These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

State of Eve: War Dec

Author
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#361 - 2016-07-09 16:51:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Dracvlad wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
The Forge on its own is not hisec, you might want to think what you said through again.

Eh, I'm using the numbers he provided. Fighting him on his own turf.

It may have little relation to reality, but that isn't my problem - I'm not going to look up numbers for all of high sec if he can't be bothered to.

He is an idiot citing evidence that doesn't even support his own point. That is the main thing I was trying to point out I suppose.


Your retort is not valid because anyone with a brain will see that hisec mining is not just limited to the Forge. Of course you are not going to look up the numbers, I did not ask that, I just suggested that your comments which were underlined and highlighted were not valid and you would be better off re-stating it.

Anyone with a brain will also see that the vast, vast majority of the 630b isk imported into jita is in the form of PLEX, skill injectors, faction/officer modules, and moon minerals - which have nothing whatsoever to do with high sec mining.

However it is impossible to determine the exact amount of ore actually shipped in/out...as well as to separate out high-sec-mined ore and 0.0 mined ore that was shipped in without looking up numbers....so I'm just going to use his own logic and assume that the forge = 100% of high sec and use the numbers to point out he is an idiot.

Again, I realize it isn't particularly realistic - but it is a reasonable interpretation of the data provided by Geronimo, using some of the same (ridiculous) assumptions made *by Geronimo*.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#362 - 2016-07-09 20:22:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Geronimo McVain
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:

#1 your numbers are of course biased, and don't even include some major ganking systems since you limited it to the forge itself rather than the routes leading into the forge...

But even so, your numbers show pretty convincingly that the idiot high-sec miners are barely even a factor in production. Only 1.5B isk was mined - but 32B isk was produced. That means only 4.5% of production in the forge came form ore mined in high sec. 95.5% of the ore came from elsewhere.

Also considering that 95% of the high-sec idiots aren't even at war even with the wardec spamming in EVE today, and that they only account for 0.23% of the value imported into the forge... That means the wardec spamming corps killed 5-600% of the total value of every single miner in the forge combined. It is pretty impressively idiotic that 5% of the miners can lose 6x the total value produced by all of the rest *combined*. You will never convince me that they are not idiots for doing this.

Additionally, more isk was lost than was mined.

By your own admission the high sec idiots (who only made 1.5b isk from the ore they mined per your numbers) gave the war-spamming hub-humping corp(s) in Jita 6 billion isk in profit in whatever period you are looking at. And that is *only* in Jita - that doesn't even count the other trade hubs or the major pipeline choke points!



Finally - I have said this before and I'll say it again - *I* am not in a large war-spamming corp. *I* am not doing any of the things you are talking about. And the people who are doing it, aren't *trying* to "make a dent" - they are just *farming kills and isk*. Successfully.

Why don't *you* stop flying your jump freighter full of plex into gate camps while you are at it? You may in fact be the dumbest person in all of EVE.

Sorry, bur wrong interpretation of the data:
1. production is the refining of ore to ships an modules
2. Most of the values going through the Forge are goods from other regions like ratting loot aka no HS miners
3. You also hit the outgoing traffic with effectively doubles the amount of cargo you miss and the buyers are also no HS miners
4. If you can afford a jump freighter full of Plex you are doing something right even if your method of transport is totally stupid.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#363 - 2016-07-09 21:16:22 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
Sorry, bur wrong interpretation of the data:
1. production is the refining of ore to ships an modules
2. Most of the values going through the Forge are goods from other regions like ratting loot aka no HS miners
3. You also hit the outgoing traffic with effectively doubles the amount of cargo you miss and the buyers are also no HS miners
4. If you can afford a jump freighter full of Plex you are doing something right even if your method of transport is totally stupid.

So you admit your data doesn't say what you claimed - aka: You admit you are a Liar and an Idiot.

That was really all you had to say.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#364 - 2016-07-09 23:28:38 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Actually I said that the current system is actually quite good as mechanics go, as far as I have seen so far you critique any ideas that are against your strongly held point of view and then you try to paint them as some sort of extremist carebear. Actually an extremist carebear is a strange concept...

My suggestions are focused on not changing the mechanics, but giving back something of value (a sort of watch list) but in such a way that people can fight over it and yet all the way through this thread you and others try to make out that I am doing this to make things more fair, or happy or reduce risk. I am also happy to restrict people instantly re-creating their corp and would reduce the fees on large alliances which are just silly.

Yes it will cost the war dec entities a bit of ISK to set these OS things up and defend them, but it creates something in space that is aimed to make people think about fighting in some way, in a game that is all about fighting what is wrong about that?

