

really depends on if your "defense gank" thrasher can target/pop the catalysts fast enough to handle the situation, and if the mining fleet is somewhere "safe" (i.e. not at the GD warp-in point).


@ Henry -- Mack is shield tank ONLY ... and has paper thin armour/hull as it is (though a DCU would have helped for a volley)

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-01-12 22:10:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Smodab Ongalot
Skorpynekomimi wrote:


Read before you post.

Increasing demand for minerals. Not reducing supply. The demand comes from the loss of the mining ships AND the gank ships, all of which are bought again off the market.
It's like how hulkageddon won't ever stop people mining totally. It causes a huge demand around the event, and the lower supply pushes prices even further, luring people out to the belts.

You fail economics and reading comprehension forever.



Are you suggesting my hidden agenda is to drive up mineral prices buy destroying lots of ships (macks + dessies) which require minerals to be rebuilt?

Wouldn't the more logical assumption be that I'm trying to drive up the isotope prices?

I think you wrote minerals the first time, when you meant isotopes, and are now trying to not look foolish.

How's that workin out?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#37 - 2012-01-12 22:32:25 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Karak Bol wrote:
Just an idea, dont know if its feasible as my grasp about PvP is a bit shaky when it comes to ganking. Lets say a corp mines Ice. 1 Orca, 6 Macks and another pilot in lets say an Arty Trasher with SeBos. Three Catalysts come in. The Trasher doesnt hesitate, locks a Catalyst and blows it out of the sky (As gank ships have absolutely no tank). Yes, the Thrasher may be lost, but the leftover Catalysts have no not enough DPS to crack a Mack so easily. And if the Catalysts are flown by -10 pilots, the Trasher is not even lost.
The question is now: Is the timeframe between out of warp and gank big enough for this?


TBH probably not, lock times for most gank ships are less than 3 seconds so unless youve got other ships remote sensor boosting the thrasher you probably wont lock them before they can open fire. However it depends on the fit the ganker is using and what the ship is so give it a go and see.


now, if the orca pilot (or thrasher, or someone else off grid) has shield ganglinks going ... it'll help the survivability of the macks (maybe a volley or two, if you're lucky).

really depends on if your "defense gank" thrasher can target/pop the catalysts fast enough to handle the situation, and if the mining fleet is somewhere "safe" (i.e. not at the GD warp-in point).


@ Henry -- Mack is shield tank ONLY ... and has paper thin armour/hull as it is (though a DCU would have helped for a volley)


A thrasher's dps is too little to destroy the catalysts before they do signficant damage. A Hurricane, Vaga, or Munnin is probably a better choice. A BS could too, assuming it gets a lock in time, and is setup to appropriately track the dessies.

The truth is, if they Mack actually has a tank (MSE, DCU, 2x IF), you have some time to save. If if doesn't... two catalysts can destroy it in under 10 seconds.

IMO, a blackbird, rook, or falcon would be the most effective counter... (You don't need to destroy them, you only need to stop them from shooting).

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#38 - 2012-01-12 23:05:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
1) Tanking a mack is pointless. Putting more than a T1 extender is overkill for hi sec and will never save it from any decent gank.

2) Not putting expanders is also pointless since the huge loss in cargo space (unless in a gang) will more than overcome the paltry increase in tank. Ice blocks are big.

3) Stats on below 20 minutes are useless, some ships fill up in 18 minutes iirc. You can't imagine a regular human being torturing himself staring at a screen for a whole mining cycle. Most alt tab to the mining ship once they hear the lasers noise stop or put a stopwatch.

4) The "stay aligned" is also a dumb request. It might be worthwhile for mining roids since cycles are short, roids need to be changed often. But for ice mining you have 15 mins+ cycles and in 15 mins a ship will move 20-30 km. Unlike roids, if you stop ice miners you lose the whole block => several minutes so you must stay in range of the ice roid and not interrupt the lasers.

Therefore you either stand still (99% do this) or circle around ice (but then aligmnent is impossible, only happens once per turn).

5) Even if you had 10 BCs and battleships protecting you "BECAUSE EVE IS SOCIAL!" and gankers were -10, a cloaky can get close, gankers warp to him, lock and kill the mack before the gankers suffer any tangible loss.


Bottom line is: don't mine in systems close to low sec, check map for ship kills in last 24 hours, fit the ship CHEAPLY (fitting some deadspace mod makes you just a gank magnet) and plan to lose it sooner or later. It's a running cost, like for gankers losing their ships is a running cost.
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2012-01-12 23:38:05 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Um... Take action before dire need? That doesn't work. If a tanker plans to get you, they will scram or disrupt you. There is no warping. If you mean have time to run a booster, again they usually bring extra ships to compensate. 3 to 4 catalysts will beat a shield boosters.

Better to stay passively aligned to your warp out and run when people arrive at the belt if you are not afk.

As for hulk, remember, the Mack gains a 100% yield bonus for ice mining, but mines a tad slower. Still, for ice mining if you do not use a Mack, then you are hurting your profits more than a gank will.

As for cost... About 1000 units of ice equal 200 mil isk, which is about 21 hours solo mining and with no bonuses. That really is a day of bot mining for a single botting account. (a week if you have limited play time for a normal miner) you would have to kill over a ship per day to hurt their profit.


Active repping (shield boosters) are typically much less efficient against a ganker assault than a buffer tank (Medium Shield Extender). But you do sacrifice your mining efficiency to fit a tank.

A mack gains the bonus for ice yield, but a tanked mack has 20-25k EHP, where a tanked ice mining hulk has 35-45k EHP. These hulks would require more catalysts to bring down (my guess is 3-5 of Smodab's catalysts). From the targets perspective, they can overheat modules to try and survive longer. If your enemy is bringing 3-5 people, do you really think you should be able to thwart them as a solo entity? A group of 10 ice miners can feed all they want on the ice belt buffet, is it unreasonable for one of them to get into a combat vessel and defend the operation? Would you not PAY for such a service? This is NOT a solo game, and we should be able to adapt to the dangers around us!



The issue is that it would be economically irrational to pay a salary which is competitive with level 4 mission running. The only way to make it more competitive though is to (*gulp*) make ice mining hard enough so that it becomes valuable enough to pay for these services.
Smodab Ongalot
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-01-13 00:23:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Smodab Ongalot
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:


blah blah blah blah blah




Lots of really really bad information here I would like to respond to. But the forum ate my well thought out and lengthy post and I can't be arsed to retype anything but the last line.


As this is the first time you've posted in one of my threads, I never understood why people despised you posting in their threads. Now I do.