These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 don't NPC ships attempt to pod players?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#41 - 2012-12-08 17:45:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Then nothing gets mined....then you don't get ships.

Low Sec is nothing but the Circle of Ouroboros as far as what the heck to do with it. Every solution seems to have a counter...in BOTH directions.
Nothing is perfect, but everything has checks and balances. The fewer ships there are on the market, the more expensive the ships become. The more expensive ships are, the more profitable mining becomes. Eventually with enough scarcity, the pirates would be unable to fund gank ships and would instead start mining for money. But it'll never go that far as there is never a shortage of crafty players who can make mountains out of molehills, and make the margins work. If players had to mine lowsec or nullsec to get the nocxium needed for ships and stuff, then they'd find a way and do it.



No. It just empowers the NullBears and they will then "Provide for All".



EDIT: Like they do with Technetium.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Ocih
Space Mermaids
#42 - 2012-12-08 17:47:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Ocih
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ocih wrote:
You are under some illusion as to the mining systems in EVE. There are better rocks in an .8 system than in most .5 the same as there are premium mining systems in Null.
True. But the highsec asteroid values ARE supposed to scale with the sec status. I think the problem is pretty obvious: pyroxeres yields too much nocxium, so lowsec ores aren't hardly worth mining. Also, kernite could probably have its isogen yield reduced to increase the demand for isogen and improve the comparative price of omber. My point is that the highsec ores are poorly balanced and that that is entirely the reason for 0.8 ores netting higher sale values than 0.5 ores.


The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything. Because of manipulations in the market that have been going on for years, you can't tell what is 'valuable' any more. That and depth in the manufacturing that ends with a loot based aspect and has a bottleneck holding it back.

"Ship J would be a good ship if I could put this fit together" but that fit has loot based bottlenecks and would multiply the price by 5000% and it never happens.

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:


No. It just empowers the NullBears and they will then "Provide for All".



EDIT: Like they do with Technetium.


Monopoly. Nothing is rare. Things just have a monopoly. Great fun I suppose for people who like to manipulate. Not very productive in a game world.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2012-12-08 17:48:27 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
retriever has a drone bay
ergo it has self supplied combat support

whether the pilot of that retriever uses the drone bay for combat drones is completely different matter
I meant it should have to have more than itself.

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

Edit: Bleh. Read the newest dev blog, where they point out that the mining buff lead to an increase of afk and bot mining in high sec.




That may be true, but I don'tconsider that true mining.

I'm NEVER afk. Never for a second.
Good for you. You want a cookie? What does your personal mining ethic have to do with bot mining and how it's a problem in EVE?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-12-08 17:49:03 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

Edit: Bleh. Read the newest dev blog, where they point out that the mining buff lead to an increase of afk and bot mining in high sec.




That may be true, but I don'tconsider that true mining.

I'm NEVER afk. Never for a second.

Not everyone is you.

CCP clearly indicated that mining ships not getting blown up isn't good.

And you are advocating that you should be able to mine with immunity in high sec.



Of all the ships in EVE, it's the mining ships that, when not blown up, have the most negative impact on the whole of the game. They are the single most important ship to blow up in all of EVE, and high sec is granting them far to much safety; as CCP clearly showed in the data.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#45 - 2012-12-08 17:55:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Pahrdi
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Why aren't belt rats a threat to high sec miners?

I'd rather see that addressed before they consider having NPC's pod you; neither of which will ever happen.

Actually they are. I don't know how they do it, but the rookie channel clearly says high sec belt rats are a threat.

And after 2 weeks observing the rookie channel, I doubt that anything is going to change until we can insert the reading comprehension skillbook in our neural interface before hitting the "create account" button on CCP's EVE Online account management web page.

CCP managed to have all those lovely little labels sticking to interface places and they do not even go away until you activate the correct element. Still some people manage to get into a rookie ship, take Auras mission to fetch the first rookie ship and then warp out there. The clever rookie manages to switch ships but is by then so confused, that he is no longer able to see the big label on the gate to the next room where, according to the mission, he is supposed to loot a container.

Others just sit there and ask themselves what to do with two ships out in space. Then they find out about the rookie help channel.

Remove standings and insurance.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#46 - 2012-12-08 17:56:26 UTC
Ocih wrote:


Monopoly. Nothing is rare. Things just have a monopoly. Great fun I suppose for people who like to manipulate. Not very productive in a game world.


