These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK: The State of Highsec Mining and the Effect of Upcoming Changes

Author
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#61 - 2016-08-31 00:04:26 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


I was referring to freighters.


Well, those are still defenseless ships, i.e. no weapons slots or drones.


Yeah and people are foolish with them all the time.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#62 - 2016-08-31 00:08:23 UTC
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Those are still classified as defenseless ships, i.e. no weapons slots or drones.


Ya it's weird that CCP gave them HP at all....it's like they should just be invulnerable right.

Maybe you should submit that as a bug....


Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2016-08-31 00:09:37 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Those are still classified as defenseless ships, i.e. no weapons slots or drones.


Ya it's weird that CCP gave them HP at all....it's like they should just be invulnerable right.

Maybe you should submit that as a bug....


Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



Maybe those pilots should not be foolish. Putting more than a billion ISK in your freighter has always been kind of a dumb move.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#64 - 2016-08-31 00:14:00 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Those are still classified as defenseless ships, i.e. no weapons slots or drones.


Ya it's weird that CCP gave them HP at all....it's like they should just be invulnerable right.

Maybe you should submit that as a bug....


Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



Maybe those pilots should not be foolish. Putting more than a billion ISK in your freighter has always been kind of a dumb move.


Agreed.





There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#65 - 2016-08-31 00:14:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

Btw, you do know why we all use procurers in highsec now, your organization made it impossible to mine in any ship that:

1) either costs a couple hundred million making the 2 catalysts it takes to gank one a huge loss discrepancy in YOUR favor.
2) Or it has such a wimped out defense already that using anything less than a fully tanked procurer is stupid.


This is heartening to hear, but sadly we still find plenty of Hulks and Macks every day.

If it makes you feel any better, there is no profit to be made off ganking a T2-fitted exhumer. If a Catalyst costs 10m and two of them are needed to kill a poorly tanked Mack, then I would recover an average of 8m worth of loot from your wreck and 8m of my own wrecks, with a bit more from your T2 salvage if I'm lucky, and maybe some ore if I come back with a Miasmos.


But while you can gank all day with the loss of little in ship costs the exhumer pilot cannot, his / her losses will stack so quickly that.....wait for it.....

He will chose a less expensive and tanked up the butt ship (procurer) so that your losses are more on par with yours and now they can legitimately defend themselves through, "economic defense".

This economic form of pvp is the only real defense that industrialists have. My proof is that:

1) procurers are quickly becoming the highsec ship of choice for mining because it is both cheap and tough, which makes its 'economic defense' high.

2) Most ganks of freighters are freighters carrying over a certain threshold of value as cargo, they have reduced their "economic defense" by making themselves too valuable for the ship's defensive capabilities.

As miners we currently have important decisions available to us, we can chose a high profit ship with reduced, 'economic defense' like the hulk or choose a lower profit but higher 'economically defensible" ship like the procurer. Your proposal simple makes all mining ships easy to kill to benefit you and takes any choice about ships and fittings away from the miner.

Let me finish with this: What if we made it so that if a ship (or group of ships) that were capable of ganking a miner that-that ship would cost 10x as much as the mining ship AND to further complicate things the mining ship had a choice between putting substantial firepower on his ship or more mining mods but game mechanics so favored firepower over mining mods that virtually every encounter between a ganker and a miner would end in the miners favor. These game mechanics reversed are what miners face everyday and we arent whining that your gank ships be nerfed, increased in cost or any other such change just to benefit our own petty self interests.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Caco De'mon
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#66 - 2016-08-31 00:15:37 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...

*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#67 - 2016-08-31 00:21:33 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

The environment that you describe where one watches local with hyper vigilance at all times best describes other environments of game play like low, wh, and nullsec. If we make highsec like all those other environments then the game loses something rather than gains anything. And I CONCLUDE that homogenization of a game is ALWAYS detrimental because players that had an interest in that segment of the game that became homogenized leave the game because the no longer feel there is a place for them.

