Science & Industry

We don't need more veldspar in nullsec anomalies. We need anomalies without fixed ratios of ore, so people can truely cherrypick the valuable stuff without having to mine the worthless stuff to get more of the good stuff

Another suggestion in terms of pricing/demand/supply :

In RL and thinking in terms of the wool and milk trade, although there are probably other examples, when prices have collapsed in the past the stock was destroyed rather than take it to the market. Would it be an option to 'trash' excess amounts of high end minerals that had been mined to keep stocks lower and hence prices stable or higher

In RL marketing boards, somebody ends up paying even if you "trash" surplus inventory to artificially inflate prices -- and it's usually the taxpayers in the form of government subsidies.

But, by all means, "trash" your surplus minerals... the guys with all the "Sell" orders in major hubs will luv you for it.

They could always just introduce mineral alchemy as well- converting excess mega/zyd into other lowend minerals

Edit: They would just have to make sure the conversion ratio is established at a base line that matches the aggregate consumption of minerals- if it's 1024/512/256/128/64/32/16, they would need to make the ratio a base of 16 mega : 256 mex or something of the sort.

Who is your dealer and what is their number, this sounds like some pretty good stuff you're on.

I was thinking the same, remembering how copper coins are regularly trashed in other games like EQ to keep more of the valuable gold coins. If the ores were really as worth- and useless as the whiners wish to make believe, this would be a viable solution. Every miner can trash what is in his cargo hold in EVE as well. However, the high end minerals and ores are still much too valuable to simply throw them away.

I also learned from this thread that there are several other ways to counter the so called crisis. But mining in wormholes, mining in belts, cherrypicking anomalies and trading with high sec are all discarded as they are less efficient and less profitable than mining complete anomalies. As long as this is the case there is no crisis at all. So can we please let this topic die in peace?

• mining in wormholes - Can you fully control the hole, are there ore anoms in the hole? If you can, why mine, if not WHY MINE? Risk/reward bad for mining in a WH, not that it doesn't happen, just why?


• mining in belts - it does happen, you don't have to worry about cycling the belt, just mine what you're short on. Except when you pop the rock it doesn't automatically respawn with the exact same ammount that you started with, you have to wait for downtime for them to respawn, and they respawn as tiny little roids like in highsec, so you have to move around more. It's like trying to drain a olympic pool with a straw.


• cherrypicking anomalies - Oh hey, lets wait three days for this anomaly to despawn so we can get more of the ores we want, all the while our inustry index goes down. Honestly you'd be better off mining in the belts.


• trading with high sec - Already happening, but due to space constraints on JFs you get the ONE thing you really need to maximise m3/ly, the rest you better make up yourself. Also screw you, we don't want to come to you with our hat in hand saying "Please sir, more."

All of these "solutions" are utter rubbish, have been pointed out repeatedly as being complete and utter rubbish, except the buying in highsec and JFing it up. Yet these "solutions" keep cropping up in this thread, because for some strange reason you think we haven't tried those "solutions" before, and we keep telling you from experience, why your "solution" really doesn't 'solve' anything.

I am capable of reading and fully understand your points. However you don't seem to understand mine.

What my options have in common is that they do not feed the perceived high end ore crisis. If you pick the one mining option that feeds the percieved high end ore crisis over a bunch of others that don't, please tell me who is to blame? To me its seems that there is no crisis as you are capable of mitigating it. You simply don't do this because mitigating the perceived crisis would have some severe drawbacks. This is fine. Just stop moaning and live with consequences of your actions.

Everyone else has to make choices. Actions/decisions have consequences. You're advocating for the removal of said drawbacks while stating that no other courses of action will be explored.

What kind of reaction did you expect?

That's the thing- there are no "real" choices in null mining. That is why we're saying that a change needs to be made.

Sure, you could "choose" to mine at a null belt- the same way a mission runner could "choose" to run a level 2 or 3 mission instead of a level 4 mission. You just wouldn't run a level 2 if you have access to and can run a level 4 for the same faction.

Null anomalies are the "level 4 missions" of the mining profession. In their very nature, they are providing a huge surplus of high end minerals to the point that there is literally no reason to go to any other source of minerals in null because there is no incentive to.

The suggestion here isn't to just give us more stuff. It is to remove the bulk of the high end ore from null anoms. That's it. This means that belts and scannable ore sites become valuable again, for everyone, if they want to cherry pick or scout out "rare" ore.

Right now, arkonor is the second least valuable ore in the game. Why? Its primary value component comes from Megacyte. Arkonor is readily available in every null anom. Because you have to cycle anoms to get them to respawn for more low end ores, you have to burn through the arkonor. This leads to a huge supply of Megacyte- vastly more than any production in eve can consume.

This has resulted in the most "valuable" ores in the game becoming garbage. You can obtain more minerals of any type more quickly in an ore anom than anywhere else in null. There is zero incentive to cherry pick unless you are running one or two miners or if you want to eat a huge wealth loss over time.

Therefore, the suggestions are not to "remove the drawbacks" of null anoms- null anoms are already the best in every circumstance. The suggestion is to balance the null anoms so that there is a point for miners to seek out rare ores, while allowing consistent income to still be made at null anoms.