I have suggested that the Indy structures should have a lower yield one that can be taken down quickly but want better yields on ones that cannot. This is actually worse then it is now, where people can pull down a POS very quickly. The objective is to push corps that have something of value and will fight to defend it.

My suggestions are to create conflict drivers first and foremost for meaningful smaller level hisec content and yet people like you attack me as if I am some sort of anti-christ. Or accuse me of trying to delete war decs when I want them to have the capacity to perhaps create more meaningful content and my focus is on content so that an indy corp can resist and do damage if they have it in them.

I personally think that many of the detractors in this thread just want people in null sec to play their game and will do anything to keep hisec stale and un-involving. Some of the hisec players get it, but apart from the opportunity you have of being insulting to me, what is your beef with my suggestions?

Well, we can hardly critique something based on someone else's view, so of course critiques that we all make are from our own perspective.

And yes, I critique strongly when I feel it appropriate. Somehow, it's often put that wardeccers are bullies, risk averse, gutless players that only want easy kills, to rob new players, etc., etc., etc. (sometimes much worse has been put).

Yet the expectation of people like yourself and McVain is that all responses to your posts should be cordial and respectful. Well if you guys want respect, then show some.

I don't personally care what you or McVain or many others think, so I have no problem being strong in replies, because if you are going to throw stones, then you better be prepared to have them returned, which makes your claims that it's all others have available, all the funnier after you attack someone and then get all butthurt when it's returned. That's really quite entertaining.

As to your suggestion, I already addressed that a couple of pages ago. No need to rehash it. The opinion is still the same. It's as unbalanced as every other post and in many ways one of the worst suggestions ever made, in its current form. I hope CCP never adopt it and based on what they have so far indicated about observatory arrays, it's a good chance they never will.


I only throw stones when people throw stones at me. I am certainly not butthurt, I am asking you whet do you find exactly wrong with my suggestions. And your previous posts are attack posts not refuting with calm collected arguments.

You are weak in replies it is basically bluster.

Why is it unbalanced? You just throw views out with no details to explain why it is unbalanced. I am after intelligent feed back not propaganda.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#365 - 2016-07-09 23:34:17 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
The Forge on its own is not hisec, you might want to think what you said through again.

Eh, I'm using the numbers he provided. Fighting him on his own turf.

It may have little relation to reality, but that isn't my problem - I'm not going to look up numbers for all of high sec if he can't be bothered to.

He is an idiot citing evidence that doesn't even support his own point. That is the main thing I was trying to point out I suppose.


Your retort is not valid because anyone with a brain will see that hisec mining is not just limited to the Forge. Of course you are not going to look up the numbers, I did not ask that, I just suggested that your comments which were underlined and highlighted were not valid and you would be better off re-stating it.

Anyone with a brain will also see that the vast, vast majority of the 630b isk imported into jita is in the form of PLEX, skill injectors, faction/officer modules, and moon minerals - which have nothing whatsoever to do with high sec mining.

However it is impossible to determine the exact amount of ore actually shipped in/out...as well as to separate out high-sec-mined ore and 0.0 mined ore that was shipped in without looking up numbers....so I'm just going to use his own logic and assume that the forge = 100% of high sec and use the numbers to point out he is an idiot.

Again, I realize it isn't particularly realistic - but it is a reasonable interpretation of the data provided by Geronimo, using some of the same (ridiculous) assumptions made *by Geronimo*.


Sorry but you are being an idiot here, I was starting to get some respect for you, not that it matters to you, but you mucked it up with that post, because you were so keen to make a point that you ignored that fact that your point was rubbish.

Now you are just trying to divert attention from the fact that you replied to troll without being truthful. People who engage on the forums are better off just saying your figures are wrong rather than using figures like you did, you made yourself look like an idiot.. You are wiggling here, nice try and it sort of is acceptable in one sense, but you are ignoring all the mining done in other regions which is huge...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#366 - 2016-07-09 23:42:28 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Actually I said that the current system is actually quite good as mechanics go, as far as I have seen so far you critique any ideas that are against your strongly held point of view and then you try to paint them as some sort of extremist carebear. Actually an extremist carebear is a strange concept...

My suggestions are focused on not changing the mechanics, but giving back something of value (a sort of watch list) but in such a way that people can fight over it and yet all the way through this thread you and others try to make out that I am doing this to make things more fair, or happy or reduce risk. I am also happy to restrict people instantly re-creating their corp and would reduce the fees on large alliances which are just silly.

