Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You have to be afk to be caught unawares... Meaning that you should not be caught out in a non-combat ship when the neighbors come visiting?

Because that's what's being complained about. We put away the soft targets when they are under direct threat. Either it's ok that we do that, or it's not.

In fact, it would be integral to defending your space. It's like cleaning up the kitchen so you don't get ants. If it's both ok, and expected....nigh unto required by those interested in actually defending space...

You see, the detractors here seem to be under the assumption one should carry on as if the camper wasn't in the system at all, even when he is.

Ratting in a PvP boat is possible, but it's better to just go to high sec.
Ratting in a fleet is possible, but it's better to just go to high sec.
Ratting in a PvP boat while in a fleet is possible, but it's better to just go to high sec.

If your goal is making money.

Now, if you are there for a variety of other reasons, all that is fine. If you are doing it in an area where the rafting is an order of magnitude more profitable, that is fine.

But all of that is absolutely beside the point.

Oh yes... "my isk/hour!"
Everyone should totally go to the place with the most risk for least return.

It's not about effort, or risk, or even the reward. It's about one side being able to affect the other in a negative fashion from 100% safety.

So it's ok when you hunt me, just so long as you can't be hunted in return?

Yeah, that's really, really balanced there.

You like to go around the point that the cloaked camper is at zero risk while touting how someone else needs to be at more risk. How is wanting the basic opportunity to fight for the space in any way a problem?

I like how you edit around the salient points...

Move over a system is the same thing as abandoning the space. Camper wins by default as he cannot be challenged and the locals can't use the space.

Compromised fits. Camper wins by default since he cannot be challenged, only tolerated.

How about the option to actually, you know.... Contest him for the space. Put him at risk. Share out the non-consent?

What holy decree makes him worthy of winning by default from his unassailable 100% safe vantage?

Why should I be forced to lose, or lose more without ever having a chance to actually confront him and win?

It's not about effort, or risk, or even the reward. It's about one side being able to affect the other in a negative fashion from 100% safety.

Yes, cloaks are balanced. You know I am there thanks to local. And once I engage you, you can engage me.

And I have not said anybody needs to be at more risk, but if you find yourself facing risk it is up to you to deal with it.

Not affecting me in anyway?

I am sorry... Are you assuming I should just ignore the hostile hunting me and take no action in response to his presence?

Because that's what your statement implies.

Unfortunately there is no option to actually confront him. He will wait until there is a lone target in system that is stupid enough to ignore his presence.

He will know what resists to tank for, because he knows the local rats. He will know what damage to bring because he knows the local rats. He will know he is facing an active tank, and roughly the amount of buffer because he can see how effectively I deal with the local rats.

He has every advantage, and makes a perfect assessment of his risk in attacking, or he simply does not attack. His effort is minimal, and taking a nap is actually advantageous and serves to increase his safety.

There is target selection and stealth gameplay, and then there is the current state of affairs which pushes stealth into 100% safety while still projecting threat to force defensive actions to the detriment of his prey.

That does not happen in wormholes for several reasons. It's a comparison of Apple's and Orangutans. It's not balanced.

Honestly, i know the OP is just doing the math and not actually out there every day mining in null and pulling in those numbers.
I have mined all over Eve, and i will be damned if a freaking nuet or enough rats don't get me to dock up. Im talking about deep space null as well, where it takes several minutes with 5 T2 drones in my barge fighting off 3 or more rats. Sure i have made some isk vs time while mining in null, but like others have said, there is risk involved, not to mention shipping costs unless your building on site. Either way, all it takes is a swarm to come thru, and before you know it you have to move your whole operation and start all over.

Additionally, if your able to stay on grid long enough to fill your cargo with Spod or any other ABC ore it would be possible.
Lets do your math divided by 3 since i only run one account.
70 mill / 3 = 23.3 mill per hr, per toon, which also breaks down to 11.66666 mill per half hour. I suppose that makes sense, and i can hit about 80% of that in high sec with orca support mining Veld/Scordite in a T2 barge with pretty good skills. Oh and there is a crap ton of buyers who dont mind traveling to pick it up from you.

So if you could stay on grid consistently or up to 5 hrs a day, which is like a second job, i could see you pulling in about a billion isk that way. But i have rarely seen or lived in what was supposed to be a dead end, or "quiet" area and been left alone to mine juicy rocks all freaking day without some Neut coming in forcing me to dock up and play the waiting game. But i dont think there is much difference between what your doing and what most others in high sec are doing. You are getting nearly the same results, and your locked into mining so much in order to pay for your other accounts.

I agree that mining in null can be safer than high sec, but your constantly watching local, checking d-scan, and putting all your goods into a station that can be taken by the end of a week. Oh, did i mention the cloaky camper, you know, the A-hole who sits in your mining system every day, so guess what, time to clone jump to mining base #2, aka high sec..... Geesh,,,,, Whatever.