I Heartily Endorse This Statement

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-12-08 17:57:55 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
retriever has a drone bay
ergo it has self supplied combat support
whether the pilot of that retriever uses the drone bay for combat drones is completely different matter


I meant it should have to have more than itself.



A Battleship doesn't need additional support to kill belt rats in true -1 nulsec, as it is more capable of dealing with them solo.
Why, therefore, should an entry level industrial ship require a fleet to perform it's intended role in entry level belts ?
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#48 - 2012-12-08 17:58:21 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:


And you are advocating that you should be able to mine with immunity in high sec.




I never can figure out why you guys always say this or where you get it from when anyone can check for themselves.

So we get doubly insulted in that you think we are too dumb and will robotically believe your words.

You don't know geeks very well.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2012-12-08 17:58:22 UTC
Ocih wrote:
The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything..
Balance by volumes doesn't do much good. The problem is that lowsec ores are unnecessary. Lowsec ores provide nocxium. Hemorphite provides almost entirely nocxium. Hedbergite provides about the same amount of nocxium, but with a bit of isogen. Jaspet provides almost as much nocxium, but with a moderate yield of other minerals too. Then there's pyroxeres, with half the lowsec nocxium yield along with enough other minerals to be almost worth mining without the nocxium at all. The problem is pyroxeres, pure and simple. More than half of the current influx of nocxium comes from pyroxeres, I bet. It comes as no surprise to note that throughout all the expansions, with mineral prices constantly changing due to changing demands, that pyroxeres always stays at or near the top in value of all highsec ores, while omber stays at or near the bottom. Pyroxeres should have its nocxium yield cut in half or maybe even to a third. Mining omber is like mining kernite and not getting the mexallon. It's also like mining in a mackinaw with only one strip miner running. I exaggerate a bit, but a quick look at the yield rates of each mineral by ore volume quickly reveals that some ores yield way too much or way too little.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Ocih
Space Mermaids
#50 - 2012-12-08 17:59:10 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

Edit: Bleh. Read the newest dev blog, where they point out that the mining buff lead to an increase of afk and bot mining in high sec.




That may be true, but I don'tconsider that true mining.

I'm NEVER afk. Never for a second.

Not everyone is you.

CCP clearly indicated that mining ships not getting blown up isn't good.

And you are advocating that you should be able to mine with immunity in high sec.



Of all the ships in EVE, it's the mining ships that, when not blown up, have the most negative impact on the whole of the game. They are the single most important ship to blow up in all of EVE, and high sec is granting them far to much safety; as CCP clearly showed in the data.


I actually agree with you. The trouble goes back to the nature of EVE. Once you find me in some remote .2 system and you kill my Ret, I can pretty much leave that system. I'm not going to be allowed to mine there for 6 months because my location is known and I will be camped. My killmail will be documented on a website, people will come to the mining system to get killmails. That much power to prevent is game breaking.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#51 - 2012-12-08 18:00:25 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:


That may be true, but I don'tconsider that true mining.

I'm NEVER afk. Never for a second.


Good for you. You want a cookie? What does your personal mining ethic have to do with bot mining and how it's a problem in EVE?



It means I'm not the problem. Derrrrrrrrr. Ugh

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2012-12-08 18:01:49 UTC
Mara Pahrdi wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Why aren't belt rats a threat to high sec miners?

I'd rather see that addressed before they consider having NPC's pod you; neither of which will ever happen.

Actually they are. I don't know how they do it, but the rookie channel clearly says high sec belt rats are a threat.

And after 2 weeks observing the rookie channel, I doubt that anything is going to change until we can insert the reading comprehension skillbook in our neural interface before hitting the "create account" button on CCP's EVE Online account management web page.

CCP managed to have all those lovely little labels sticking to interface places and they do not even go away until you activate the correct element. Still some people manage to get into a rookie ship, take Auras mission to fetch the first rookie ship and then warp out there. The clever rookie manages to switch ships but is by then so confused, that he is no longer able to see the big label on the gate to the next room where, according to the mission, he is supposed to loot a container.

Others just sit there and ask themselves what to do with two ships out in space. Then they find out about the rookie help channel.

True, but it takes a little bit of understanding those basic mechanics to end up sitting in a belt shooting an asteroid with the right laser, in a .7 or below system.

