These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Probe Scanning and other Goodies for Odyssey

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kitanga
Lowsec Border Marshals
#261 - 2013-05-29 15:29:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Kitanga
the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

all we want:

  • user defined launch pattern(s)
  • bring back Deep Space Probes
  • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
  • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
  • do not magically recall probes
  • allow the launch of one probe
  • keep Grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space
Draconus Lofwyr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2013-05-29 15:30:41 UTC
all grav and belts are now going to be anoms? welcome to easy mode for gankers and gangs. CCP, this was the wrong action to take. I am all for removing the static overview belts to combat bot miners, but not anoms. If you really want to do right and encourage mining, then 3 changes are needed


1. make all systems have anom based belts that only have highsec ores and ices, even in the deepest 0.0 systems

2. lowsec and nullsec higher and high end ores are still probe out only. so if you want the mex, and ABC ores, you still have to go find them.

3. remove system develop indices from the star map and add sovereignty challenge actions ( sbu's in system) currently the starmap will point the way to where people are ratting and mining like a lighthouse beacon for roaming gangs, AKA, easy mode.



These changes will make roaming gangs have to actually hunt for targets, like the miners have to do for their minerals and the ratters have to do for their rats.
iThirdAge Stetille
Order of the Phoenix
#263 - 2013-05-29 15:31:45 UTC
Kitanga wrote:
the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

all we want:

  • user defined launch pattern(s)
  • bring back Deep Space Probes
  • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
  • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
  • do not magically recall probes
  • allow the launch of one probe




Leave grav sites in signatures, not moving them to anoms. Put the new ice sites in signatures as well.
iThirdAge Stetille
Order of the Phoenix
#264 - 2013-05-29 15:32:34 UTC
DigDoug wrote:
A LETTER TO THE DEVELOPERS OF EVE

Lets take a walk down memory lane, o forgetful developers of Eve. BEHOLD!


A LETTER TO THE FOLLOWERS OF EVE
05.10.2011 17:29 By CCP Hellmar

Dear Followers of EVE Online,

The past few months have been very humbling for me. I’ve done much soul searching, and what follows is my sincere effort to clear the air with all of you. Please bear with me as I find my way through.

The estrangement from CCP that many of you have been feeling of late is my fault, and for that I am truly sorry. There are many contributing factors, but in the end it is I who must shoulder the responsibility for much of what has happened. In short, my zeal for pushing EVE to her true potential made me lose sight of doing the simple things right. I was impatient when I should have been cautious, defiant when I should have been conciliatory and arrogant when I should have been humble....

..... Somewhere along the way, I began taking success for granted. As hubris set in, I became less inclined to listen to pleas for caution. Red flags raised by very smart people both at CCP and in the community went unheeded because of my stubborn refusal to allow adversity to gain purchase on our plans. Mistakes, even when they were acknowledged, often went unanalyzed, leaving the door open for them to be repeated.

You have spoken, loudly and clearly, with your words and with your actions. And there were definitely moments in recent history when I wish I would have listened more and taken a different path.

I was wrong and I admit it.

In the interest of time I'll just cut that off right there, because if you're capable of getting the point it'll be enough.

Stop ignoring us. Address the many repeated concerns voiced in not only this thread but since this feature set was added to the test server.

Don't pick out the one or two positive posts that you made with your alts just to generate the appearance that this is some kind of dynamic exchange of information.

We pay you for this game. We deserve to be treated like we matter. You need to respond to the CRITICISM of this feature set, you need to do it now and you need to LISTEN to us before you put these changes into effect on the live server.


Quoting because this should be on every new page of the thread until CCP listens.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#265 - 2013-05-29 15:37:00 UTC
Kitanga wrote:
the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

all we want:

  • user defined launch pattern(s)
  • bring back Deep Space Probes
  • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
  • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
  • do not magically recall probes
  • allow the launch of one probe



By we, you mean "you."

