Devoid/Bleak Lands/Domain
Of course there’s also systems with a couple of people, usually there are also no points or interest like ice belts
Check out Kador, or Tash-Murkon. Farther from the Amarr EFA Market, but less active, even in systems with ice belts.
I mean, if I want a place with few people in local where I can fear each and every one new that appears I’ll honestly just go in lowsec 
Sure, but with fewer people in local, you don’t have to fear the regulars.
Lowsec has no builtin protection for gankers like highsec does.
Imagine a bunch T1 gank fit Cats jump into a lowsec gate camp where Concord won’t protect them. There’s your answer - Gankers like controlled risk, lowsec can’t offer them that
Even for gankers there is a line where cost vs reward stops them. If they had to use 10 X 200 mil isk ships to gank a 200 mil isk ship, how many of them would do it? Another reason they don’t hunt lowsec - cost vs reward is too high.
Aren’t most high sec gankers outlaws, and subject to being shot without CONCORD interference anyway?
You may be right - but this is what I got from sisi - I think you may be off on your calculation
Using T2 crystal Type C for premium mining arkonor (It will seem weird due to the 16X wastage on sisi and 16m3 for the ore)
T2 mining amount based on my skills
327m3 in 157.5seconds
Ore amount in cargo 20
Ore waste 327
NOW - the REAL math
327m3 / 16m3 = 20 ore - but the real number is 20.4375
20.4375 x16 wastage multiplier = 327 - that equals the ore wasted
So, my math matches sisi, if you talked to a dev and found out that the way sisi calculates is wrong, please file a bug report
Picture in case you don’t believe me:
Not really, CCP made it easy to fix sec status with tags.
Many gankers will have poor sec status but not low enough they are easy targets.
1 Like
plus, they usually send a scout to find targets while the rest spend most of the time docked/tethered
You are correct… So, gankers tether to player station(invulnerable)… gate guns will be tanked with a single ship allowing the rest to pass unharmed… there is no game mechanic to stop warping in empire space(invulnerable also)… that leave only the pilot’s awareness to get safe. Which mostly consist of warping away.
I did say above that I understand what that person means now.
Anyway, this isn’t something that’s a factor for most players out there. The average miner doesn’t watch for local spikes in high-sec, especially in semi-populated systems where ganking occurs most often. The only players this would help, ironically, are the ones that already don’t get ganked because they mine in secluded areas with little traffic.
Barge EHP is a zero-sum game. This isn’t the first time barge EHP will get adjusted, and it won’t be the last. Here’s a pretty chart explaining it:
Lots of barges get ganked
Players ask for barges to get extra EHP to prevent ganking
CCP increases barge EHP
Gankers get more accounts and continue ganking barges (maybe even more than before)
In a practical sense, it doesn’t matter whether a Hulk has 1,000 EHP or 100,000, because it will continue to be ganked regardless. Only a very marginal amount of ganks will be eliminated by raising barge EHP (e.g. solo/very small group gankers who might not bother adjusting by joining a very large ganking group). Big groups aren’t going to stop ganking just because barges have more health, unless barge EHP is raised to such an extent that the effort required to gank one exceeds the gankers’ willingness to play, in which case ganking will be eliminated 100%. It’s that black and white.
So the question is, are we willing to eliminate ganking from the game entirely?
1 Like
Look at all the ones flagged ganked… in an asteroid field to looks like afk playing to me… the ones more than 2 km off gate is auto-piloting
This one really get me… auto-piloting with about 2 bil in cargo
1 Like
Has SISI been updated? Cuz last I saw in here, it hasn’t. Admittedly, I might’ve missed it.
Edit: Also…
So x18 matches x16?
Also also, if the yield is being rounded down, shouldn’t the waste be based off the rounded-down yield value?
