These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Time to re-balance ores yet?

Author
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#81 - 2012-08-12 15:54:04 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote:
I beg to differ. 2 orcas woudlve been added to that if they hadnt warped that thrasher in there to suicide on my smarties as it was a wardec scenario.
So in other words, it doesn't happen as a suicide gank tactic all that often.


As usual you twist something those you don't side for say and "forget" to point out the inconsistencies of those who you side for.

- You forgot an "any longer". Hi sec disco ganks are rare only since the insurance nerf. AoE ganks were done since the dawn of EvE and only relatively recently demand more careful targets selection. That is, it was "the other standard" practiced by more coordinated corps vs the individual ganks "a la 2-3 dessies".

- On the other side you forgot how Anski original example wanted to prove something (0.0 mining fleet ganks happen) but which ends up being irrelevant. Evidently they happen but not enough to warrant an ABC minerals increase in value so that it does disprove prove his point (which is: feeble attempt show how stuff also happens in 0.0. It does not happen enough).


In the end, 100M of Megacyte units are attributed a value with the same mechanicm used to value of 1 Trit unit: the value the markets aka the players behind them put in them. 100M of Megacyte have an inherent value of zero, they only buy value due to human assigned factors. An prominent factor among those factors, is the risk involved at acquiring said Megacyte.
If the perceived risk is low, then the value will be low and only logistics and opportunity vs doing something else will dictate the actual price.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#82 - 2012-08-12 15:59:16 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
As usual you twist something those you don't side for say and "forget" to point out the inconsistencies of those who you side for.
No. As usual, I note that the response someone makes doesn't match what they're responding to. The discussion was about disco suicide ganks, to which he provided a non-suicide gank as a counter-example.

…and as usual, you prejudice makes you presume that I'm saying thing that I don't.
Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2012-08-12 16:04:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabrielle Lamb
Ptraci wrote:

Not sure I agree. I find in my manufacturing that the bottleneck tends to be mexallon. Maybe it depends on what you're making. As for nullsec being safer - it is. But it's not magically safer. We MAKE it safer.


No, you're "Allowed" to make it safer. There's no real way to kick everyone out of your hisec mining or mission running system. Hisec carries the inherent risk of spending every waking hour in the same system as the people that wish you harm. Nullsec on the other hand allows you to stop them 10 systems out in a collaberative effort. As well as beeing given an early warning that they wish to do you harm through Local chat.

Hisec ganking borders closer on awoxing in 0.0 then it does PVP.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#84 - 2012-08-12 16:11:19 UTC
corestwo wrote:


If mining in nullsec is safer than highsec it's because the majority of it is done by multiboxing sperglords in grav anomalies who are smart enough to do minor things like watch local and leave their grav site when hostiles enter local, escaping safely LONG before even the best scanners are able to establish a fix on their location.


Does not matter how and why or thanks to whom or thanks to whose supreme skills 0.0 mining is safer. It's made safer => it's safer => price tanks.

I know it's sort of very counter-intuitive that after having worked very hard the reward has so harsh diminishing returns but hey, the markets are evil like that. They prize *on the run, perma risk* over "we are now kings of the hill, everybody please applause us".


corestwo wrote:

Regardless, you can no longer really consider highsec to be "more dangerous" than nullsec anymore, seeing as CCP gave the highseccers the tools to protect themselves in the form of higher Hulk EHP or other barge options with still higher EHP.


I agree on the "other barges" but not really on the Hulk being so buffed. Yesterday I went to check an Hulk I have. It's an "old gen, no tank" Hulk still having large rigs. It was 7900 EHP before the patch, now it shows 9260. Two catalysts can do about 14k damage iirc (the damage shown in a kill linked earlier today on GD), they would kill this buffed Hulk just fine.
Now, you might object how people *could* tank the Hulk but hey, it's been how many years and it just did not happen?

