Yes, which you totally ignored from my post.
My post also wasn’t about ADMs. It was about an activity based system (which exists in the game) applying to structure benefits to encourage activity in the corps that own those assets.
If you want to claim your context is important, then at least do the courtesy of understanding that others are just as important and ignoring them is only going to lead to conflict, where it isn’t needed.
And that is what I replied to saying why that’s a terrible idea already, and you then tried to say Null Sec proved it was a good idea… when that’s not what Null Sec has, and Null Sec shows that large alliances lead to stagnation over time…
So, I did do you the courtesy of paying attention to what you said, and provided reasons why it was a bad idea.
You however… tried to move the goalposts into completely different areas and were deliberately rude.
So, GTFO.
It is not that they are risk adverse to pvp.
It is the fact that if a group is using the athanor, it is more Financially feasible to let it burn and put up a new one. Cause if you are doing PI as a group, and mining the moon belts…and already have the BPO’s.
An Athanor costs as little as 100-200 million ISK to build in as little as 5-6 days flat.
No I didn’t say nullsec proved it was a good idea.
I said an activity based system already exists in the game and it works fine.
Here’s the direct quote:
and when you complained about that:
Activity based system is what I was talking about, but of course, context doesn’t count for you.
Your level of dishonesty hasn’t changed I see.
So good luck to you. I haven’t said my ideas are good, but they are ideas.
Going off with some ■■■■■■■■ crap ignoring context because it isn’t your context, yeah typical of your approach to the forums.
Sorry i Have to agree with Nevyn on this…
Structures themselves do not get any bonuses from the ADM’s
And im talking about service modules and the like.
Nevyn’s arguments: Window Vulnerability timers, ability to place a structure quickly (or at all with some recent CCP changes), is about it…ADM’s affect things at the higher ends of the Corp spectrum and go far into the Alliance leadership and Coalition Meta-gaming than anything else.
No one is saying they do, so we are all in agreement.
What I am saying is, there could be benefits for asset owning corps, for having more activity from members.
At the moment, holding corps are used, so that members are war ineligible and we aren’t seeing the “give us something to shoot and we will” talk from the pre-change, actually happening. Most of the time, there aren’t any defenders (to defend or attack a War HQ), aside from the one member of the holding corp sitting in his citadel, totally unprepared to actually defend.
So all I have proposed above is providing more benefits to members of asset owning corps, from those assets. The more active the Corp and the more assets it has, the better the defence support from those assets and the better the benefits the members individually get from the things that are important to them (ie. refining, industry, clones, etc.) Give people more reason to be in those corps when the risk is higher to them. At the moment, there is no difference in benefit being in the corp, or being in a non-eligible corp and just using the assets.
More safety for people that don’t want to take part in wars is fine. it doesn’t need to change and it is an improvement in the social aspects of the game, compared to the previous NPC Corp approach to dodging wardecs. None of that needs to change.
However, more benefits on offer for those that are prepared to take that additional risk is a very EVE-like approach that is currently missing.
ok i have an open mind…
But first,
I am an EvE player that strongly believes in “if you are not willing to defend it you dont deserve it” attitude.
Unfortunately as an industrialist I also know the other side of the coin, of how cheap it is in the long run to build stuff.
(^^^ i deleted 2 sentences cause of the following but leaving this here for the moment)
My understanding is this on your proposal then:
Upwell:
Service module: benefits increase over time the more ppl(characters) use them, if they are also in the same Corp as the upwell?
Defenses: HP, EHP, combat modules etc also over time get more effective with that same useage, albeit making them easier to defend?
Non-Corp/Alliance members(but on ACL): do not get these benefits, nor do they contribute to the increase of said benefits?
Is my understanding of your proposal so far in case of its context correct? (i was going to type more but i want a discussion here not an argument or debate)
Yes, basically.
Not double the benefits or anything (that would totally whack the economy), but enough benefit to provide incentive not to stay in an ACL-based only corp.
And of course, ability to mine moons extracted from a Corp owned refinery freely (others flag suspect as per the OP).