Yes it will cost the war dec entities a bit of ISK to set these OS things up and defend them, but it creates something in space that is aimed to make people think about fighting in some way, in a game that is all about fighting what is wrong about that?

I have suggested that the Indy structures should have a lower yield one that can be taken down quickly but want better yields on ones that cannot. This is actually worse then it is now, where people can pull down a POS very quickly. The objective is to push corps that have something of value and will fight to defend it.

My suggestions are to create conflict drivers first and foremost for meaningful smaller level hisec content and yet people like you attack me as if I am some sort of anti-christ. Or accuse me of trying to delete war decs when I want them to have the capacity to perhaps create more meaningful content and my focus is on content so that an indy corp can resist and do damage if they have it in them.

I personally think that many of the detractors in this thread just want people in null sec to play their game and will do anything to keep hisec stale and un-involving. Some of the hisec players get it, but apart from the opportunity you have of being insulting to me, what is your beef with my suggestions?

Well, we can hardly critique something based on someone else's view, so of course critiques that we all make are from our own perspective.

And yes, I critique strongly when I feel it appropriate. Somehow, it's often put that wardeccers are bullies, risk averse, gutless players that only want easy kills, to rob new players, etc., etc., etc. (sometimes much worse has been put).

Yet the expectation of people like yourself and McVain is that all responses to your posts should be cordial and respectful. Well if you guys want respect, then show some.

I don't personally care what you or McVain or many others think, so I have no problem being strong in replies, because if you are going to throw stones, then you better be prepared to have them returned, which makes your claims that it's all others have available, all the funnier after you attack someone and then get all butthurt when it's returned. That's really quite entertaining.

As to your suggestion, I already addressed that a couple of pages ago. No need to rehash it. The opinion is still the same. It's as unbalanced as every other post and in many ways one of the worst suggestions ever made, in its current form. I hope CCP never adopt it and based on what they have so far indicated about observatory arrays, it's a good chance they never will.


I only throw stones when people throw stones at me. I am certainly not butthurt, I am asking you whet do you find exactly wrong with my suggestions. And your previous posts are attack posts not refuting with calm collected arguments.

You are weak in replies it is basically bluster.

Why is it unbalanced? You just throw views out with no details to explain why it is unbalanced. I am after intelligent feed back not propaganda.

Oh god. You're going down the stupid rabbit hole again.

Go back a couple of pages and read again. It's all there, with reasons.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

W33b3l
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#367 - 2016-07-10 00:57:53 UTC
Honetly, being war decced for stupid reasons is way less annoying then having your alliance war dec other people for stupid reasons. But the former is what annoys new people.

There are ways around this. People in the same NPC corp can create an invite only chat channel and create sub groups. ECT. Although the only way around the problem Ive been able to think of when it comes to milking new 5-10 players corps or whatever to death is this.

Allow people to create a non dec-able corp for an appropriate fee. If they create said corp, apply all NPC corp taxes that already exist to it on top of any player created corp taxes. Do not allow them to anchor anything in space (other then cans or MTU's and that type of thing). Do not allow them to wardec anyone else (obviously). Create a member limit and do not allow them to be a member of an alliance. Create a new game mechanic allowing a single player (or multiple players individually) that allows someone in a non NPC corp to purchase kill rights (like a single player wardec) against another single player that happens to be in one of these "special corps". just to make sure they cant be complete dirt bags.

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#368 - 2016-07-10 04:07:35 UTC
W33b3l wrote:
Honetly, being war decced for stupid reasons is way less annoying then having your alliance war dec other people for stupid reasons. But the former is what annoys new people.

There are ways around this. People in the same NPC corp can create an invite only chat channel and create sub groups. ECT. Although the only way around the problem Ive been able to think of when it comes to milking new 5-10 players corps or whatever to death is this.

Allow people to create a non dec-able corp for an appropriate fee. If they create said corp, apply all NPC corp taxes that already exist to it on top of any player created corp taxes. Do not allow them to anchor anything in space (other then cans or MTU's and that type of thing). Do not allow them to wardec anyone else (obviously). Create a member limit and do not allow them to be a member of an alliance. Create a new game mechanic allowing a single player (or multiple players individually) that allows someone in a non NPC corp to purchase kill rights (like a single player wardec) against another single player that happens to be in one of these "special corps". just to make sure they cant be complete dirt bags.


The idea of the 'Social Corporation' when it was originally rumored received such a bad response, that I think CCP have vacated the idea, without critically assessing what the issue was.

The issue wasn't with the idea, but with the way it was leaked out with no formal discussion.

Calling it a Corporation, without explaining how it actually isn't a Corporation like the current structure was a big mistake IMO.