While certainly anecdotal one of the main reasons i stopped playing WOW after 8 years wasn't that the game overall was bad it had, in fact, become a much better game BUT the classes had started to become homogenized and so having reduced choice i quite the game.

I can assure you that should highsec become just another hyper vigilant place to play the game i will stop playing, the world is stressful enough without a video game adding any more stress to my life.


I would argue you don't have to be hyper vigilant to avoid being ganked most of the time. Keep local open and look at it, use alt-a to so you can see if somebody new comes in. Also, look for systems that CODE. does not frequent as much. They do exist. And if somebody lands in your belt align out, and consider keeping your ship in motion, a moving target is harder to hit. My guess is these moderate precautions will help you avoid ganks better than most. It is a case of not out running the bear, just out running the other miners...let the bear eat them.


Um that all sounds hauntingly like hyper vigilance......

Roll

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#68 - 2016-08-31 00:26:28 UTC
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...


Fair enough, please go on about how you guys engage in "Elite PVP". Forum regulars could probably use a good laugh.















There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#69 - 2016-08-31 00:26:42 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

The environment that you describe where one watches local with hyper vigilance at all times best describes other environments of game play like low, wh, and nullsec. If we make highsec like all those other environments then the game loses something rather than gains anything. And I CONCLUDE that homogenization of a game is ALWAYS detrimental because players that had an interest in that segment of the game that became homogenized leave the game because the no longer feel there is a place for them.

While certainly anecdotal one of the main reasons i stopped playing WOW after 8 years wasn't that the game overall was bad it had, in fact, become a much better game BUT the classes had started to become homogenized and so having reduced choice i quite the game.

I can assure you that should highsec become just another hyper vigilant place to play the game i will stop playing, the world is stressful enough without a video game adding any more stress to my life.


I would argue you don't have to be hyper vigilant to avoid being ganked most of the time. Keep local open and look at it, use alt-a to so you can see if somebody new comes in. Also, look for systems that CODE. does not frequent as much. They do exist. And if somebody lands in your belt align out, and consider keeping your ship in motion, a moving target is harder to hit. My guess is these moderate precautions will help you avoid ganks better than most. It is a case of not out running the bear, just out running the other miners...let the bear eat them.


Um that all sounds hauntingly like hyper vigilance......

Roll


If you can't be bothered to at least align out when a neutral comes into the belt....yeah, maybe this is not your game. I mean seriously, is hyper vigilant not watching Netflix?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Caco De'mon
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#70 - 2016-08-31 00:26:59 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Um that all sounds hauntingly like hyper vigilance......

Roll



So then you champion closing local, ignoring the overview and forget about any intel on the system you plan to work in?

That's a winning formula right there.

Shocked

*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

Lawrence Lawton
The Lawton School for Pubbies Who Can't Mine Good
Novus Ordo.
#71 - 2016-08-31 00:30:44 UTC
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...


When he refers to "actual combat" he means consensual PvP. He'll no doubt tell us that he doesn't have a killboard history because Doc Fury is a forum alt, and he will decline to name his PvP character.
Caco De'mon
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#72 - 2016-08-31 00:31:12 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
please go on about how you guys engage in "Elite PVP". Forum regulars could probably use a good laugh.


Sorry I missed where "Elite PVP" was mentioned...plz link. thx.

*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#73 - 2016-08-31 00:38:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...


When he refers to "actual combat" he means consensual PvP.


Nice try, but it simply means combat as in 2 (or more) armed opponents, consent notwithstanding.

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#74 - 2016-08-31 00:41:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
please go on about how you guys engage in "Elite PVP". Forum regulars could probably use a good laugh.