I'm pretty sure if CCP released the number of barges and exhumers destroyed by belt rats in a high sec system it would be small enough to label as insignificant.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2012-12-08 18:03:21 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
retriever has a drone bay
ergo it has self supplied combat support
whether the pilot of that retriever uses the drone bay for combat drones is completely different matter


I meant it should have to have more than itself.



A Battleship doesn't need additional support to kill belt rats in true -1 nulsec, as it is more capable of dealing with them solo.
Why, therefore, should an entry level industrial ship require a fleet to perform it's intended role in entry level belts ?
0.5 isn't entry level any more than level 3 missions are entry level. Why should 0.5 rats be easy enough for a day one player to beat with a pre-Inferno mining frigate and a single drone?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-12-08 18:06:59 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ocih wrote:
The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything..
Balance by volumes doesn't do much good. The problem is that lowsec ores are unnecessary. Lowsec ores provide nocxium. Hemorphite provides almost entirely nocxium. Hedbergite provides about the same amount of nocxium, but with a bit of isogen. Jaspet provides almost as much nocxium, but with a moderate yield of other minerals too. Then there's pyroxeres, with half the lowsec nocxium yield along with enough other minerals to be almost worth mining without the nocxium at all. The problem is pyroxeres, pure and simple. More than half of the current influx of nocxium comes from pyroxeres, I bet. It comes as no surprise to note that throughout all the expansions, with mineral prices constantly changing due to changing demands, that pyroxeres always stays at or near the top in value of all highsec ores, while omber stays at or near the bottom. Pyroxeres should have its nocxium yield cut in half or maybe even to a third. Mining omber is like mining kernite and not getting the mexallon. It's also like mining in a mackinaw with only one strip miner running. I exaggerate a bit, but a quick look at the yield rates of each mineral by ore volume quickly reveals that some ores yield way too much or way too little.


what your saying is quite possibly totally correct.
but this is not the forum for that complaint

it's not the fault of the mining barge/exhumer pilots that ore distribution is unbalanced
it's not the fault of the mission runners that meta1-4 reprossessing accounts for a large slice of the mineral market

it's ccp's fault
only ccp can change it
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-12-08 18:07:46 UTC
Ocih wrote:


I actually agree with you. The trouble goes back to the nature of EVE. Once you find me in some remote .2 system and you kill my Ret, I can pretty much leave that system. I'm not going to be allowed to mine there for 6 months because my location is known and I will be camped. My killmail will be documented on a website, people will come to the mining system to get killmails. That much power to prevent is game breaking.

Nothing that works as intended, is ever "game breaking", and that is exactly as it should be. Especially when that's the way it wroks for everyone.

Miners are not a special subset of players that are allowed their own rules on interaction within the sandbox.
Which is effectively the result high sec is having on that particular playstyle.

Ocih
Space Mermaids
#56 - 2012-12-08 18:08:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Ocih
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ocih wrote:
The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything..
Balance by volumes doesn't do much good. The problem is that lowsec ores are unnecessary. Lowsec ores provide nocxium. Hemorphite provides almost entirely nocxium. Hedbergite provides about the same amount of nocxium, but with a bit of isogen. Jaspet provides almost as much nocxium, but with a moderate yield of other minerals too. Then there's pyroxeres, with half the lowsec nocxium yield along with enough other minerals to be almost worth mining without the nocxium at all. The problem is pyroxeres, pure and simple. More than half of the current influx of nocxium comes from pyroxeres, I bet. It comes as no surprise to note that throughout all the expansions, with mineral prices constantly changing due to changing demands, that pyroxeres always stays at or near the top in value of all highsec ores, while omber stays at or near the bottom. Pyroxeres should have its nocxium yield cut in half or maybe even to a third. Mining omber is like mining kernite and not getting the mexallon. It's also like mining in a mackinaw with only one strip miner running. I exaggerate a bit, but a quick look at the yield rates of each mineral by ore volume quickly reveals that some ores yield way too much or way too little.