It would be great if CCP put it on the roadmap to increase the social tools available in game, so groups of players can form up, no matter whether they are in an NPC Corp or a player Corp.

Something more than mail and a calendar, but no other privileges. An in game slack sort of system that people can join, with a history, that has a calendar, etc.

That would immediately eliminate the issue of wardecs for a large number of players, who despite being in an NPC Corp, could be part of active groups based on the interests they have.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#369 - 2016-07-10 04:22:37 UTC
By "social corporation" you mean chat channel I presume?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#370 - 2016-07-10 04:39:05 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
By "social corporation" you mean chat channel I presume?

Chat channels don't have the same tools that CCP were proposing for a Social Corporation. So no.
The intended difference was that a Social Corporation did not count as a Corp for purposes of owning objects. So no POS, no Citadels, no Sov etc was possible. But it still had a corp name, a ticker, they were debating the possibility of tax (believe they were also debating if NPC tax still applied), & so forth.
And had proposed that a one way transformation could be done.

So you could start life as a social corp, gather friends, recruit, and make sure you actually were stable and having a good membership online before you became a real corp and tried stepping your game up a notch, but once you made the decision you couldn't just casually press the 'Social' button again. Creates room for people to get started without creating ways to avoid wardecs after you start using structures in space.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#371 - 2016-07-10 06:09:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
By "social corporation" you mean chat channel I presume?

Not quite. Something more.

Nevyn seems to have expressed a view that I never saw CCP outline, so that understanding is different to what I understood it to be, although that could potentially be one use.

If you take a group like Spectre Fleet. As a public NPSI group, they have 13,000 members from all sorts of different corps, including NPC Corps and player corps.

However, although they are an organised group, there are no ingame tools that really help support their activities, other than the possibility of creating a public chat channel and the difficult process in Eve of a mailing list.

There is no calendar that all members can access to see what public fleets are planned, there's no possibility of any organisational structure that helps people support the activities, no ability to publish doctrines to the group, no automatic chat channel or mailing list that people have access to by default if they decide to become part of the Spectre community, no easy way to provide contracted fitted ships just for the group, etc.

Essentially, while CCP acknowledged a couple of years ago that 'meaningful experiences' correlate with long term retention for players, the game currently has very, very limited tools to support people who want to create meaningful experiences and provide content for others.

The in game tools currently also lock you into one organisation. As I'm in an NPC Corp, it's difficult to be assigned roles in a structure that Spectre Fleet have, or to also join Affirmatives structure to help their public roams and be assigned roles, etc.

It all has to be done out of game and many things (eg. providing fitted ships, ensuring people know doctrines, etc.) are a pain in the ass.

So it leaked out over a year ago now (maybe even pushing 2 years) that CCP were considering the concept of a 'Social Corp' and to increase the range and use of social networking tools available in game to support different activities.

Unfortunately it was all handled poorly and was shitcanned here in the forum, in Reddit and on the tweetfleet slack.

Good idea overall though.

Introducing the concept would possibly go a long way to aleviating the constant whinging about wardecs as other non-deccable groups would be available to join and there wouldn't necessarily be the use of Corps unless a group needs to erect structures or control their tax structure.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#372 - 2016-07-10 07:40:03 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Oh god. You're going down the stupid rabbit hole again.

Go back a couple of pages and read again. It's all there, with reasons.


What suggesting that people give intelligent specific responses to suggestions instead of general one liners about wanting 100% safety or want to always cost the war deccers, neither of which apply. And this is a game, if people want to play as bullies robbers and so on that's their right, also Eve is a game where you get the drop on people, so many kills are easy kills, so what.

Link it back your answer because all I recall from you is general HTFU chanting type replies and nothing addressing the value of having people decide to go out in space to shoot the damn things and thus causing a point of conflict and content. My entire suggestion is to give carebears with teeth something that rewards them to resist and at the same time give back something of real value to war dec corps.

You have read Dirty Forum Alt in this thread and in others get to the heart of the matter, the unwillingness to engage, huffing and puffing is not going to do much to change this situation and apart from war dec fees for large alliances and corp destruction and re-creation I think the mechanics are largely sound. I think the war dec fees had an impact in creating blanket war dec entities too. I wanted to kill a couple of Goon miners near me, but at 500m I am not going to bother...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#373 - 2016-07-10 08:03:03 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#374 - 2016-07-10 08:32:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Go back a couple of pages and read again. It's all there, with reasons.


What suggesting that people give intelligent specific responses to suggestions instead of general one liners about wanting 100% safety

I don't know why I bother. There are a couple of extensive posts a couple of pages back.