Sorry I missed where "Elite PVP" was mentioned...plz link. thx.


http://www.minerbumping.com/2015/07/elite-pvp-by-numbers.html

http://www.minerbumping.com/2016/03/the-most-elite-pvper-in-eve-online.html

http://www.minerbumping.com/2014/05/codedot-is-elite-pvp.html

http://www.minerbumping.com/2015/11/front-row-seats-for-elite-pvp.html

http://www.minerbumping.com/2016/06/the-extraordinary-compliance-program_22.html


Ingio_Montoya.jpg

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Solecist Project
#75 - 2016-08-31 00:46:53 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
May Arethusa wrote:
Quote:
including many bots


Your proof?

Quote:
These miners do not interact with the community


They're buying and sell products, that's interaction. Now we're all real, real sorry that guy you met on your first day didn't speak to you, but there are better ways to farm hugs than whelping catalysts into fictional space police all day.

That's not interaction, it's a transaction.

glad we got that covered.


Why isn't a transaction a type of interaction?

The question is ill phrased.

Interaction as a term means that two people do something with each other actively.
There are no "types of interaction", only "ways of interacting with each other".

Interaction demands presence, physical or not.
It can even be over longer time-frames, but it demands presence.

Transactions describe an exchange of goods/money.
It does not demand interaction.

The interaction with the market interface leads to a transactions of goods/isk with another player.
The two of them are never actively interacting with each other.

Never
In
The
Process
Is
Anything
Interactive
Between
The
Two
Players
Happening.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Lawrence Lawton
The Lawton School for Pubbies Who Can't Mine Good
Novus Ordo.
#76 - 2016-08-31 00:52:42 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

Btw, you do know why we all use procurers in highsec now, your organization made it impossible to mine in any ship that:

1) either costs a couple hundred million making the 2 catalysts it takes to gank one a huge loss discrepancy in YOUR favor.
2) Or it has such a wimped out defense already that using anything less than a fully tanked procurer is stupid.


This is heartening to hear, but sadly we still find plenty of Hulks and Macks every day.

If it makes you feel any better, there is no profit to be made off ganking a T2-fitted exhumer. If a Catalyst costs 10m and two of them are needed to kill a poorly tanked Mack, then I would recover an average of 8m worth of loot from your wreck and 8m of my own wrecks, with a bit more from your T2 salvage if I'm lucky, and maybe some ore if I come back with a Miasmos.


But while you can gank all day with the loss of little in ship costs the exhumer pilot cannot, his / her losses will stack so quickly that.....wait for it.....

He will chose a less expensive and tanked up the butt ship (procurer) so that your losses are more on par with yours and now they can legitimately defend themselves through, "economic defense".

This economic form of pvp is the only real defense that industrialists have. My proof is that:

1) procurers are quickly becoming the highsec ship of choice for mining because it is both cheap and tough, which makes its 'economic defense' high.

2) Most ganks of freighters are freighters carrying over a certain threshold of value as cargo, they have reduced their "economic defense" by making themselves too valuable for the ship's defensive capabilities.

As miners we currently have important decisions available to us, we can chose a high profit ship with reduced, 'economic defense' like the hulk or choose a lower profit but higher 'economically defensible" ship like the procurer. Your proposal simple makes all mining ships easy to kill to benefit you and takes any choice about ships and fittings away from the miner.

Let me finish with this: What if we made it so that if a ship (or group of ships) that were capable of ganking a miner that-that ship would cost 10x as much as the mining ship AND to further complicate things the mining ship had a choice between putting substantial firepower on his ship or more mining mods but game mechanics so favored firepower over mining mods that virtually every encounter between a ganker and a miner would end in the miners favor. These game mechanics reversed are what miners face everyday and we arent whining that your gank ships be nerfed, increased in cost or any other such change just to benefit our own petty self interests.


Your evidence supports the "economic defense" theory quite well. I have definitely observed an increase in Procurer use. Like someone mentioned above, you don't have to outrun the bear, just the guy behind you. To be clear though, I am not the one proposing the game changes in the OP, and the changes don't make Procs and Skiffs any easier to kill.

