These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Hisec ice removal

Author
Nex apparatu5
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#81 - 2013-04-27 00:05:01 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Nex apparatu5 wrote:
Huttan Funaila wrote:
Elena Thiesant wrote:
My rough notes from the keynote:

Ice belts move into anomalies, will spawn in systems that previously had ice belts. Can be mined out, when they are they’ll respawn 4 hours later.

Unless they change the respawn mechanisms, the sites don't despawn while someone is in the site. So perhaps the next "ice interdiction" scheme will involve AFK cloaking on grid with the sites. They'll respawn next downtime, but this will delay repops in the more popular systems.

Either ice anomalies will need to last most of a day even with a plague of locusts mining the place, or ice anomalies will have to spawn in systems that don't currently have ice.

Until they get this rebalanced, I predict a lot of towers will go offline.


Well, the ice belts will take about an hour to mine out, so they're probably using the incursion anom code, where people on grid don't prevent the anom from despawning.

Because if they don't, I'm sure as hell going to stop them from respawning.


I have a feeling that after the last chunk of ice is gone, the site evaporates, so good luck.

Yeah, which is the incursion code. No way CCP is stupid enough to let people hold them open.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#82 - 2013-04-27 00:28:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Dave Stark wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Crap. My Ice Mining system in Ammatar is not on the list. It's going away. Tears, yes. Cry


the real question is; where are there systems with multiple belts?

i've already spotted 2 caldari systems 2 jumps from each other with a combined 5 ice belts.

This is likely wrong and/or incomplete, but a place to start:
http://eve-online.itemdrop.net/eve_db/universe/search/?field_from=2&field_to=
Haulie Berry
#83 - 2013-04-27 00:38:56 UTC
I run combat anomalies all the time. They most definitely despawn, as a signature, whether you leave them or not. The space doesn't vanish off grid until you leave, but the scannable definitely disappears whether you leave or not.
pyronatic
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2013-04-27 05:30:36 UTC
They are moving Ice belts to scannable anomalies, No more belts in space.
Dave Stark
#85 - 2013-04-27 06:19:13 UTC
pyronatic wrote:
They are moving Ice belts to scannable anomalies, No more belts in space.

welcome to the party, you're late. however, the good news is that we haven't quite run out of beer yet!
OldWolf69
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#86 - 2013-04-27 17:15:17 UTC
Just wonder how long will take the bots to learn to scan. Big smile Still this won't push people to mine ice in lowsec or null. But let's say we idealists and do believe it will.
Dave Stark
#87 - 2013-04-27 17:17:19 UTC
OldWolf69 wrote:
Just wonder how long will take the bots to learn to scan. Big smile Still this won't push people to mine ice in lowsec or null. But let's say we idealists and do believe it will.


bots don't need to scan. you just warp to the anom that you automatically scan for on session change.
OldWolf69
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#88 - 2013-04-27 17:22:59 UTC
^then here it goes. another inutile change. once again, bots will go on. i hope you guy see the difference between a normal belt, and a 300 km long ice belt. and how fast destroyers can be. Big smile. CCP you just did cheat on us once again. and won't even mention hypochrisy.
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
#89 - 2013-04-27 18:10:43 UTC
Rather bad move I believe.

I like the idea of depletable ice belts, don't get me wrong. Not against having scannable ice belts too. But essentially they are creating a scenario which will impact things even worse than the drone poo evaporation.

Let's be clear everyone knows where these belts will be, they are in already existing ice systems. Guess where the cloaky cyno droppers and bombers will be in the future? Doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

I think the mistake is much like the drone poo they are taking it to far to quickly. A transitory stage where they reduce the size of current static belts, start having ice deplete from space, and sprinking in hidden ice belts to see how the changes go would have less market impact, but given the history of how they essentially killed the drone regions I won't hold my breath.

The Ore belt rebalancing could help address problems that the drone poo evaporation created, however if you depress the value of minerals by introducing more of them, less miners will mine them and thus less of that resource will be available creating inflation, this is something that the devs don't seem to understand or don't care about.

Anyway back to ice, the way I'd rather see changes would be ihub upgrades for each racial ice that added a belt of racial specific ice to a system in a hidden belt. It's fine if it decays as mined out, even okay if it takes this belt 4 hours to respawn in the system. I think that would be a better way to handle the situation, and move more mining to 0.0, plus it would allow ice mining in virtually any system that had an ihub.
DeLindsay
Galaxies Fall
#90 - 2013-04-28 05:53:00 UTC
But just think of the LOL times gankers will have in these new "belts" with most players fitting their Macks for max yeild/min tank just so they get the most out of the field before it's depleted. It'll bring much joy to the ganking "Industry" and much nerd raging in local, flaming on the forums about how CCP is being unfair to miners.

The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".

Haulie Berry
#91 - 2013-04-28 06:01:37 UTC
Mecinia Lua wrote:
Rather bad move I believe.

I like the idea of depletable ice belts, don't get me wrong. Not against having scannable ice belts too. But essentially they are creating a scenario which will impact things even worse than the drone poo evaporation.