If reading more than one line at a time without losing focus is an issue for you, then there isn't much I can do about that.

Here is even one of your very own replies to one of my posts about your suggestion:

Deacvlad wrote:
Actually a very good point on the impact of small entities...

At least have the integrity to have consistency. You're just shitting up the thread for the sake of a fight otherwise.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#375 - 2016-07-10 09:29:53 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Go back a couple of pages and read again. It's all there, with reasons.


What suggesting that people give intelligent specific responses to suggestions instead of general one liners about wanting 100% safety

I don't know why I bother. There are a couple of extensive posts a couple of pages back.

If reading more than one line at a time without losing focus is an issue for you, then there isn't much I can do about that.

Here is even one of your very own replies to one of my posts about your suggestion:

Deacvlad wrote:
Actually a very good point on the impact of small entities...

At least have the integrity to have consistency. You're just shitting up the thread for the sake of a fight otherwise.


The comment was actaually a good one and I remember it now, you said that leaving it vulnerable all the time would hurt small corps so I agreed and therefore suggested it would be better if they could turn it on which made it vulnerable. So I stand corrected, you did make a positive post on this which helped me to improve the idea. So I apologise that was a very good post and I up-voted you for it too.

I wish more of your posts were like that.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#376 - 2016-07-11 07:25:10 UTC
let's go back to the datas:
The damage done to the whole Traffic is about 1%. Let's assume you do 500% of that to the "idiot HS-miners" thats 5%. Or you might say that you loose an Exhumer (at 200M) every 4B ISK mined ore........ That's around 140h of mining (and 4-5 visits to your therapist for your masochistic tendencys P)

Also the example of the HS-Miner with a Jump-freighter full of Plex....... Why should someone living in HS use a Jump freighter? Or even transport PLEX if the trade hubs are around the corner? And these kills like the 40B kill in a shuttle full with Plex: Do you have any Idea how long you need to mine to get 40B ISK? I really don't want to calculate that. So most of your high loot kills are most likely not HS-Miners. All the ones that get buy are the leet NS- players and the big hits are all the HS-Miners? Most likely it's the other way around.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#377 - 2016-07-11 07:35:20 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
let's go back to the datas:
The damage done to the whole Traffic is about 1%. Let's assume you do 500% of that to the "idiot HS-miners" thats 5%. Or you might say that you loose an Exhumer (at 200M) every 4B ISK mined ore........ That's around 140h of mining (and 4-5 visits to your therapist for your masochistic tendencys P)

Ahhhh, where is the data exactly?

Like if all of those figures are real data, then give us the link.

Or is that just fictional justification in a way that suits whatever argument you are trying to make?

Real figures, or it just fiction, which means nothing.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#378 - 2016-07-11 10:35:29 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
let's go back to the datas:
The damage done to the whole Traffic is about 1%. Let's assume you do 500% of that to the "idiot HS-miners" thats 5%. Or you might say that you loose an Exhumer (at 200M) every 4B ISK mined ore........ That's around 140h of mining (and 4-5 visits to your therapist for your masochistic tendencys P)

Also the example of the HS-Miner with a Jump-freighter full of Plex....... Why should someone living in HS use a Jump freighter? Or even transport PLEX if the trade hubs are around the corner? And these kills like the 40B kill in a shuttle full with Plex: Do you have any Idea how long you need to mine to get 40B ISK? I really don't want to calculate that. So most of your high loot kills are most likely not HS-Miners. All the ones that get buy are the leet NS- players and the big hits are all the HS-Miners? Most likely it's the other way around.

#1 - *YOU* just said the data wasn't valid for all of high sec and couldn't be used to prove what you are saying - now you are trying to use it for that again? Make up your ****ing mind.

#2 - I said *you personally* fly the jump freighter full of plex, and you fly it directly into gate camps. I don't know why you are this stupid, maybe you can tell us?

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)

W33b3l
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#379 - 2016-07-12 01:32:59 UTC
I was going to to look into using a JF to haul stuff in highsec until I realized that a regular freighter can haul more and has a larger tank. So to be fair, there is no reason to be flying one in highsec unless you are moving stuff to or from somewhere other then highsec.
ll Kuray ll
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#380 - 2016-07-12 11:40:44 UTC
Reading all these threads it looks like we need a complete overhaul of the surveillance system.

Surveillance system in my eyes is local, chat channels, overview, d scan.

For too long has surveillance been about using alts to monitor gates and local in adjacent systems.

Couple a new surveillance system with the rightly positioned war dec mechanic and that will be a start.