As for the hypothetical, there is a long history of Carebears demanding nerfs to highsec aggression, including EHP buffs, changes to CONCORD, the inability to reship with a criminal timer, AWOXing nerfs, can flipping, removal of insurance for criminal ships, etc.
Lawrence Lawton
The Lawton School for Pubbies Who Can't Mine Good
Novus Ordo.
#77 - 2016-08-31 00:57:41 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...


When he refers to "actual combat" he means consensual PvP.


Nice try, but it simply means combat as in 2 (or more) armed opponents, consent notwithstanding.


My apologies for putting words in your mouth. You'll love the combat (Gila) I engaged in yesterday.
Serene Repose
#78 - 2016-08-31 01:08:15 UTC
The OP's changed his tune so many times through this thread methinks it must be a medley of CODE's favorite hits!

"It is a tale
told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing."

-Willie the Shake-
Macbeth, Act V, Scene V (trained to V)

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Piugattuk
Litla Sundlaugin
#79 - 2016-08-31 01:18:10 UTC
What is it with "code" and "afk miners" fixation, ok lets put legs on this beast;

Code; hi miner.

Miner, hello.

Ok...odd silence as they both wonder what else to say...

Code, What are you up too?

Miner, mining.

What is there to say???

Seriously 'code' what do you people want from miners or anybody, why at this point would any miner afk or otherwise want to interact with 'code' when your there to play the way you do, you are there to destroy their barges and exhumers this is like slapping someone then expecting friendships...makes no sense, code is so crazed about what they do you have outside websites dedicated to your deeds, the code doesn't want interaction, nor do they want "prices" to go up for ores, if prices go up for ores then prices go up for everything, ores are the base starting point for everything.

When I stopped playing a DRAKE sold for about 25 mil, now a few years later they are over 50 mil, yet the price of veld was about 12 ISK and today it is ~14 to 15 ISK per unit...a marginal increase at best.

Today I have been to belts, they are empty, many hubs that used to boast 75 people today I notice only average about 15 people, JITA use to be so jammed pack getting in used to be an issue...now its never a problem, a raven that used to cost me 125 mil ISK is over 200 mil ISK, plex when I first seen it sold for about 125 mil ISK, today billions, yet price for ore is only marginally higher...please explain this, the prices have gone up because miners and industrialist have left the game, the prices for ore are being set by forces that code is not looking at, As I run around in my exploration ship and scan I also do directional scans to see what's out there...the most mining ships I ever see are Venture and the most I've seen in one system is 5....in a noob system.

I absolutely disagree that 'miners' are the problems of the market, the market is stagnant for ores and high for ships, hell I built an incurses because buying one would have been a rip off, an Iteron V was about nine hundred thousand ISK, today about 2 mil ISK, industrial ships are stinkers for the cost increase in comparison to combat ships, sure procurer and other barges have gone up but that is only because they can produce ISK in greater quantity other then that industrial ships just don't gain in value as combat ships have...this means only one thing, less industrial pilots/toons in game, have you ever considered that it is the antics of 'code' that has driven away people?

Consider that, I'm not saying ganking ships shouldn't happen in high sec but to understand the eve economy and the background environment that drives it, less players less demand from a segment of players that are missing, miners, industrialist, casual players, higher prices for combat ships means someone is building them because they are in demand.

Anyway I've waffled on far too long.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#80 - 2016-08-31 01:19:41 UTC
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Lawrence Lawton wrote:
Caco De'mon wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Maybe you guys would be taken more seriously if you engaged in actual combat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Well we can't compete with your KB that's for sure....that's why I am taking you so seriously...


When he refers to "actual combat" he means consensual PvP.


Nice try, but it simply means combat as in 2 (or more) armed opponents, consent notwithstanding.


My apologies for putting words in your mouth. You'll love the combat (Gila) I engaged in yesterday.


A combat Gila kill mail where an NPC claimed max damage...


At least he was armed, and it only took 5 of you so... kudos.

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.