Are you playing an alternate Eve in a parallel universe? There was nothing bad about the death of gun-mining.
Pwnzer
Doomheim
#92 - 2013-04-28 07:30:43 UTC
Who gives a ***t about ice mining bots. All I care about is what the price is going to do. That should be the focus of this thread and half of you are arguing about bot tendencies and capabilities.

I think the price for fuel is going to go up quite a bit shortly after the ice belts are moved. I sure hope so, I have a lot of money riding on it. Bear



xPredat0rz
Project.Nova
The Initiative.
#93 - 2013-04-28 07:35:46 UTC
Hopefully current stockpiles hold up until the high sec peoples can secure that 80% we need daily.

I expect something along the lines of hulkageddon to happen once this change is made though. Best way to capitalize on the market speculation.


Dave Stark
#94 - 2013-04-28 07:36:35 UTC
Pwnzer wrote:
Who gives a ***t about ice mining bots. All I care about is what the price is going to do. That should be the focus of this thread and half of you are arguing about bot tendencies and capabilities.

I think the price for fuel is going to go up quite a bit shortly after the ice belts are moved. I sure hope so, I have a lot of money riding on it. Bear





considering in odyssey you mine ore 2x as fast, and based on that ice will be the same isk/hour as scordite (and let's face it scordite is going nowhere but down) i'm unconvinced higher ice prices will be a permanent thing. sure it'll spike from speculation but after that, nah it'll come down again.
Bloody Wench
#95 - 2013-04-28 08:52:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloody Wench
I think a lot of you are missing this.

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/resource-shakeup-blog#ICE

Quote:
These belts will respawn in exactly the same system four hours after they are completed


This means that if you mine a site dry in an hour, then there's going to be 3 hours where the system will have nothing.

Massive fleets are either going to have to move, depending on their extraction rates, or they are going to have a fair bit of downtime.

Spawn, GO GO GO, depleted...
wait wait wait,
Respawn GO GO GO, depleted.
wait wait wait
go find something else to do.


They are halving the cycle time too, so things will deplete faster IMO.
It will be interesting to see just how many miners a site can support over 4 hours.
It will be even more interesting to see just how random visitors will be treated by existing locals.


There may be a case for Ice miners using their own alts to suicide unwelcome miners.
Having Ice miners eat their own kind makes me warm and fuzzy.

[u]**Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: **[/u]  CCP should not only make local delayed in highsec, but they should also require one be undocked to use it. Then, even the local spammers have some skin in the game. Support a High Resolution Texture Pack

xPredat0rz
Project.Nova
The Initiative.
#96 - 2013-04-28 08:56:12 UTC
Bloody Wench wrote:
I think a lot of you are missing this.

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/resource-shakeup-blog#ICE

Quote:
These belts will respawn in exactly the same system four hours after they are completed


This means that if you mine a site dry in an hour, then there's going 3 hours where the system will have nothing.

Massive fleets are either going to have to move, depending on their extraction rates, or they are going to have a fair bit of downtime.

Spawn, GO GO GO, depleted...
wait wait wait,
Respawn GO GO GO, depleted.
wait wait wait
go find something else to do.


Or you bring what you need for Ice and ore mining.

Ice spawns kill the spawn swap to ore **** and mine ore.

Alternative is to setup in a system with decent missions and Mine out ice then mission for 3 hours rinse repeat.



EIther way a long pause in between spawns isnt going to stop most people. I have seen 20 hour mining/missioning ops before. Thats 5 spawns worth of ice, a chance to strip out an entire system of ore and still blitz a fair amount of level 4s.
Bloody Wench
#97 - 2013-04-28 08:57:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloody Wench
You quoted me too early.

Stop that.

And a long pause between spawns will definately mess with bots.

[u]**Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: **[/u]  CCP should not only make local delayed in highsec, but they should also require one be undocked to use it. Then, even the local spammers have some skin in the game. Support a High Resolution Texture Pack

Dave Stark
#98 - 2013-04-28 09:11:38 UTC
Bloody Wench wrote:
You quoted me too early.

Stop that.

And a long pause between spawns will definately mess with bots.


there exists systems with 3 ice belts (soon to be anoms)

this means that the downtime between each ice belt is 4/3 hours, or 1 hour and 15 mins. provided these sites will be mined out in 1 hour 15 mins or longer, it won't really impact bots much. (ccp's assumption of 5 cycles of an anom per day, gives you 40 mins to clear an ice site, so 1hr 15 isn't that unrealistic depending on how many people ccp expect in an ice anom)
Kado Nolens
Doomheim
#99 - 2013-04-28 09:19:11 UTC
I wish they would remove Ice from all high sec and be done with it.

The fact several years ago the ice fields stopped refilling has had little to no impact on ice at all...

Bloody Wench
#100 - 2013-04-28 09:26:07 UTC
Dave,

again it will depend on how many miners that an individual site can support. Those systems will multiple belts (anoms) *may* be heavily contested.

[u]**Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: **[/u]  CCP should not only make local delayed in highsec, but they should also require one be undocked to use it. Then, even the local spammers have some skin in the game. Support a High Resolution Texture Pack