These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Max Yield for all ORE ships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alduin666 Shikkoken
Doomheim
#101 - 2013-10-11 05:43:31 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
Alduin666 Shikkoken wrote:
Using the program Eve ISK/Hour could have solved this entire 5 page thread before it happened.


Perhaps, but this thread is part of the emergent gameplay/player created content everyone talks about. Not everyone needs to strap themselves into the saddle of an internet spaceship to get their plex worth of fun.


If I wanted to pay to use a forum I would have joined Something Awful.

Honor is a fools prize. [I]Glory is of no use to the dead.[/I]

Be a man! Post with your main! ~Vas'Avi Community Manager
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#102 - 2013-10-11 05:52:09 UTC
Alduin666 Shikkoken wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:
Alduin666 Shikkoken wrote:
Using the program Eve ISK/Hour could have solved this entire 5 page thread before it happened.


Perhaps, but this thread is part of the emergent gameplay/player created content everyone talks about. Not everyone needs to strap themselves into the saddle of an internet spaceship to get their plex worth of fun.


If I wanted to pay to use a forum I would have joined Something Awful.


It's only :tenbux:

Totally worth it.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#103 - 2013-10-11 06:30:29 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
Alduin666 Shikkoken wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:
Alduin666 Shikkoken wrote:
Using the program Eve ISK/Hour could have solved this entire 5 page thread before it happened.


Perhaps, but this thread is part of the emergent gameplay/player created content everyone talks about. Not everyone needs to strap themselves into the saddle of an internet spaceship to get their plex worth of fun.

If I wanted to pay to use a forum I would have joined Something Awful.

It's only :tenbux:

Totally worth it.

If only you could play with plex...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
beancounter Jaynara
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#104 - 2013-10-11 06:32:51 UTC
grr goons

Corp Recruitment Specialist- now for hire! For a small fee, I will grow your corp, using all the secrets I have learned in powerful nullsec alliances that they don't want you to know about!  Beware jelly haters who will contact you with vicious lies!  They just want to keep these secrets to themselves!
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#105 - 2013-10-11 06:36:49 UTC
beancounter Jaynara wrote:
grr goons

progodlegend said ....

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#106 - 2013-10-11 06:44:21 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


See the GM ruling on bumping.
...
My argument was limited to the EULA and TOS.
...
By the way, an argument for the potential illegality of bumping born out of TOS 16 is a novel one, and I applaud you for it.


The argument you were initially responding to didn't mention bumping specifically, but all activities of the New Order (which happen to include bumping, ganking, awoxing, reverse awoxing, 'scamming',etc), and so to assume that I was only talking about bumping is a puzzling assumption. Also, I'm not really interested in any debate on potential bans that is limited to only a specific subset of the documents that would be used in any actual petition. We seem to be talking about two completely different things at this point; but thank you for the responses.


Ganking, AWOXing, reverse AWOXing are all quite clearly covered under the kbase's mention that combat is not "griefplay".

Scams are covered by the kbase article creatively titled "Scams and Exploits"
http://community.eveonline.com/support/knowledge-base/article.aspx?articleId=34

Bumping is both the most famous activity of the New Order and the most recently controversial one.


All of the New Order's activities (that I am aware of) are explicitly legal, and none of their respective legal statuses hinge on them being a part of any racketeering scheme.

"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
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2013-10-11 20:00:48 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:


Yeah I was going to go there, but decided to try and keep it short this time. That is truly the maximum level of thinking. There is no need to mine when you can just buy what you need. It is my belief that rampant mining makes ships so cheap that people don't mind losing them. If trit, for instance, cost 10 times as much due to fewer miners, (assuming all else being equal) people may take more care of their ships and be better pilots. There is really no downside. That is why I really think CCP should do some sort of special event where all the ore in the universe magically disappears for like a month. They can write a story that goes into the lore. Eventually someone tracks down the problem and restores the ores. I think it would be great fun and interesting month for all sorts of reasons.


I have an even better idea. We can nerf mining and industry to death and just set up NPC's where we can buy all our ships and stuff. Then we could call it "WoW in Space"

There is so much wrong in this post that its hard to know where to start.
1. There is a large group screaming for more PvP. Your idea of people less willing to lose ships will decrease PvP.
2. No ore to mine for a month? Gankers will love you for suggesting the removal of the majority of their targets.
3. Not losing ships helps you be a better pilot? Please tell me you are trolling, as this is one of the most idiotic comments I have ever seen.
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#108 - 2013-10-11 20:13:16 UTC
Gargep Farrow wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:


Yeah I was going to go there, but decided to try and keep it short this time. That is truly the maximum level of thinking. There is no need to mine when you can just buy what you need. It is my belief that rampant mining makes ships so cheap that people don't mind losing them. If trit, for instance, cost 10 times as much due to fewer miners, (assuming all else being equal) people may take more care of their ships and be better pilots. There is really no downside. That is why I really think CCP should do some sort of special event where all the ore in the universe magically disappears for like a month. They can write a story that goes into the lore. Eventually someone tracks down the problem and restores the ores. I think it would be great fun and interesting month for all sorts of reasons.


