These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Q: What can an ice miner do?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#121 - 2012-06-14 08:15:05 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
My entire point of this is you can still mine and have some fun too. Remember a nice big buffer fit is key and devote every module for tank. In order to break your tank they will have to sacrifice more ISK in ships than the mittani is willing to pay out for bounties.

So have fun AFK PvPing guys! Big smile


Your point has a flaw.

Like those who made Decshield wanted to put CCP's face in the dung until they'd force-change wardecs mechanics, Goons are doing this to demonstrate how vastly ret4rded is to allow a close to infinite wealth source in the game (Technetium), while making loads of money for demonstrating it.

All it takes them is to double the payout. It's still pocket change for them, and then you are back looking at your 38k EHP Hulk wreck.

If they want to prove their point then they will do that.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
#122 - 2012-06-14 08:22:10 UTC
So - a short summary

With the stated parameters, it is agreed that it is not possible to survive a gank if you ice mine in a Mack alone.

However it is possible for a lone ganker to destroy a Mack. Not just possible - highly probable!

It seems that the best defence for a Mack in an ice belt to avoid being destroyed is not to be there when the ganker turns up.

CCP - do you need to do some balancing here?

I am aware of my own ignorance and have checked my emotional quotient - thanks for asking
Jafit
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#123 - 2012-06-14 08:41:15 UTC
Klandi wrote:
So - a short summary

With the stated parameters, it is agreed that it is not possible to survive a gank if you ice mine in a Mack alone.

However it is possible for a lone ganker to destroy a Mack. Not just possible - highly probable!

It seems that the best defence for a Mack in an ice belt to avoid being destroyed is not to be there when the ganker turns up.

CCP - do you need to do some balancing here?


No CCP don't need to do some balancing here. You need to adapt to changing circumstances.

I think you'll find that it's always the best defense is to not be there when a ganker turns up. In nullsec and lowsec it's practically the only defense, whether you're mining or running anomalies

In highsec you have no warning because there's too many people around, the first thing you know about the threat is a pair of catalysts warping in at zero. If you were to go to nullsec or lowsec however, find a quiet system and do your ice mining there, then you would have more warning for when you might be in danger so long as you monitor local. A neutral enters local you warp out of the belt, dock up or go to your POS, you don't wait for them to turn up in your belt and hope you can tank them.

So my sugestion to you and your friends would be to work together, find a quiet lowsec or nullsec system, and mine ice there. You get access to better ore, there's vast swathes of lowsec that is unoccupied. Sure there is a marginal increase in risk, but I don't think it's far beyond what you're already exposed to, so you may as well go for it.

Do your research, fly around in a shuttle or frigate first, pick a nice quiet spot before trying to move your ships out there.

Good luck, have fun.
sweetrock
#124 - 2012-06-14 09:08:37 UTC
Simple quit, find another game
Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
#125 - 2012-06-14 09:09:58 UTC
Thanks Jafit - I will pass that on to the people in the system I was in

I am aware of my own ignorance and have checked my emotional quotient - thanks for asking
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#126 - 2012-06-14 09:42:56 UTC
I agree with Jafit, mostly. I think mining in high sec is still very possible as long as you go full blown tank. Yes the yield is less, but what the tank does is force the casual Hulkaggedon pilots to look for a soft target, which you are not. So the more of those soft targets die, the more valuable your ore becomes. Besides, there is only a fraction of Hulkaggedon pilots actually still doing this event. Most have gone back to their normal activities. So keeping track of who they are is not too hard. I heard some Hulkaggedon pilots keep recycling trial accounts, so it will be hard to predict those initially.

Still, pay attention to local and the directional scanner.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#127 - 2012-06-14 10:18:13 UTC
Russell Casey wrote:
Go to lowsec, it's dead once you get past the border systems. And as all the pirates moved to highsec long ago, you can probably pay off the locals by offering to fuel their POS.



oh yes.. there is much less chance of you getting blown up in a Mack in low sec.... (sic)

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2012-06-14 10:24:36 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
My entire point of this is you can still mine and have some fun too. Remember a nice big buffer fit is key and devote every module for tank. In order to break your tank they will have to sacrifice more ISK in ships than the mittani is willing to pay out for bounties.

So have fun AFK PvPing guys! Big smile


Your point has a flaw.

Like those who made Decshield wanted to put CCP's face in the dung until they'd force-change wardecs mechanics, Goons are doing this to demonstrate how vastly ret4rded is to allow a close to infinite wealth source in the game (Technetium), while making loads of money for demonstrating it.

All it takes them is to double the payout. It's still pocket change for them, and then you are back looking at your 38k EHP Hulk wreck.

If they want to prove their point then they will do that.