I do NOT want the release postponed.
I do NOT want DSPs.
The patterns will come soon enough. The defaults that they give us are fine until then.
The overlay is great and immersive.
eh, no sense continuing. I think CCP is going the right direction on all the points that seem to bother you.

I would ask CCP, though, to give us an auto-center formation on scan result function. And a function to keep the best result from every scan for each signature and ignore worse results.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Strom Crendraven
The H8teful Eight
#266 - 2013-05-29 15:46:17 UTC
Chitsa Jason wrote:
First... Oh wait :)

While I am happy about the Overlay and Scanning changes in general there are some details left to sort out after the Expansion hits..

I will try to work with CCP to resolve all possible issues connected to above mentioned features.

If you any of you feel that changes are bad in some way please hit me up with eve mail with reasons and how would you like this or that mechanic to be implemented and I will make sure the information is available to CCP in constructive manner.


Read the 116 posts before yours you moron.
Zorok
The Guardian Knights
#267 - 2013-05-29 15:50:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Zorok
Andy Landen wrote:

By we, you mean "you."

I do NOT want the release postponed.
I do NOT want DSPs.
The patterns will come soon enough. The defaults that they give us are fine until then.
The overlay is great and immersive.
eh, no sense continuing. I think CCP is going the right direction on all the points that seem to bother you.

I would ask CCP, though, to give us an auto-center formation on scan result function. And a function to keep the best result from every scan for each signature and ignore worse results.


I think that you are outnumbered here by the number of folks who do not like the changes. I think it's safe to say that most of us here have qualms with some aspect of the exploration system. It is very apparent that CCP did not solicit opinions from the player base and I'm even starting to suspect that they ignored the CSM as well.

No....this update is not on par with the previous updates. The mechanics that CCP is implementing have not been given due consideration. I am all for the great gate effects and some of the other nice touches that they have added. DSPs are quite helpful in the game though- I use them to get a list of all signatures in a system before I even start to probe down sites. I build a check list and then I hunt down each signature based on my list. I'm not so sure that this new system is really adding anything to the game. It's basically changing something that doesn't need to be changed. I do like the the quick probe configs but I agree with others that this should be customizable.

Unlike you, I do not see how making grav sites able to be accessed by any ship without the use of probes is such a great idea. Mission running already is the defacto money maker in Eve- I guess this is CCPs way of telling the miners to just move on to something else that doesn't have a skewed risk-to-reward ratio.

I understand that you want to just see something new and shiny come out- I get that... I believe however that patience is key here and I definitely think that CCP needs to hold back on some of these ideas until they can hammer out some proper balance to the game mechanics.
Kitanga
Lowsec Border Marshals
#268 - 2013-05-29 16:09:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Kitanga
iThirdAge Stetille wrote:
DigDoug wrote:
A LETTER TO THE DEVELOPERS OF EVE

Lets take a walk down memory lane, o forgetful developers of Eve. BEHOLD!


A LETTER TO THE FOLLOWERS OF EVE
05.10.2011 17:29 By CCP Hellmar

Dear Followers of EVE Online,

The past few months have been very humbling for me. I’ve done much soul searching, and what follows is my sincere effort to clear the air with all of you. Please bear with me as I find my way through.

The estrangement from CCP that many of you have been feeling of late is my fault, and for that I am truly sorry. There are many contributing factors, but in the end it is I who must shoulder the responsibility for much of what has happened. In short, my zeal for pushing EVE to her true potential made me lose sight of doing the simple things right. I was impatient when I should have been cautious, defiant when I should have been conciliatory and arrogant when I should have been humble....

..... Somewhere along the way, I began taking success for granted. As hubris set in, I became less inclined to listen to pleas for caution. Red flags raised by very smart people both at CCP and in the community went unheeded because of my stubborn refusal to allow adversity to gain purchase on our plans. Mistakes, even when they were acknowledged, often went unanalyzed, leaving the door open for them to be repeated.

You have spoken, loudly and clearly, with your words and with your actions. And there were definitely moments in recent history when I wish I would have listened more and taken a different path.