Odin used to be a real nice neighborhood before we lost Niarja.
x18 was the blog - but sisi was set to x16 - so yes, they match as close as they could - I used x18 in the first example as the blog - but I used x16 in the second example as I had the screenshot from sisi, so I had to use what was uploaded to sisi
As far as whether or not you should use the rounded down value or the real value to calulate the waste - I think using the real value is fine, but honestly I don’t much care either way
I just know that it is not x19 or x17 (sisi) per the numbers I am getting, feel free to prove me wrong
Really don’t see where I need to. Either you’re wrong (and if you’re basing all of your estimations off of the un-updated Sisi build, that seems possible), or the OP is presenting us with inaccurate information, as an additive ‘Wasted Volume Multiplier Bonus’ of +18 cannot yield a final Wasted Volume Multiplier of x18 unless the multiplier it was being added to is 0.
18 + X = 18
X= 0
So either your math, based on the previous iteration, doesn’t accurately model the new iteration (and I don’t see why it should be expected to, all things considered), or the numbers we’re being presented are not correct. Technically ‘both’ is a possible answer, I suppose, but there’s really no way to argue that ‘x18’ is a viable final modifier if the ‘18’ really is being added to a non-zero initial multiplier.
1 Like
OK, I see your point - the problem is how the X18 was represented in the name
I only know how it works in reality - so if the name should be X18 “final multiplier not including any previous number or whatever” I am not sure
Other than the fact sisi was loaded with x16 instead of x18 the math works the same and afaik, the way the math works on sisi is correct and matches the way I am doing the math. I was initially told the waste comes first and then the yield, but that was corrected - the math is done for yield first - then multiplied by the wastage multiplier - BUT the wastage is subtracted from the moon first, then your cargo amount (if any or part is left) is put in your cargo
If that doesn’t match the way the column notation is labeled from a mathematical perspective - I will certainly bring that up.
We are talking about one of the most expensive ships in the game, it takes many months and a lot of ISK to get on a Rorqual and it has only received Nerf since its launch.
If the intention is to have more capital in the air, I do not understand how the nerf can help, the Rorqual did not do much, this will remove it from the air.
The real problems in mining are bots, currently almost all players are uncomfortable mining, you spend a lot of time in the air and you do not get good profits.
Instead of nerfing the few ships that can still make mining fun, we should take action against bots.
as a “timer” for the prolonged use of certain types of modules, “module wear” or something like that, so mining with bots will not be so profitable and those of us who really love mining can dedicate ourselves more to it.
Another option is better authentication methods to avoid the use of bots.
I have a rorqual, I was able to buy it a month ago. It was not profitable to have it in the air because of the buffs that the pvp receives.
even if I mine for a month alone, I could not get all that the ship cost. It was no longer profitable to remove it, we are only talking about 8B between hull and fit, this will only improve the benefit of the large corporations that are already established, but those of us who are starting to get on capital ships is a very hard blow.
all the updates that come out only think of great corps like Goons or Test, but they are not all eve.
just a month, in an investment that now is useless, if I have the same benefit with an orca.
when they do these updates they do not think of small corporations, not even medium-sized ones.
1 Like
If by ‘launch’, you mean ‘the change five years ago that took a ship that provided mining boosts system-wide in perfect safety and turned it into an OP mining powerhouse that we told CCP would be horribly, horribly abused to the point of breaking the game, but they did it anyway in a naked cash grab to fuel PLEX > Extractor > Injector sales’ then sure.
If by ‘launch’ you mean ‘launch’ then… no.
You won’t. The Rorq still has a larger carrying capacity, and it’s got a jump drive. I promise you, if you aren’t using it yet, you have no idea how much of an advantage that is.
1 Like
You’re right, with launch I was referring more to mining in general, the Rorqual itself was already a useless in the air for a long time, but they have nerfed mining so much that now it was the one that remained.
And no, the extra space is of no use to the compression of minerals, I have never managed to exceed 10% of my capacity with mining alone or in fleet more than 20%, now this will also have the orca as well, do you think that Is it possible to fill 300,000 m3 in compressed mine by mining alone?
And yes, I know the function of the Jump very well, as well as the cost it represents, it spend a lot isk per average jump, the Rorqual consumes a lot compared to other ships like a JF, that’s why nobody uses them to jump and leave them in a specific system, a single jump represents a whole afternoon of mining.