I have an even better idea. We can nerf mining and industry to death and just set up NPC's where we can buy all our ships and stuff. Then we could call it "WoW in Space"

There is so much wrong in this post that its hard to know where to start.
1. There is a large group screaming for more PvP. Your idea of people less willing to lose ships will decrease PvP.
2. No ore to mine for a month? Gankers will love you for suggesting the removal of the majority of their targets.
3. Not losing ships helps you be a better pilot? Please tell me you are trolling, as this is one of the most idiotic comments I have ever seen.


There is no need to cast stones at me for sharing my ideas that you disagree with. Regardless, I will address your concerns:

Mining and industry and have grown like a plague. Players who commit to these activities experience negative side effects such as reduced brain activity, slurred speech, and hallucinations. I am not suggesting that we wipe out them forever. I am saying we take a break, reduce supplies, and make a fun event out of it. This will allow the carebears to experience other aspects of Eve.

I never said replaced with NPC's. Do not put words in my mouth. Players should not only mine and manufacture the items, but there should be mini games created to make the process more hands on. I have a disdain for WoW that is widely known. Do not make silly assertions like that.

1. If people are less willing to lose ships (i.e. losses cost more to replace) they will improve the quality of the pvp. Yes, quantity may decrease. I see no problem with that unless you are a fan of blob warfare.

2. Gankers already love me. They will love me even more for suggesting something to immediately advance their causes. They will still be able to go after freighters and other haulers moving around illegal mining supplies and ore, which will become more valuable and thus the ganks they focus on will have better economic results for them in loot drops and killmails.

3. Not knowing where to start has led you to a circular argument. See #1. If you cannot see how this works, no one can help you.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2013-10-11 20:35:01 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
Gargep Farrow wrote:
Erotica 1 wrote:


Yeah I was going to go there, but decided to try and keep it short this time. That is truly the maximum level of thinking. There is no need to mine when you can just buy what you need. It is my belief that rampant mining makes ships so cheap that people don't mind losing them. If trit, for instance, cost 10 times as much due to fewer miners, (assuming all else being equal) people may take more care of their ships and be better pilots. There is really no downside. That is why I really think CCP should do some sort of special event where all the ore in the universe magically disappears for like a month. They can write a story that goes into the lore. Eventually someone tracks down the problem and restores the ores. I think it would be great fun and interesting month for all sorts of reasons.


I have an even better idea. We can nerf mining and industry to death and just set up NPC's where we can buy all our ships and stuff. Then we could call it "WoW in Space"

There is so much wrong in this post that its hard to know where to start.
1. There is a large group screaming for more PvP. Your idea of people less willing to lose ships will decrease PvP.
2. No ore to mine for a month? Gankers will love you for suggesting the removal of the majority of their targets.
3. Not losing ships helps you be a better pilot? Please tell me you are trolling, as this is one of the most idiotic comments I have ever seen.


There is no need to cast stones at me for sharing my ideas that you disagree with. Regardless, I will address your concerns:

Mining and industry and have grown like a plague. Players who commit to these activities experience negative side effects such as reduced brain activity, slurred speech, and hallucinations. I am not suggesting that we wipe out them forever. I am saying we take a break, reduce supplies, and make a fun event out of it. This will allow the carebears to experience other aspects of Eve.

I never said replaced with NPC's. Do not put words in my mouth. Players should not only mine and manufacture the items, but there should be mini games created to make the process more hands on. I have a disdain for WoW that is widely known. Do not make silly assertions like that.

1. If people are less willing to lose ships (i.e. losses cost more to replace) they will improve the quality of the pvp. Yes, quantity may decrease. I see no problem with that unless you are a fan of blob warfare.

2. Gankers already love me. They will love me even more for suggesting something to immediately advance their causes. They will still be able to go after freighters and other haulers moving around illegal mining supplies and ore, which will become more valuable and thus the ganks they focus on will have better economic results for them in loot drops and killmails.

