These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why a high sec nerf is good for industrialists.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#281 - 2012-10-24 19:04:28 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


let me put the question to you this way--if blowing up metal-containing ore were an effective way to deny resources in war, than surely you'd be able to find examples in our history of this taking place, right?


The latest example
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#282 - 2012-10-24 19:07:17 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:
In terms of realism, blowing up asteroids is not super realistic.


Why on earth not? Shooting lumps of antimatter or large fusion shells seems like an ideal way to get the job done.



lasers wouldn't do anything, explosives would move it more than breaking it, unless you fire a charge designed to penetrate to precisely the middle and then exploding...what is this, minerbumping 2.0, where we bump the miner by exploding the asteroid into him at 20km/s?

let me put the question to you this way--if blowing up metal-containing ore were an effective way to deny resources in war, than surely you'd be able to find examples in our history of this taking place, right?

We can blow up a PoS but we can't blow up an asteroid?

Asteroids don't abide by the same laws of physics that the stations do?

One would think that that the only way to destroy an asteroid is by shooting it with a laser that sucks it into the back of a ship would be unrealistic.


Could you explain a litle more about how blowing up asteroids by shooting a laser at is unrealistic, I"m confused.

Shouldn't barges be able to use the most powerful weapons in the unverse against everyone else? Holy **** the lasers on barges can destroy an asteroid and mine can't!


Yes, I already suggested exactly that in the minerbumping thread ;)

So in the end, all this comes down to is you asking for the ability to use lasers against asteroids to destroy them? Cool, you already can :) I'd build you a mack, but you're an industrialist yourself :)
Ghazu
#283 - 2012-10-24 19:09:32 UTC
Explain how lasers transport ores into the cargo bay.

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#284 - 2012-10-24 19:09:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


let me put the question to you this way--if blowing up metal-containing ore were an effective way to deny resources in war, than surely you'd be able to find examples in our history of this taking place, right?


The latest example


That's even better than the original idea.
Don't let the asteroids explode.....let them burn!
A burning asteroid cannot be mined, but still is in your way and might make it difficult to align your ship / warp out.
And it would look terrific...Silent Hill in space.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#285 - 2012-10-24 19:11:57 UTC
Ghazu wrote:
Explain how lasers transport ores into the cargo bay.


A mix of tractor beams, elves and bungiecord.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#286 - 2012-10-24 19:14:10 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


Yes, I already suggested exactly that in the minerbumping thread ;)

So in the end, all this comes down to is you asking for the ability to use lasers against asteroids to destroy them? Cool, you already can :) I'd build you a mack, but you're an industrialist yourself :)

I pointed out the suggestion in the other thread because I think it's an excellent solution that provides a great opportunity for emergent gameplay to another problem that people face in EVE, bumping.

Not only would being able to destroy roids provide a potential benefit to null by allowing us to reduce the possible output, it would also give bumpers something to do other than bump miners; the flag would allow miners the ability to retaliate, which is what they're asking for in the other thread.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#287 - 2012-10-24 19:15:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


let me put the question to you this way--if blowing up metal-containing ore were an effective way to deny resources in war, than surely you'd be able to find examples in our history of this taking place, right?


The latest example



Crude oil is "metal-containing ore"? ...sorry, no.

Magnetite, bauxite, hematite, taconite. Examples of Metal-containing ores.

high-fat dairy ice cream with all natural ingredients. not an example of a metal-containing ore.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#288 - 2012-10-24 19:17:36 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


Yes, I already suggested exactly that in the minerbumping thread ;)

So in the end, all this comes down to is you asking for the ability to use lasers against asteroids to destroy them? Cool, you already can :) I'd build you a mack, but you're an industrialist yourself :)

I pointed out the suggestion in the other thread because I think it's an excellent solution that provides a great opportunity for emergent gameplay to another problem that people face in EVE, bumping.

Not only would being able to destroy roids provide a potential benefit to null by allowing us to reduce the possible output, it would also give bumpers something to do other than bump miners; the flag would allow miners the ability to retaliate, which is what they're asking for in the other thread.



Yes, like I said, although I would do it differently if I were a game-designer, I support your idea 99.44% pure. It's way better than the status quo. The point that current mining is just an unrealistic as blowing asteroids up with combat lasers is a quite valid one, as well.
Ghazu
#289 - 2012-10-24 19:22:35 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ghazu wrote:
Explain how lasers transport ores into the cargo bay.


A mix of tractor beams, elves and bungiecord.