I was wrong and I admit it.

In the interest of time I'll just cut that off right there, because if you're capable of getting the point it'll be enough.

Stop ignoring us. Address the many repeated concerns voiced in not only this thread but since this feature set was added to the test server.

Don't pick out the one or two positive posts that you made with your alts just to generate the appearance that this is some kind of dynamic exchange of information.

We pay you for this game. We deserve to be treated like we matter. You need to respond to the CRITICISM of this feature set, you need to do it now and you need to LISTEN to us before you put these changes into effect on the live server.


Quoting because this should be on every new page of the thread until CCP listens.


sadly i think the only way to really get CCP to listen is through a mass un-sub protest.
Dmitri Ronuken
ReStore of Reset
#269 - 2013-05-29 16:28:49 UTC
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
all grav and belts are now going to be anoms? welcome to easy mode for gankers and gangs. CCP, this was the wrong action to take. I am all for removing the static overview belts to combat bot miners, but not anoms. If you really want to do right and encourage mining, then 3 changes are needed


1. make all systems have anom based belts that only have highsec ores and ices, even in the deepest 0.0 systems

2. lowsec and nullsec higher and high end ores are still probe out only. so if you want the mex, and ABC ores, you still have to go find them.

3. remove system develop indices from the star map and add sovereignty challenge actions ( sbu's in system) currently the starmap will point the way to where people are ratting and mining like a lighthouse beacon for roaming gangs, AKA, easy mode.



These changes will make roaming gangs have to actually hunt for targets, like the miners have to do for their minerals and the ratters have to do for their rats.



That would actually be a really great, I think. Scordite and Veldspar in the static belts. The four 0.5<0.9 ores in anomalies. The Zydrine-producing ores (Jaspet, Hemorphite, Hedbergite) in signatures in high sec and megacyte-producing ones in lowsec/nullsec.

It gives new players who jump into mining right away baby steps of incentive to get into exploration. Tritanium and pyerite is practically given away, isogen and mexallon gets people into hitting their onboard scanner at least, and zydrine and megacyte requires one further step into probing. Suddenly astrometrics is very valuable to miners, you've got exploration as a career in high demand by industrial/mining corps, but at the same time if miners don't want to go down that road, they don't have to. Scordite is one of the highest price ores by volume of the six high sec ore types, so unless prices change they still make a "living" even if they aren't going for omber/plagioclase/pyroxeres/kernite.
Logix42
Taxation Damnation
#270 - 2013-05-29 16:29:05 UTC
As an update CCP has posted in the test server feedback thread about the auto-recall
CCP Paradox wrote:

We have been discussing the point so far, and we are making one change.

  • Deactivating probes will not cause them to auto-recall. (When jumping, or logging off etc)

We're still reading up and discussing other points however.

Source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3106300#post3106300

Go beyond the edge of space... Explore
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
#271 - 2013-05-29 16:33:11 UTC
CCP as usual, taking the Ham-fisted approach of "MY WAY BECAUSE WE KNOW BETTER" .

Nightmares of past horrors are coming back.

As a weekend prober and explorer, these changes are simply cosmetic, thrown out haphazardly and OBVIOUSLY made by people that don´t know their game, don´t play it or believe all we need to do here is PVP FOR THE LULZ.

Many much much better vet probers here have already stated, as well as in the test threads why all of these changes are BAD and WRONG.

I for one join the stance of seeing these changes as utterly antagonizing to niche proffesions and ways of play.

It is as if CCP wanted to conglomerate ALL players into a single amorphous blob of a play style.

Only thing I don´t quite understand, and thats why I voted for Chitsa, is that WH/Exploration mechanics needed to be looked at , not dumbed down and made prettier, so my hopes, even if slim go to him/her/it in delivering the message as a token of at least.

If I wanted to play a "pretty" game I wouldn´t be here and if I wanted to feel in a Star Wars battle full of blazing action, I wouldnt be here either.

ugh, just posting my displeasure, I dont care if they read this or not. I vented most of my anger a couple years ago in the forums, it´s useless.