3. Not knowing where to start has led you to a circular argument. See #1. If you cannot see how this works, no one can help you.

OK I got my answer. RP trolling.
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#110 - 2013-10-11 20:36:49 UTC

Please do not make rude comments and lump me into a group just because you disagree.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2013-10-11 20:45:12 UTC
If you are RP trolling, then you are just playing the game your way. No insult there. Just dont expect people to take your ideas seriously.

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#112 - 2013-10-11 21:06:29 UTC
Wasn't this thread about linking to EFT?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Nathalie LaPorte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2013-10-11 22:01:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Nathalie LaPorte
RubyPorto wrote:

Ganking, AWOXing, reverse AWOXing are all quite clearly covered under the kbase's mention that combat is not "griefplay".


All of the New Order's activities (that I am aware of) are explicitly legal, and none of their respective legal statuses hinge on them being a part of any racketeering scheme.


The article does not say "combat is not griefplay". The article actually says "nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play". Every example given in that article involves combat, in a prohibited place and manner (having to do with rookies). My point is that at any time, CCP could decide to retroactively apply, that clause, saying that combat is prohibited with different associations, in this case associated with a large scale racketeering scheme., and issue a bunch of bans for past behaviors. I'm not predicting they will, I'm just saying they could, and they've been pretty careful not to rule it out in their semi-regular communications about the NO.

I'm getting pretty bored of arguing that the rules aren't all that clear, and you constantly asserting that they're perfectly clear and definite. There's no real progress being made, just an exchange of assertions. Here, this guy sums up my feelings on the matter perfectly, why don't you argue with him and I"ll step out:

PipaPorto wrote:

The EULA/TOS are written (as most are) specifically to allow CCP unfettered choice in their responses to anything. Thus, they are not ignoring any part of their EULA/TOS regardless of how you may feel about the classification of this event.


Cool have fun.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#114 - 2013-10-12 03:10:47 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:
The article does not say "combat is not griefplay". The article actually says "nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play". Every example given in that article involves combat, in a prohibited place and manner (having to do with rookies). My point is that at any time, CCP could decide to retroactively apply, that clause, saying that combat is prohibited with different associations, in this case associated with a large scale racketeering scheme., and issue a bunch of bans for past behaviors. I'm not predicting they will, I'm just saying they could, and they've been pretty careful not to rule it out in their semi-regular communications about the NO.

I'm getting pretty bored of arguing that the rules aren't all that clear, and you constantly asserting that they're perfectly clear and definite. There's no real progress being made, just an exchange of assertions. Here, this guy sums up my feelings on the matter perfectly, why don't you argue with him and I"ll step out:

PipaPorto wrote:

The EULA/TOS are written (as most are) specifically to allow CCP unfettered choice in their responses to anything. Thus, they are not ignoring any part of their EULA/TOS regardless of how you may feel about the classification of this event.


Cool have fun.


Blink

Anyway, if that was your point, why did you start by arguing that the racketeering was what made all of the actions of the New Order actions more legal if your point was that CCP could change the rules wildly in the future? Your new argument has nothing to do with the clarity of the current rules.

"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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#115 - 2013-10-12 03:48:59 UTC
We need more "clarification"s.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#116 - 2013-10-12 04:16:16 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
We need more "clarification"s.


Of rules that aren't changing and never have changed.

"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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#117 - 2013-10-12 04:24:48 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
We need more "clarification"s.

Of rules that aren't changing and never have changed.

Basically

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#118 - 2013-10-12 04:32:13 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
We need more "clarification"s.

Of rules that aren't changing and never have changed.

Basically

We have always been at war with EASTASIA.

"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
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#119 - 2013-10-12 04:40:58 UTC
Quote:


Max Yield for all ORE ships


There is no max yield for ORE ships.

Or more specifically, once it is blown up, it stops yielding. Since you have no idea how long it will stay in one piece, you can't give an absolute number on it's yield.

Mr Epeen Cool
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2013-10-12 18:05:39 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
We need more "clarification"s.


Of rules that aren't changing and never have changed.

So being able to can bait in rookie systems never changed? Any rule or game mechanic can be changed at CCP's discretion if they feel its needed.
Now unless CCP has specifically stated an act is a bannable offense, then it is most likely OK to do that act. ie New Order extortion tactics. If it was against the rules, the New Order would be just another closed empty corp right now. That doesnt mean that wont change in the future, but that is up to CCP to decide. Lastly, as with the most recent issue with fleets and drones, CCP is usually good about putting out a warning prior to pulling out the ban hammer. Once warned, push the limits of the warning at your own risk.