Systemic failure from a whole category prompted a systemic CCP intervention. Hulks are still so many and most still (not) tanked like pre-patch, the hi sec will still be "dangerous" as people will still fail tanking them.

Not saying they should be helped by the dev gods, just saying that the result that matters (minerals price) is still going to be affected by the systemic failure for a long while.


corestwo wrote:

So perhaps if the true issue is that mining in highsec is "too safe", perhaps that's what CCP should focus on.


The day it's too safe, is the day of 3 trit and 4 pyerite ISK / pu prices again.
Even then, this would just help 0.0 mineral prices to a point, not strongly reverse their decline.

Also, :summer: so it'd be obtuse of CCP to intervene right now without experiencing 1-2 Christmas patches first.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#85 - 2012-08-12 16:12:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
As usual you twist something those you don't side for say and "forget" to point out the inconsistencies of those who you side for.
No. As usual, I note that the response someone makes doesn't match what they're responding to. The discussion was about disco suicide ganks, to which he provided a non-suicide gank as a counter-example.

…and as usual, you prejudice makes you presume that I'm saying thing that I don't.


Yeah how odd how those you harp upon are always the same "bloc" and those you brown nose are always the other.

Edit: always as in "most often", before you bring in the umpteenth nitpick.
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#86 - 2012-08-12 16:14:26 UTC  |  Edited by: corestwo
Gabrielle Lamb wrote:
Nullsec on the other hand allows you to stop them 10 systems out in a collaberative effort.


Defensive gatecamping isn't a very useful thing, fyi. If a gatecamp trying to protect something lets anything past, they've failed, and if they don't, they've ultimately given the roaming gang what they wanted anyway - fights - which means they'll just show up again.

Plus, sitting there on a gate hoping something comes to you is boring, especially when you're doing it so that some miners can sit there fat, happy and unmolested.

The early warning, combined with the extra safety offered by grav sites, is far more valuable than any sort of defensive gatecamp, and seeing as miners don't need THAT long to be able to get out even without early warning, bubbles on the in-gates to the system is a much easier solution than actual gatecamps.

Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
corestwo wrote:

So perhaps if the true issue is that mining in highsec is "too safe", perhaps that's what CCP should focus on.


The day it's too safe, is the day of 3 trit and 4 pyerite ISK / pu prices again.
Even then, this would just help 0.0 mineral prices to a point, not strongly reverse their decline.

Also, :summer: so it'd be obtuse of CCP to intervene right now without experiencing 1-2 Christmas patches first.


I meant nullsec actually, not highsec, just got it backwards. Oops

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#87 - 2012-08-12 16:20:50 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yeah how odd how those you harp upon are always the same "bloc" and those you brown nose are always the other.
How odd that your prejudice always leads you to see things you want to see rather than things that actually take place.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#88 - 2012-08-12 16:38:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Yeah how odd how those you harp upon are always the same "bloc" and those you brown nose are always the other.
How odd that your prejudice always leads you to see things you want to see rather than things that actually take place.


I see high sec minerals up and 0.0 minerals down and explaining some of the reasons why.

You, on the other side have done what so far? Nitpicking, surprise!
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2012-08-12 16:48:51 UTC
Zifrian wrote:
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5084/image2qls.jpg

So 3 high sec ores are better than all lowsec and nullsec ores? Most null/low ores are at the bottom? Miners in nullsec or low sec take more risks and have to deal with things like poor refining rates (not to mention station tax). Risk goes up, reward should go up.

We going to get Spod looked at? Ie Spodzilla in the hidden belts? Hard to want to flip a belt when you have to mine that crap rock for a day.

Wait, let me see if I understand this correctly. In one paragraph you believe there is a problem with the value of hi-sec ores, then in the next you call Spodumain crap even though it refines into 85% hi-sec minerals and 15% of the most valuable lo-sec mineral excluding Morphite. Could it be that you really don't understand the problem economically, or is it that you just want CCP to change some numbers so you and others don't have to change the way you play?