Even the CSM rep will be heard and replied with a "Good points, we will look into them" as the CCP staff just goes back to whatever great plans they have in mind in a game they seem to no longer play. CCP is still stuck in 2005 and Null as the endgame of everything, and all i can do is watch Hisec as I shake my head.

/rant off

Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco: http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco
Octoven
Stellar Production
#272 - 2013-05-29 16:37:29 UTC
Kitanga wrote:
the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

all we want:

  • user defined launch pattern(s)
  • bring back Deep Space Probes
  • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
  • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
  • do not magically recall probes
  • allow the launch of one probe
  • keep Grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space



Sooo essentially you want to just say **** all the changes lets keep the game how it is till December?

[list]
  • User defined launch patterns? Yeah lets do that
  • bring back Deep Space Probes? To be honest I never really use them so I dont really care.
  • remove the new probe mods? No, its nice to give scanning ships a place holder for those midslots
  • keep your overlay in but do not force us? As I recall, you are not FORCED to use the damn thing, it cycles one freaking time, oh my save me from this one cycle CCP >.>
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it? Again, its a one cycle brief look...this doesnt keep them there so to be honest id rather see it stay.
  • do not magically recall probes? I agree with you here, that should be removed.
  • Allow the launch of one probe? This is already in effect. You need to split your stack of probes to whatever you normally use 1-8 and drag and drop it into the launcher. You can launch as few as 1 or as many as 8, it isn't very efficient but its a temp fix.
  • Keep grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space? Hell no, why should miners in one area be safer then those not there? Why should person A be in a grav site and have marginal safety while person B in the same system in a standard belt have no safety? This is NOT balanced, im glad they are removing them from sigs to anoms.

    • I would add to that last statement though that if you wanted to give wh miners a fighting chance at least, the proper solution would be to wait to do the first system scan after you enter the system. You could restrict the scan from doing its intial scan until the ship decloaks. That way at least they show on dscan first before they can find you. If you are out of dscan range...well you should be using a scout alt anyway. You have nothing else to do while mining, so may as well hit dscan on two different characters.

    Odyssey is in a 200% better shape then it was when first deployed on sisi. There are some kinks to iron out but for all intents and purposes, it is at least functional. They can then do a major patch or second deployment in like Aug/Sept to fix any minor tweaks and major changes. it doesnt need to be pushed back months because 100+ players decide its bad. Keeping in mind 100 out of 60,000 is still not enough to warrant a major roll back. Besides, of that 60K only about 10% ever come onto the forums. So really the only way to confirm it is to put it live and see the reaction. It takes time to adjust.
    Vakasho Umi Kenshar
    Doomheim
    #273 - 2013-05-29 16:55:03 UTC
    Logix42 wrote:
    As an update CCP has posted in the test server feedback thread about the auto-recall
    CCP Paradox wrote:

    We have been discussing the point so far, and we are making one change.

    • Deactivating probes will not cause them to auto-recall. (When jumping, or logging off etc)

    We're still reading up and discussing other points however.

    Source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3106300#post3106300


    A step in the right direction. Not enough, but a step nonetheless.

    I wouldn't mind seeing the auto-recall kept just in case of logging off, as an edge case (sucks to be stranded because ISP failed/WiFi down/PC died/neighbour cut the cable while gardening...), but people should have a spare set of probes in their cargo anyway.
    Zorok
    The Guardian Knights
    #274 - 2013-05-29 17:11:16 UTC
    Octoven wrote:

  • Keep grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space? Hell no, why should miners in one area be safer then those not there? Why should person A be in a grav site and have marginal safety while person B in the same system in a standard belt have no safety? This is NOT balanced, im glad they are removing them from sigs to anoms.