No, what they are really demonstrating is counter intuitive to what they think their goal is. What they are doing is proving that high sec is in fact more risky than other mining zones... as such it deserves more of the reward. So it's time to balance the reward for the risk; move some of the value back out of null sec and into high sec where it was.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#129 - 2012-06-14 10:33:10 UTC
Barbara Nichole wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
My entire point of this is you can still mine and have some fun too. Remember a nice big buffer fit is key and devote every module for tank. In order to break your tank they will have to sacrifice more ISK in ships than the mittani is willing to pay out for bounties.

So have fun AFK PvPing guys! Big smile


Your point has a flaw.

Like those who made Decshield wanted to put CCP's face in the dung until they'd force-change wardecs mechanics, Goons are doing this to demonstrate how vastly ret4rded is to allow a close to infinite wealth source in the game (Technetium), while making loads of money for demonstrating it.

All it takes them is to double the payout. It's still pocket change for them, and then you are back looking at your 38k EHP Hulk wreck.

If they want to prove their point then they will do that.

No, what they are really demonstrating is counter intuitive to what they think their goal is. What they are doing is proving that high sec is in fact more risky than other mining zones... as such it deserves more of the reward. So it's time to balance the reward for the risk; move some of the value back out of null sec and into high sec where it was.


When was the last time you saw a solo neut bomber park in a high sec ice belt system and stop all mining? High sec is very safe compared to low sec and 0.0 but that doesn't mean you are totaly safe. By now you should have learned that fitting a tank is a good idea but no, you refuse to adapt and instead whine to CCP to protect you from your own lazyness and greed.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#130 - 2012-06-14 10:37:15 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Replace those warriors with VESPA ecm and god damn.


Nah. Those are chance based and I think you have to physically tell them to fight back. Normal drones will agress back automatically if setup correct. ECM drones tip off that they might get jammed and not get the kill. I also like to have auto lock back, so I can watch them melt.

Another tid bit of information, the fits I gave above, one destroyer only manages to take off 15% of the shields in a 0.5 system before Concord warps in to ***** on the destroyer mail.


Vs a destroyer they have a fairly good chance with them being med ECM. I belive they do auto agro on someone who attacks you so always have them deployed and its an extra layer of defence. Just having them out can be enough to put off an attackBlink Pilots choice though, a flight of med combat drones works for getting on the KMTwisted
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#131 - 2012-06-14 11:25:33 UTC
Same thing the roid miners are doing (should be doing).

Watch local (everything else is just a waste of time)

That is all.

EVERYBODY KNOWS
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#132 - 2012-06-14 13:21:09 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
They reprocess modules to get low ends. They mine(?) all needed high ends in nullsec. They build their own ships and modules...
…none of which makes them free.

Minerals you mine are free. Sell them to me cheaper.

Also, I think people who gank miners might be unlikely to grind low margin HS ore like a silly.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#133 - 2012-06-14 13:24:06 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Replace those warriors with VESPA ecm and god damn.


Nah. Those are chance based and I think you have to physically tell them to fight back. Normal drones will agress back automatically if setup correct. ECM drones tip off that they might get jammed and not get the kill. I also like to have auto lock back, so I can watch them melt.

Another tid bit of information, the fits I gave above, one destroyer only manages to take off 15% of the shields in a 0.5 system before Concord warps in to ***** on the destroyer mail.


Vs a destroyer they have a fairly good chance with them being med ECM. I belive they do auto agro on someone who attacks you so always have them deployed and its an extra layer of defence. Just having them out can be enough to put off an attackBlink Pilots choice though, a flight of med combat drones works for getting on the KMTwisted


ECM drones do a great job of KM whoring. I used them sometimes for that purpose when flying Logi (though damage drones are better because you can assist them to someone and ignore them).

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#134 - 2012-06-14 13:47:37 UTC
Klandi wrote:
So - a short summary

With the stated parameters, it is agreed that it is not possible to survive a gank if you ice mine in a Mack alone.

However it is possible for a lone ganker to destroy a Mack. Not just possible - highly probable!

It seems that the best defence for a Mack in an ice belt to avoid being destroyed is not to be there when the ganker turns up.

CCP - do you need to do some balancing here?


Stated parameters being, I don't want to sacrifice not one bit of my maximum yield.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
True Reign
#135 - 2012-06-14 14:50:15 UTC
I had a mackinaw fit with 12k EHP and always kept a shield repper on my orca trained on the mack. Since most gankers started off with the weaker ships in the mining belt, I always had plenty of time to judge when it was time to stop ice mining.