1st part answer
Ok, i can get behind this part of it. The benefit idea
Since the onus for keeping and maintaining active membership willing to defend stays with the Corp/CEO as it is now. (defend it to deserve it or lose it)
2nd part answer:
The suspect flagging I can not get behind though.
Minimum time for a pull is like 6 days (been a few months since i managed them) and equates to at the very most 2-3 million maybe 4 million M3 of ore total. (5 skiffs with 1 boosting Orca and 1 hauling orca can deplete this in like 3-4 hours)
Maximum time for a pull is: 26 million M3 (unrigged athanor) for the 8wk approx(the actual time is a a few hours or a cpl days short of actually 8 wks) max time pull.
the in betweens is like 4wk pull (approx up to 10 million m3)
and the 6wk pull (approx up to 14-18 million m3 unrigged/rigged)
I posted somewhere up above the avg ISK value you get from refining the ore at 72.4%.
Most of this is the reason I can not get behind adding a suspect flagging of any sort to moon belts,
1.) you can set the Fracture time when you have the most miners able tot log in to mine the belt, as well as controlling the level of M3 your group can mine it out.
2.) Ganking and Bumping are very viable options for defending a belt if that is what you wish to do.(if you deserve it you will defend it)
3.) If you can convince others to pay you 10%…well thats a win win fro your miners and your wallet if you creating belts you have no hope of fully mining yourself.
But wouldn’t it be so much more fun if we added direct, CONCORD-sanctioned PvP options for fighting over the ore? If the “owner” hides their mining characters in a war-immune corp and puts the structure in an alt corp they all get suspect flagged when they try to mine “their” ore and you can fight them for it. If the owner puts all of their miners in corp with the structure holder they’re now all war eligible and you can have a war over control of the moon. More conflict, win-win for everyone.
no
the idea only works for those with the ideology already of Ganking, War deccing, or using industry to build an supply for a reason, like IE Ganking and Wardeccing.
what you want will be a lose-lose for us all, as the I hate to use your terminology “prey” will just up and leave and EvE slowly but most surely becomes a ghost town of a game at more accelerated rate than it is now.
and besides you can already do this…
What you want though is easier killing of ships and chaotic use of mechanics…
I feel as if you do not want to maintain Moon structures and the admin hassle that might come with them including defending them yourself. (but obviously that is my opinion and how i feel you come across)
Citation required for evidence.
I mean they can just not mine moons, it’s not like all mining will be forced into wardec vulnerable corps.
And those that do moon mine often complain they can’t defend their moon ore, so clearly those that do moon mine actually aren’t prey and do want to shoot.
Not sure what citation you want or are alluding to.
Even though @Merin_Ryskin may not have said directly, his post is referring to the Suspect Flagging of characters mining ore…
Which I am against and will always be against. Cause it does not make sense.
You are claiming that moon mining being vulnerable to wardecs will cause a mass exodus.
I’m calling on you to actually produce some evidence to back that, because the anecdotal evidence we have actually suggests the opposite, because the moon miners are wanting to be able to shoot people.
Just to be clear, we’re talking about people that aren’t on the structures ACL getting a suspect timer / limited engagement. How exactly would this cause a mass exodus?
that is not a true statement . if it were , they’d be asking for an LE for ninja miners , like the old mechanic of can-flipping . they want free , around the clock protection of ‘their’ ore , even when they’re not online .
and re. buddy/watch list … yes fay i’m sure you do miss the days of logging in , running locates and half-dozen of you piliing into bricked proteus to go run down some solo mission runner or miner … what a thrill that musta been …
So… because people are talking about a suspect flag because the LE mechanics of old were the stupidest thing in the world the way you ended up with weird webs of engagements and could end up legally able to shoot yourself… it’s clearly a lie?
Go back and think about that.
the faults in the old LE mechanic have been fixed it would work perfectly in this situation .
i say your statement is untrue , and stand by that . as you cannot show me in this , or any thread regarding ninja moon mining , where the owners of the structure have asked for anything except suspect flagging …
LE’s can’t be assigned to an entire corp, they can only be assigned to the individual and are also assigned two ways.
So no, the LE system has not been fixed, it would not work perfectly.
The Suspect flag however does work perfectly. Since it then creates an LE for everyone who actually engages the suspect.