    • It's currently balanced because ALL warp-able asteroid belts exist within K-space and you can see who is in local also, if you ever noticed, you won't find many mining barges mining the regular belts in low-sec- there's a good reason for this. At any rate, explorers who put in the time to locate grav sites using probes SHOULD be rewarded with being able to find a site that can't easily be accessible without the use of probes. I'm guessing you don't do much mining yourself. If you are concerned you won't get an easy gank, just watch some videos of advanced combat scanning and you will learn how, with practice, you can jump in on anyone but the most cautious of mining ships.
    Wyrm Drake
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #275 - 2013-05-29 17:13:00 UTC
    I'm getting tired of all this noob simplification. I want a game where if you die, that's it! You start over from square 1. New character etc. Then, when you see someone with, say, over 50mil SPs, you know they have achieved something and they are not to be messed with.
    Kitanga
    Lowsec Border Marshals
    #276 - 2013-05-29 17:39:47 UTC
    Octoven wrote:
    Kitanga wrote:
    the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

    all we want:

    • user defined launch pattern(s)
    • bring back Deep Space Probes
    • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
    • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
    • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
    • do not magically recall probes
    • allow the launch of one probe
    • keep Grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space



    Sooo essentially you want to just say **** all the changes lets keep the game how it is till December?

    [list]
  • User defined launch patterns? Yeah lets do that
  • bring back Deep Space Probes? To be honest I never really use them so I dont really care.
  • remove the new probe mods? No, its nice to give scanning ships a place holder for those midslots
  • keep your overlay in but do not force us? As I recall, you are not FORCED to use the damn thing, it cycles one freaking time, oh my save me from this one cycle CCP >.>
  • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it? Again, its a one cycle brief look...this doesnt keep them there so to be honest id rather see it stay.
  • do not magically recall probes? I agree with you here, that should be removed.
  • Allow the launch of one probe? This is already in effect. You need to split your stack of probes to whatever you normally use 1-8 and drag and drop it into the launcher. You can launch as few as 1 or as many as 8, it isn't very efficient but its a temp fix.
  • Keep grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space? Hell no, why should miners in one area be safer then those not there? Why should person A be in a grav site and have marginal safety while person B in the same system in a standard belt have no safety? This is NOT balanced, im glad they are removing them from sigs to anoms.

    • I would add to that last statement though that if you wanted to give wh miners a fighting chance at least, the proper solution would be to wait to do the first system scan after you enter the system. You could restrict the scan from doing its intial scan until the ship decloaks. That way at least they show on dscan first before they can find you. If you are out of dscan range...well you should be using a scout alt anyway. You have nothing else to do while mining, so may as well hit dscan on two different characters.

    Odyssey is in a 200% better shape then it was when first deployed on sisi. There are some kinks to iron out but for all intents and purposes, it is at least functional. They can then do a major patch or second deployment in like Aug/Sept to fix any minor tweaks and major changes. it doesnt need to be pushed back months because 100+ players decide its bad. Keeping in mind 100 out of 60,000 is still not enough to warrant a major roll back. Besides, of that 60K only about 10% ever come onto the forums. So really the only way to confirm it is to put it live and see the reaction. It takes time to adjust.



    seems like you agree with me on all points except the last. and you are wrong there, if the miner takes the time to probe out the site then he should be rewarded with a slight margin of safety. and this is coming from a pirate who kills any miner i see. i prefer a challenge in hunting with probes instead of just turning on the overlay... i just don't get how CCP does not see it this way... this grav site change of theirs should be for highsec only.
    Eric Darmazaf
    Magnum Research
    #277 - 2013-05-29 18:02:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Eric Darmazaf
    Just as I switched off CQ when it was released I will be switching of scanning (well not doing any) once Odyssey hits the server. I will find something better to do with my time in EVE.

