You remind me of one of my favourite Fawlty Towers quips…
yeah…if you spit out the same propaganda every day it HAS TO BE true right?
Nope…
The irony. This is exactly what you’ve been doing.
4 Likes
removed 7~ posts for the following reasons:
1. Specifically restricted conduct
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to courteous when disagreeing with others.
In order to maintain an environment where everyone is welcome and discussion flows freely, certain types of conduct are prohibited on the EVE Online forums. These are:
- Trolling
- Flaming
- Ranting
- Personal Attacks
- Harassment
- Doxxing
- Racism & Discrimination
- Hate Speech
- Sexism
- Spamming
- Bumping
- Off-Topic Posting
- Pyramid Quoting
- Rumor Mongering
- New Player Bashing
- Impersonation
- Advertising
2. Specifically restricted content
EVE Online holds ESRB Teen and PEGI 12 ratings. All content posted to the EVE Online forums must be teen rated.
In addition to this, the EVE Online forums are not for discussion of real life current affairs, news, politics or religion. Discussion should revolve around EVE Online and its community.
For these reasons, specific content is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. These are:
- Pornography
- Profanity
- Real Money Trading (RMT)
- Discussion of Warnings & Bans
- Discussion of Moderation
- Private communications with FC
- In-Game Bugs & Exploits
- Real World Religion
- Real World Politics
- Content that distorts the forum layout
Complaints
If any pilot has an issue or complaint regarding the conduct of our forum moderators, the EVE Universe Community Team can be reached by contacting communityteam@ccpgames.com from the verified email address connected to their EVE Online account(s).
2 Likes
ORCAs pre-scarcity…were very very very slow…it took about 4 hours to clear a belt. And now even though the drones can wipe the belt now…you really are actually losing alot of yield…and the industrial core makes them alot less usable in their older…sub category usage. Plus you really don’t want to be sitting on a belt in complete locked up sitting duck mode.
There in lies the main problem of the mining situation.
Fenris does something which kind of devalues certain sections of mining…so players modify their behaviors to fit the meta. People don’t like the new meta because XYZ factor of mining. And then it goes round and round…frustrating the mining community who could be actively participating or at least partaking in an event or campaign.
Right now what concerns me is this weird feeling like Fenris, puts a few interesting ships that might “solve” in a small part a problem. But then people who don’t even use the ships…get mad other people use the ships.
Mining should have some progression. But I feel we have two points of conflict over what ideas constitute mining [or not] We have one group who argues for almost complete simplicity of the mechanics and the ores. Which on paper looks good…until you look at the mechanics of EVE Online with Catalyst [upgrades…more like downgrades] While others argue against mining in all its forms, because they don’t want people to build up.
Some of the pro-PVP argument seems to be coming indirectly from market manipulation/PVP players, because they want ISK sale of goods to stay high…and make isk without undocking. PVP players want targets, but most people who have worked up to a certain level of mining or any collection based activity…are very aware of their ship costs due to that slog of grinding to make that isk…[looks over at the never undocking market guys driving costs up]…do not want to lose their ships…they dock. Some players just have a hatred for mining period. (I get it…its a slog of time, but someone has to munch the ore, slice the ice, and huff the gas, do you want Fenris to sell you the kit and gear for ISK/PLEX on the market?)
But then again that would end up like Star Conflict which imploded recently. Its a balance.
We want a balance [offense/defense] mining/exploration/salvage/PVE/PVP it can’t be 100% satisfy everyone, but if lowers the heat to a “grumble” at least its better than a screaming fest.
I understand for the PVP players, not being happy with seeing Mining/Hauling/Exploration/Salvage Players around. And the PVE crew, but you would rather have people undocking and potentially becoming targets? Instead of them always stuck in stations? (Like the market crew, which I don’t think alot of people really can interact with.)
At least give the Miners/Haulers/Exploration/Salvage players a little grudging respect that they at least undock to do stuff. Versus other players who “spreadsheet” the game and never undock.