They should like, add robotic arms to hulks and macks etc, so that they can pick up ores after they've been separated from the asteroid by lasers. But only from a range of say 100m, and damn those would be pretty long Bender arms. That would be so realistic

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#290 - 2012-10-24 19:25:58 UTC
Vanyr Andrard wrote:



Crude oil is "metal-containing ore"? ...sorry, no.

Magnetite, bauxite, hematite, taconite. Examples of Metal-containing ores.

high-fat dairy ice cream with all natural ingredients. not an example of a metal-containing ore.


You wanted an example of resource demial. There it is.

If you want metal denial thenlook up all of the raids on iron ore ships/trains/deppos/mines in Norway in WW2.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#291 - 2012-10-24 19:27:33 UTC
Ghazu wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Ghazu wrote:
Explain how lasers transport ores into the cargo bay.


A mix of tractor beams, elves and bungiecord.

They should like, add robotic arms to hulks and macks etc, so that they can pick up ores after they've been separated from the asteroid by lasers. But only from a range of say 100m, and damn those would be pretty long Bender arms. That would be so realistic


Realistically, we'd use self-propagating nanites to mine for us. Then they would mutate and go rogue drone, and kill us all. Then, finally, James's crusade against miners would be justified--but too late, for he would be just more mini-drone goo. Better indeed for EVE to have some unrealism.
Vanyr Andrard
VacuumTube
#292 - 2012-10-24 19:31:21 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:



Crude oil is "metal-containing ore"? ...sorry, no.

Magnetite, bauxite, hematite, taconite. Examples of Metal-containing ores.

high-fat dairy ice cream with all natural ingredients. not an example of a metal-containing ore.


You wanted an example of resource demial. There it is.

If you want metal denial thenlook up all of the raids on iron ore ships/trains/deppos/mines in Norway in WW2.



I did specifically ask for someone going around and blowing up metal-containing ore, actually. Blowing up mines/depots/ships in Norway is actually a fantastic analogue to freightergeddon and the gallente ice interdiction, which target the tools of industry, and not metal-containing ore in the wild. You are doing a fantastic job of convincing me that freightergate and the GII are awesome, but I already think that. If you'll examine my suggested alternative, you'll see that again, it's exactly my attempt to make a substantially similar suggestion that is more similar to the norway situation (if you don't want to look it up, it was being able to attack hisec industry by damaging facilities for such at NPC stations in hisec)
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#293 - 2012-10-24 20:08:35 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
We have accessto many things via the alliance but we still build most of the gear in empire because its cheaper.
Seriously how is this hard for people to understand?

So build your stuff in highsec fffs. How is this hard for you to understand?! A JF trip is like 20 seconds ffs.

Figure this... People moan when things get expensive. Producers moan that it costs too much to produce.

So they move production to where it's CHEAPER. That's how it's done. I'm not saying it's RIGHT, it's how it's done.

But ask WHY is it done? IT'S COST TO PRODUCE. (i.e. access to resources, cheaper infrastructure and labour AND geographical convenience.)

Who in the "developed" world would take a serious paycut and double the hours worked so that companies like Nike ad infinitum bring manufacturing BACK to the US for example.

Nope, what everyone does in the "developed world" is complain that they've got high unemployment or that we must suffer from wages and conditions reductions to keep your job. THAT's what's happening here.

In this thread, rather than just do the work "offshore" - the solution being offered is to cripple the areas of manufacture so BOTH areas are now high cost.

That just makes **** more expensive.

Profit is the bit BETWEEN cost to produce and sale price - the margin. The trick to increase margin is by maintaining demand by NOT increasing prices and by reducing costs to produce.

We can increase prices to infinity to counter cost creep but if you leave NO ROOM to decrease costs and prices fall (due to competition) margins will DECREASE as costs rise. People become POORER. Stop trying to make people POORER.

If we MUST do anything, just make 0.0 cost to produce == highsec cost to produce and let industry decide where it's done.

We don't need US/THEM (the common denominator around here) - we can have BOTH.

Of course, you could start a "buy local" campaign in 0.0. We know how well they work don't we?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#294 - 2012-10-24 20:17:33 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We have accessto many things via the alliance but we still build most of the gear in empire because its cheaper.
Seriously how is this hard for people to understand?

So build your stuff in highsec fffs. How is this hard for you to understand?!

About as hard as it is for you to make a good post.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#295 - 2012-10-24 20:25:58 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


Yes, I already suggested exactly that in the minerbumping thread ;)

So in the end, all this comes down to is you asking for the ability to use lasers against asteroids to destroy them? Cool, you already can :) I'd build you a mack, but you're an industrialist yourself :)

I pointed out the suggestion in the other thread because I think it's an excellent solution that provides a great opportunity for emergent gameplay to another problem that people face in EVE, bumping.