Ice miners can't spread out into unused systems like miners of traditional ore can. Too few ice systems. And you can't get ice from anywhere but an ice belt.
Klandi
Consortium of stella Technologies
#136 - 2012-06-14 14:52:03 UTC
Kijo - Just summarizing what people were agreeing on in accordance with the preferences stated. I think it is necessary to be the best you can be in a profession and in Eve terms, that goes beyond the concept of lvl5.

If I was to give personal opinion to this post, I would choose collaboration and group involvement as a necessary part of this activity. I was happy to overhear this conversation in the local channel as it meant that people were standing up and helping each other, and for me - that is what Eve is really about

I am aware of my own ignorance and have checked my emotional quotient - thanks for asking
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#137 - 2012-06-14 14:56:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Klandi wrote:
Kijo - Just summarizing what people were agreeing on in accordance with the preferences stated. I think it is necessary to be the best you can be in a profession and in Eve terms, that goes beyond the concept of lvl5.
It also goes wa-a-ay beyond the concept of “how do I get the most X”.

The best ice miner isn't the ship that can collect the most ice. It's the ship that can make you the most money from mining ice. If a ship consistently mines mines 20 units of ice a minute and equally consistently fails to deliver any of them because they keep exploding, then they're pretty much the worst ship for the job regardless of that massive mining rate. Conversely, a ship that consistently manages to always deliver the 1–2 units it mines to the market is a far much closer to being the best than the aforementioned ice shredder.


In other words: the parameters given mean that you are designing a sub-optimal ice mining ship. It inherently disqualifies itself from “being the best” by not being able to do what it needs to be able to do: deliver ice and its products to the market.
Ban Bindy
Bindy Brothers Pottery Association
True Reign
#138 - 2012-06-14 15:04:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Klandi wrote:
Kijo - Just summarizing what people were agreeing on in accordance with the preferences stated. I think it is necessary to be the best you can be in a profession and in Eve terms, that goes beyond the concept of lvl5.
It also goes wa-a-ay beyond the concept of “how do I get the most X”.

The best ice miner isn't the ship that can collect the most ice. It's the ship that can make you the most money from mining ice. If a ship consistently mines mines 20 units of ice a minute and equally consistently fails to deliver any of them because they keep exploding, then they're pretty much the worst ship for the job regardless of that massive mining rate. Conversely, a ship that consistently manages to always deliver the 1–2 units it mines to the market is a far much closer to being the best than the aforementioned ice shredder.


In other words: the parameters given mean that you are designing a sub-optimal ice mining ship. It inherently disqualifies itself from “being the best” by not being able to do what it needs to be able to do: deliver ice and its products to the market.


Tippia is right. (Never thought I would say that, but there you go.) The truth about mining is that the ship that makes the most isk is always the one that survives and mines the longest. I have never worried about maximum yield. In my corp, the miners that did worry about max yield were the ones who lost their ships.

Ice mining in a high traffic system means watching local is irrelevant, all you have to do is watch the gankers go after the weaker ships in the ice belt and run when you decide they're getting too close to you.
Haulie Berry
#139 - 2012-06-14 15:36:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Klandi wrote:

If profit is the key to maximizing income (admit it, grinding is a boring necessity) then you need to spend as little time doing it as possible. That means an ice miner needs to keep the basics which are:
2 x ice harvester II in high slots
2 x ice harvesters (II as the meta 4 are 360mil ea) in the low slots




And there it is, right there, the reason why people find miners so loathsome: The belief that they (miners), unlike everyone else, should not have to endure any sort of compromise. Everyone else has to deal with fitting trade-offs, but miners are "special" and should only ever have to fit for max yield.

The best defense miners could possibly mount would likely be a cessation of the obnoxious entitled bullshit that makes other people want to shoot them so badly.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#140 - 2012-06-14 16:09:57 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
Klandi wrote:

If profit is the key to maximizing income (admit it, grinding is a boring necessity) then you need to spend as little time doing it as possible. That means an ice miner needs to keep the basics which are:
2 x ice harvester II in high slots
2 x ice harvesters (II as the meta 4 are 360mil ea) in the low slots




And there it is, right there, the reason why people find miners so loathsome: The belief that they, unlike everyone miners, should not have to endure any sort of compromise. Everyone else has to deal with fitting trade-offs, but miners are "special" and should only ever have to fit for max yield.

The best defense miners could possibly mount would likely be a cessation of the obnoxious entitled bullshit that makes other people want to shoot them so badly.


Correct. I see Klandi's fitting die all the time, not delivering ice to the market, but also losing a ton of ISK in the ship loss. My fittings posted earlier deliver minerals and ice to the market. Admittedly I just leave them in the belts in cans because I don't need the ice or minerals. I'm there for the ganker km's and tears. Twisted