Maybe some discussions on how NPC stations should have more interesting bonuses for reprocessing/market etc would make areas like lowsec more tempting for small time players to wander out into lowsec areas to build/mine/haul/market. (Not better than WH/Nullsec/Pochven or FW space…but at least lowsec would have some value for players. And in highsec people move to stations for their bonuses as the various stats alter with activity.) There might be solutions to the problems at hand.
1 Like
The industrial core yield bonus means Orcas mine more than a Procuree, with far more tank and more ore hold. Stack a bunch of Orcas in tank fit and you have a nigh-unkillable (multiboxed) HS fleet that can easily clean belts with much less imput required than when using barges.
I don’t exactly know what you mean when you say that “therein lies the main problem of the mining situation”, but I feel like we see different problems unless you too agree that Orcas are too much of an unkillable self-mining ship for HS space.
And yet Orcas are often too risky to use in null.
It would be nice if there was middle ground where Orcas had less passive tank, less yield, but more support and more chance of survival in dangerous space.
I agree mining should have progression.
And it has.
You can progress from the Venture to Pioneer to Barges and eventually Exhumers, and progress from T1 equipment to T2 equipment to T2 crystals and eventually abyssal rolled equipment.
You can progress from ships for less than a million to mining ships half a billion (where I am now) to ships worth billions with pods more billions.
And then there are the many side-grades. Consortium issue versions for more efficiency, expedition frigates for hostile space, or the entire path of mining support ships for people who want to support mining fleets with foreman bursts, remote compression, industrial jump bridges.
I’d say there is plenty of progression.
Besides that, I don’t recognize myself in either of the two only groups you describe.
Where is the group of players who is not against mining and also does not want mining to become simple?
I want mining to have a varied range of viable ship options and many different ways of mining. Surely that’s a third opinion?
Whenever I do PvP I’m the opposite: I love seeing miners, haulers, salvagers etc and other targets around.
I’m not sure why ‘less people in space’ is something someone looking for targets is happy about.
On the contrary, it is as miner that I love not seeing PvP players around when I mine.
1 Like
Ganking is not PVP.
Yes it is, so is hauling, mining, missioning, marketeering and sightseeing.
It’s all PvP, it’s a fully PvP game.
1 Like
yawn
1 Like
I think this is called the ‘no true scotsman’ fallacy.
But to keep things simple:
Ganking in EVE is the act of player(s) attacking another player illegally before CONCORD arrives, and as it involves player versus player content it is very much ‘PvP’, even if you dislike the playstyle.
In EVE I think it’s called the “not real PvP” argument. 
1 Like
Ganking in low sec, null, wh, pochev = legit.
Ganking in high sec = being a jerk
It’s pretty simple even you can understand
It’s impossible to gank (i.e suicide gank) anyone in low or nullsec.
There is no CONCORD.
Try to not appear a complete idiot eh?
5 Likes
We generally just call it ‘PvP’ if it’s done anywhere outside HS because spaceship combat between two unaffiliated players is to be expected there.
Only in HS do people speak about ‘(suicide) ganking’, but it’s still player versus player content despite the restricted rules, timers and CONCORD.
1 Like
In video games, ganking (short for “gang kill”) means to surprise and attack an enemy player by using a numbers advantage or an ambush. It usually involves a roaming player or a group of teammates catching a lone, unsuspecting opponent off guard to get an easy win.
I think you mean it’s impossible to suicide ganking low sec, which again isn’t true the gate guns/station gun will blow friggs and destroyers up if you do it On a gate or station.
Try thinking before opening mouth 
EVE has it’s own lingo, have you never noticed?
2 Likes
But we are not talking about ‘video games’ we are talking about EvE Online, where the meaning of ganking has been subtly altered.
In order not to appear an idiot it is best to get your nomenclature specific to the forum correct.
1 Like
Yes it does .
Gank = gang kill
Suicide gank = gang kill when the attacker also dies via concord or gate/station guns.
or didn’t you notice that ?
Is Eve not a video game ?
1 Like
Because suicide ganks are the only time people talk about ganks in EVE, the two have become synonymous here.
People tend to use the shorter form ‘gank’ to mean ‘suicide gank’ in EVE.
3 Likes