The high value of hi-sec ores and the low value of nul-sec minerals is completely a result of apathy and risk aversion by mamy nul-sec miners. Many nul-sec miners would simply rather sit in the minimally more secure industrial upgraded grav site, chewing on the least valuable rock so that they can clear the site and spawn new ABC, than go to the nominally less secure belts and mine the clearly more vaulable Veldspar and Scordite.

With the removal of drone compounds and Meta 0 loot drops, unless you are melting Meta 1 and higher loot, Nul-sec and J-space are now the only sources for Megacyte. Since the price of Megacyte still remains relatively low with the removal of other soucres, it is clear that nul-sec miners can easily fill the demand.

Some might suggest reducing or removing entirely the Spodzilla rock from the industrial grav sites entirely. That answer is short sighted. This just increases the respawn rate of the Arkonor and Bistot, both of which have a higher yield rate on Megacyte than Spodumain, further increasing the supply and pushing prices lower. The increased Bistot and Crocite will have the same effect of Zydrine and Nocxium.

The true problem is a fundamental flaw in the concept of industrial upgrades and human behavior. Before industrial upgrades ABC were less common, to the point that many nul-sec alliances would have serious infighting between corporations when it became obvious that certain individuals ware cherry picking the best ores and leaving the rest for those who can log in later in the day. Now alliances can assign each individual corp their own system and those cherries are available to anyone who can spend a few hours to despawn the site and spawn a new one, which is being done. Scarcity of high end minerals is what used to keep their value high, that scarcity no longer existes.
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2012-08-12 17:11:30 UTC
Eternal Error wrote:
Skorpynekomimi wrote:
That's not a balancing problem, it's a market problem. Either supply or demand is skewed, and it's all too interconnected and interdependent to change on a whim.

Several high sec ores have been valuable than several lowsec ores for a few years now. It's a balancing problem.

It is not a balancing problem. Nul-sec miners have access to a great volume of hi-sec ores. These ores go untouched because most prefer the disputable safety of their grav sites while they import their low end minerals through mineral compression. Low end minerals placed on the market in Nul-sec typically sell above Jita prices provided the governing alliance has a developed industrial arm.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-08-12 17:20:03 UTC
Daioh Azu wrote:
Nul-sec miners have access to a great volume of hi-sec ores.


hint: you don't mine hisec ores in nullsec because you're literally better off mining that in hisec

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2012-08-12 17:21:22 UTC
Zifrian wrote:
Skorpynekomimi wrote:
That's not a balancing problem, it's a market problem. Either supply or demand is skewed, and it's all too interconnected and interdependent to change on a whim.

I disagree. I understand that trit prices go up when there are large wars, but there have been large wars before and it stayed relatively steady. With the removal of drone poo and lowering high-sec mod drops from rats, the supply has completely changed.

So get out of your grav site and mine the Veldspar and Scordite that is floating all around you. The excuse used to be that it was worthless, that there were more valuable ores. Now they are more valuable than Spodumain. What's stopping you...risk! That sir, is irony!
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2012-08-12 17:22:49 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Zifrian wrote:
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/5084/image2qls.jpg

So 3 high sec ores are better than all lowsec and nullsec ores? Most null/low ores are at the bottom? Miners in nullsec or low sec take more risks and have to deal with things like poor refining rates (not to mention station tax). Risk goes up, reward should go up.


If nullsec/lowsec mining was more risky they wouldn't have mined their ore prices into the basement.

Agreed and liked.
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2012-08-12 17:44:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Daioh Azu
Ptraci wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
This has been discussed before.

The simple version: (a) nullsec is safer, and miners in nullsec are less rational than miners in hisec, and (b) Scordite is a bottleneck due to the demand for pyerite.


Not sure I agree. I find in my manufacturing that the bottleneck tends to be mexallon. Maybe it depends on what you're making. As for nullsec being safer - it is. But it's not magically safer. We MAKE it safer.