Agreed, there is no demand for low sec additional volumes when those addition volumes are tied to mining cycles. Low sec is where you go to build carriers and Dreads. A lot of it is player based problems though. Use PI as an example. Most PI POCO are set to 15% tax in low. I can PI in high sec cheaper because players got greedy with their tax. I can PI in Sov Null and out compete them. Low is a perfect example of a game world where players are allowed to manage the game (what EVE is all about) and how we fail to do it because of self intrest.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-12-08 18:09:56 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ocih wrote:
The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything..
Balance by volumes doesn't do much good. The problem is that lowsec ores are unnecessary. Lowsec ores provide nocxium. Hemorphite provides almost entirely nocxium. Hedbergite provides about the same amount of nocxium, but with a bit of isogen. Jaspet provides almost as much nocxium, but with a moderate yield of other minerals too. Then there's pyroxeres, with half the lowsec nocxium yield along with enough other minerals to be almost worth mining without the nocxium at all. The problem is pyroxeres, pure and simple. More than half of the current influx of nocxium comes from pyroxeres, I bet. It comes as no surprise to note that throughout all the expansions, with mineral prices constantly changing due to changing demands, that pyroxeres always stays at or near the top in value of all highsec ores, while omber stays at or near the bottom. Pyroxeres should have its nocxium yield cut in half or maybe even to a third. Mining omber is like mining kernite and not getting the mexallon. It's also like mining in a mackinaw with only one strip miner running. I exaggerate a bit, but a quick look at the yield rates of each mineral by ore volume quickly reveals that some ores yield way too much or way too little.


what your saying is quite possibly totally correct.
but this is not the forum for that complaint

it's not the fault of the mining barge/exhumer pilots that ore distribution is unbalanced
it's not the fault of the mission runners that meta1-4 reprossessing accounts for a large slice of the mineral market

it's ccp's fault
only ccp can change it

CCP showed stats that indicated that an increase in high sec mining has lead to a reduction in high end mineral prices.

Why would you go to low sec to mine minerals you can get in high sec with next to no risk?

Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#58 - 2012-12-08 18:10:33 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
retriever has a drone bay
ergo it has self supplied combat support
whether the pilot of that retriever uses the drone bay for combat drones is completely different matter


I meant it should have to have more than itself.



A Battleship doesn't need additional support to kill belt rats in true -1 nulsec, as it is more capable of dealing with them solo.
Why, therefore, should an entry level industrial ship require a fleet to perform it's intended role in entry level belts ?
0.5 isn't entry level any more than level 3 missions are entry level. Why should 0.5 rats be easy enough for a day one player to beat with a pre-Inferno mining frigate and a single drone?


you need to make your mind up over what your actual complaint is
because all of a sudden, your objective categories changed, between posts
from 1 item of objection to a completely different one.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-12-08 18:10:39 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
what your saying is quite possibly totally correct.
but this is not the forum for that complaint

it's not the fault of the mining barge/exhumer pilots that ore distribution is unbalanced
it's not the fault of the mission runners that meta1-4 reprossessing accounts for a large slice of the mineral market

it's ccp's fault
only ccp can change it
Thanks for the support. I just think it's semi-relevant because it outlines what I think is an easy change to increase the value of nullsec mining.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#60 - 2012-12-08 18:11:37 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Kitty Bear wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ocih wrote:
The minerals for T1 are actually balanced quite well when you look at volumes needed to make anything..
Balance by volumes doesn't do much good. The problem is that lowsec ores are unnecessary. Lowsec ores provide nocxium. Hemorphite provides almost entirely nocxium. Hedbergite provides about the same amount of nocxium, but with a bit of isogen. Jaspet provides almost as much nocxium, but with a moderate yield of other minerals too. Then there's pyroxeres, with half the lowsec nocxium yield along with enough other minerals to be almost worth mining without the nocxium at all. The problem is pyroxeres, pure and simple. More than half of the current influx of nocxium comes from pyroxeres, I bet. It comes as no surprise to note that throughout all the expansions, with mineral prices constantly changing due to changing demands, that pyroxeres always stays at or near the top in value of all highsec ores, while omber stays at or near the bottom. Pyroxeres should have its nocxium yield cut in half or maybe even to a third. Mining omber is like mining kernite and not getting the mexallon. It's also like mining in a mackinaw with only one strip miner running. I exaggerate a bit, but a quick look at the yield rates of each mineral by ore volume quickly reveals that some ores yield way too much or way too little.


what your saying is quite possibly totally correct.
but this is not the forum for that complaint

it's not the fault of the mining barge/exhumer pilots that ore distribution is unbalanced
it's not the fault of the mission runners that meta1-4 reprossessing accounts for a large slice of the mineral market

it's ccp's fault
only ccp can change it

CCP showed stats that indicated that an increase in high sec mining has lead to a reduction in high end mineral prices.

Why would you go to low sec to mine minerals you can get in high sec with next to no risk?



but thier mining ships can be blown up .. there is plenty of risk.