Not only would being able to destroy roids provide a potential benefit to null by allowing us to reduce the possible output, it would also give bumpers something to do other than bump miners; the flag would allow miners the ability to retaliate, which is what they're asking for in the other thread.

How does any of this fix 0.0 production?

More Goonswarm shooting **** in highsec to make their own space valuable? That'll end well.

Mittens>> OK boys. Today we're going shooting...
Sheep>> Yay, All Hail Great Leader
Mittens>> ...roids
Sheep>> huh?
Mittens>> Yes. We're shooting rocks for 3 weeks to cripple highsec.
Sheep>> Yay, All Hail Great Leader
Economist>> err.. guys....

Thus we enter the realm where in order for Goons to do indy profitably in nullsec they need to be in highsec - forever. Shooting rocks.

Good going guys. Bravo.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#296 - 2012-10-24 20:38:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Touval Lysander
Lord Zim wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We have accessto many things via the alliance but we still build most of the gear in empire because its cheaper.
Seriously how is this hard for people to understand?

So build your stuff in highsec fffs. How is this hard for you to understand?!

About as hard as it is for you to make a good post.

Grow up Zim. Try looking at the argument - not the poaster.

Actually it's funny watching you guys. When a Goon posts it, it's funny. When someone uses the same line against a Goon it's "badpoasting". Lol

Pssstt... That's why you're never taken seriously.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#297 - 2012-10-24 20:46:23 UTC
A real world example of resource denial?

China and rare earth elements comes to mind. It may not be due to war, but they understand that they're sitting on the majority of what's available, and that gives them an economic advantage.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#298 - 2012-10-24 20:48:05 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Vanyr Andrard wrote:


Yes, I already suggested exactly that in the minerbumping thread ;)

So in the end, all this comes down to is you asking for the ability to use lasers against asteroids to destroy them? Cool, you already can :) I'd build you a mack, but you're an industrialist yourself :)

I pointed out the suggestion in the other thread because I think it's an excellent solution that provides a great opportunity for emergent gameplay to another problem that people face in EVE, bumping.

Not only would being able to destroy roids provide a potential benefit to null by allowing us to reduce the possible output, it would also give bumpers something to do other than bump miners; the flag would allow miners the ability to retaliate, which is what they're asking for in the other thread.

How does any of this fix 0.0 production?

More Goonswarm shooting **** in highsec to make their own space valuable? That'll end well.

Mittens>> OK boys. Today we're going shooting...
Sheep>> Yay, All Hail Great Leader
Mittens>> ...roids
Sheep>> huh?
Mittens>> Yes. We're shooting rocks for 3 weeks to cripple highsec.
Sheep>> Yay, All Hail Great Leader
Economist>> err.. guys....

Thus we enter the realm where in order for Goons to do indy profitably in nullsec they need to be in highsec - forever. Shooting rocks.

Good going guys. Bravo.

People might actually take you seriously if every time you posted it didnt boil down to, "goons touched me, it hurt".
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#299 - 2012-10-24 21:03:27 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We have accessto many things via the alliance but we still build most of the gear in empire because its cheaper.
Seriously how is this hard for people to understand?

So build your stuff in highsec fffs. How is this hard for you to understand?!

About as hard as it is for you to make a good post.



Zim... second heads up here.

You're doing it again.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#300 - 2012-10-24 21:13:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

You need to read more before posting. What we are saying is that its cheaper to build stuff in empire and ship it out to null sec than it is to build out in null.

Everybody knows that.

Since we're on facts, how about clarify something for those that come into or are following this thread.

Q: Who is competing with 0.0 indy players?
A: 0.0 indy players

Correct - they are competing against THEMSELVES and it's the fault of highsec.

FACT: A highsec industrialist CANNOT dock at VFK with a JF and sell his stuff.
FACT: A highsec industrialist with a Goon alt CAN dock at VFK with a JF and sell his stuff.

You CAN'T SHOOT the 0.0 alt because he is BLUE.

Repeat: He is not "CCP BLUE" he is GOON BLUE. You CANNOT/WILL NOT shoot him. He buys, travels and sells unmolested. Even genuine highsec freighter pilots don't get THAT level of safety.

The inability to compete - like the rest of us can - is an INTERNAL problem. Why should ANYONE be nerfed because of YOUR own rules and inabilities?

SHOOT OR KICK YOUR BLUE - PROFIT.

And when YOU become the competition - stand there and prepare to die as well. Bet you don't.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."