Noxium is the bottleneck in my nul-sec manufacturing. It varies from region to region and that is by design.

Yes, intel channels, voice coms, and various other tools used by alliances make it safe to mine in nul-sec. Just not save enough for most to enter the belts. Strange, is it not?
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2012-08-12 17:51:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Daioh Azu
Droxlyn wrote:
I have a chart with a suggested set of changed values:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Av49RIDL-V7zdHNyVzQxOGRUVDZDeUc3czVsN0dJVVE#gid=4

The high-end ores need lots of low end minerals to ensure their value.

Drox

High end ores need nothing to ensure their value. If low end ores are more valuable then perhaps mining high end ores is simply a bad choice that you are making, like selling something on the market below its mineral value?
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2012-08-12 18:11:29 UTC
James 315 wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Ptraci wrote:
As for nullsec being safer - it is. But it's not magically safer. We MAKE it safer.


It doesn't matter why nullsec is safer, just that it is safer.

I disagree. If you have territory and you protect it, you're entitled to the benefits.

And that benefit is that you can mine in safety, without the interference of roamers, poachers, and gankers. Not that you should be guaranteed a high income!

If I decide that all I want kill are frigate sized rats because I can kill them faster, should Concord pay me more simply because I keep interlopers out, or claimed sovereignty?
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2012-08-12 18:21:42 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Zifrian wrote:
We going to get Spod looked at? Ie Spodzilla in the hidden belts? Hard to want to flip a belt when you have to mine that crap rock for a day.


Spod could be "fixed" by taking out the tritanium and sticking in a couple of hundred Zydrine per refine batch (and perhaps a trace of Nocxium). Omber could be "fixed" by taking out tritanium and putting in some Mexallon. I'd also "fix" Pyrox by adding a little Pyerite and taking out the Noxcium — that mineral should not be present in static belts in hisec.

Teensy little tweaks: no sledgehammer of gamechanging doom required.

Here's a better solution, if Spodumain is not valuable...stop mining it!
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2012-08-12 18:29:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Daioh Azu
Alexzandvar Douglass wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Zifrian wrote:
We going to get Spod looked at? Ie Spodzilla in the hidden belts? Hard to want to flip a belt when you have to mine that crap rock for a day.


Spod could be "fixed" by taking out the tritanium and sticking in a couple of hundred Zydrine per refine batch (and perhaps a trace of Nocxium). Omber could be "fixed" by taking out tritanium and putting in some Mexallon. I'd also "fix" Pyrox by adding a little Pyerite and taking out the Noxcium — that mineral should not be present in static belts in hisec.

Teensy little tweaks: no sledgehammer of gamechanging doom required.


Best way to make Spod wanted: make it give a crap load megaciyte. It is not wanted for low yield, not to mention the fact it gives nothing else useful.

Everyone skips for the ABC's so make it give a little mega than those.

Right! Let's just make the problem better by making Megacyte even more available. That will fix everthing! /Sarcasm
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#99 - 2012-08-12 18:29:22 UTC
Gabrielle Lamb wrote:


No, you're "Allowed" to make it safer. There's no real way to kick everyone out of your hisec mining or mission running system.


Wardecs, gank them, bump them away...
Daioh Azu
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2012-08-12 18:47:48 UTC
Zifrian wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Droxlyn wrote:
I have a chart with a suggested set of changed values:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Av49RIDL-V7zdHNyVzQxOGRUVDZDeUc3czVsN0dJVVE#gid=4

The high-end ores need lots of low end minerals to ensure their value.

Drox

So your talking about flooding the market with low-end minerals and removing mining for Hi-sec.

There would be no purpose to mining in Hi-sec as with the current Null sec miners the hi-end minerals have already over saturated the market place (Why they are worth so little) and now you are proposing the same for the low end minerals.


I would like to see the majority of mining happening in nullsec yes.

At least he's honest about it.