    I want my wrecks automatically salvagged and looted when I warp out.
    Galileo Ohaya
    Tortuga Coalition 102
    #278 - 2013-05-29 18:10:32 UTC
    Kitanga wrote:
    the June 4th release needs to be pushed out at least a month, if CCP is actually going to LISTEN to the player base and roll some of this stuff back.

    all we want:

    • user defined launch pattern(s)
    • bring back Deep Space Probes
    • remove the new probe mods, there is no need. restore the meaning of the current probing skills, as they are on TQ today.
    • keep your overlay in as a novelty item but do not force it upon us.
    • do not show all signatures in the system by default when entering it
    • do not magically recall probes
    • allow the launch of one probe
    • keep Grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space


    I agree with everything here. Why did I bother to train up scanning skills to use DSP or more probes just to have those skills given away through the "easy button"?

    Grav sites as anoms is a truly horrible idea .
    Equimanthorn
    RONA Corporation
    Blue Sun Interstellar Technologies
    #279 - 2013-05-29 18:25:38 UTC
    This!!

    DigDoug wrote:
    A LETTER TO THE DEVELOPERS OF EVE

    Lets take a walk down memory lane, o forgetful developers of Eve. BEHOLD!


    A LETTER TO THE FOLLOWERS OF EVE
    05.10.2011 17:29 By CCP Hellmar

    Dear Followers of EVE Online,

    The past few months have been very humbling for me. I’ve done much soul searching, and what follows is my sincere effort to clear the air with all of you. Please bear with me as I find my way through.

    The estrangement from CCP that many of you have been feeling of late is my fault, and for that I am truly sorry. There are many contributing factors, but in the end it is I who must shoulder the responsibility for much of what has happened. In short, my zeal for pushing EVE to her true potential made me lose sight of doing the simple things right. I was impatient when I should have been cautious, defiant when I should have been conciliatory and arrogant when I should have been humble....

    ..... Somewhere along the way, I began taking success for granted. As hubris set in, I became less inclined to listen to pleas for caution. Red flags raised by very smart people both at CCP and in the community went unheeded because of my stubborn refusal to allow adversity to gain purchase on our plans. Mistakes, even when they were acknowledged, often went unanalyzed, leaving the door open for them to be repeated.

    You have spoken, loudly and clearly, with your words and with your actions. And there were definitely moments in recent history when I wish I would have listened more and taken a different path.

    I was wrong and I admit it.

    In the interest of time I'll just cut that off right there, because if you're capable of getting the point it'll be enough.

    Stop ignoring us. Address the many repeated concerns voiced in not only this thread but since this feature set was added to the test server.

    Don't pick out the one or two positive posts that you made with your alts just to generate the appearance that this is some kind of dynamic exchange of information.

    We pay you for this game. We deserve to be treated like we matter. You need to respond to the CRITICISM of this feature set, you need to do it now and you need to LISTEN to us before you put these changes into effect on the live server.
    Galileo Ohaya
    Tortuga Coalition 102
    #280 - 2013-05-29 18:36:59 UTC
    Zorok wrote:
    Octoven wrote:

  • Keep grav sites in game, for the safety of miners in hostile space? Hell no, why should miners in one area be safer then those not there? Why should person A be in a grav site and have marginal safety while person B in the same system in a standard belt have no safety? This is NOT balanced, im glad they are removing them from sigs to anoms.


    • It's currently balanced because ALL warp-able asteroid belts exist within K-space and you can see who is in local also, if you ever noticed, you won't find many mining barges mining the regular belts in low-sec- there's a good reason for this. At any rate, explorers who put in the time to locate grav sites using probes SHOULD be rewarded with being able to find a site that can't easily be accessible without the use of probes. I'm guessing you don't do much mining yourself. If you are concerned you won't get an easy gank, just watch some videos of advanced combat scanning and you will learn how, with practice, you can jump in on anyone but the most cautious of mining ships.


    Exactly! This proposed change kills wh mining completely. I'm guessing that is CCPs intention. There are plenty of hisec asteroid belts available, the occasional Grav site is a reward for miners who put in the time to scan them down. No longer.

    If CCP plans on getting rid of all static asteroid belts, much as they are doing with ice belts, then they should just come clean and admit it.