Market Discussions

uh, what competition?

Given the delays involved in jumping/bridging in, any player paying attention will be able to safely warp out their hulk before the droppers load grid. (Many of the more serious droppers only use blops fyi, but the difference here is minimal) As a result, the only reliable kills are the ones your cyno bomber points on decloak.

Not liking something, and not being able to work around it are two very different things.

There is no increased risk to ICE mining, it will just require a little more effort to be in the right place at the right time. This will be offset by the advantage of mining ICE twice as fast, and the prices not dropping due to limited supply. ICE mining will take more effort, but at the same be much more rewarding from those putting in that effort. Yet the level of risk will stay pretty much the same. Sure ganking of ICE miners may go up, but how many will get ganked before the belt in flooded with CONCORD. Many players may not "like" it, but I do not see a big problem here.

The flip side is the changes to null sec ore mining. This is not just a matter of players not liking the change. Null sec mining is fairly risk adverse now, to the point where only a small number of players do it. By removing that layer of safety provided by hidden belts being grav sites that had to be scanned down the risk factor has gone up exponentially, While there has only been a slight buff to the rewards.

Miners are risk adverse players. They will adapt to changes that make mining require more effort, like the changes to ICE mining. But they will be much more resistant to changes that increase risk. There is no way for a solo miner to mitigate that increased risk thru added effort. The only possible way to mitigate if is by mining deep inside blue territory where you have a large alliance protecting the space you are mining in. Or is there another option that eludes me?

These smaller mining outfits have no way to adapt, there is no tools provided they can use to mitigate the added risk. They can only join a larger alliance, or rent space from them, if they want to continue mining in Null. Those larger alliances are not that easy to get into. Most of them are PVP focused and have no interest in miners. This will not change just because Fozzie wants it to. The majority of null sec miners will be SOL, and will have very few choices available. Either join or rent space from a large null sec alliance, or go back to high sec.

Continuing operations as they do now will only make them prime gank targets, and I guarantee you, there will be loads on small gangs roaming these no longer hidden belts looking for miners to pop. At least until there are no miners left. For those who do not want to play under the thumb of a large alliance the choices are go back to high sec, or quit mining an find another activity. If I have missed an option here please enlighten me.

MY bad.

You commented about miners not liking the changes to the ICE fields.

I meant to illustrate the difference between not liking some thing and being able to work around it. I was using the changes to null sec grav sites as an example of a change that required more than players adapting and learning to work around it. I apologize for getting carried away.

The Changes to ICE mining, while being game changing and will require players to adapt are pretty harsh. However the adaptation should be fairly easy, and does not come along with added risk. You will need to change the way you mine ICE, or get pushed out by those with a more flexible time schedule. But ICE depletion should be a healthy game change. But they may have taken it a little to far.

My point was as much as player may not like the ICE mining changes, they are not really game breaking. While the changes to the null sec grav sites are not so easy to adapt too.

With the ICE mining changes you will be able to adapt and still be successful as a solo miner. However with the changes to null sec grav sites there is no way to adapt. Your only choice will be to join a large null sec alliance that can provide you with safe space to mine in. Odyssey will be the death of the Solo/mutibox null sec miner. At least outside of the space controlled by the big alliances.

I get that I am not comparing apples to apples, more like apples to carrots, and it may be hard to grasp what I am trying to say. But if you want to talk about the impact the mining changes coming with Odyssey will have, comparing ICE mining to ore mining is a valid point.

The ICE mining changes while frustrating, and requiring adaptation, are not really game breaking. The game play is changing, but the risk level of the activity will not really be affected. While the changes coming for null sec miners may be very game breaking. And comes with an exponential increase in risk.

The ICE mining changes will level out and be easier to adapt to with time. While the Null sec grav site changes will only continue to get worse as more and more gankers realize how easy it will be post Odyssey to find those miners.

...unless of course organization would net you more ISK, which in this case it would. imagine several loosely connected corps/alliances, each of them controlling the rspawn timers in several systems. none of them has an interest in trespassing into the others' territories as this would mean more time warping and less time mining. smaller entities are pushed aside as the locust swarm gobbles the ice down in half an hour or so, warps off and then comes back exactly four hours later.

3000 likes... but still the ice thing is way overrated.

you're right, they will be there anyway. if they weren't there that'd benefit you, and if they are there that does not benefit you. so them being there, either working with you or not, it only affects you in a negative way.

"allying" with them doesn't "streamline" anything. as i said, there's no reason to mine with other people.

"streamlining" the process (whatever the **** that means) does not push disorganised people out. they're still going to be there mining just like they are now.

also nothing you wrote in that second paragraph is remotely relevant to the point being discussed.

unlike you who simply failed to understand the point being discussed. vOv.

i wasn't questioning the definition, i was questioning you shoehorning it in to a context where it simply isn't true and doesn't make sense.

because organising a fleet does none of that. hence why you're shoehorning it. it simply doesn't apply.