These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High sec Mission runners just got completely screwed by CCP

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
samualvimes
Brothers At Arms
#561 - 2014-03-25 19:38:46 UTC  |  Edited by: samualvimes
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Not sure what this has to do with anything I said.



Those "free" minerals still have a value.

Anyone who builds using only melted junk is being very inefficient with their time. Its clear you do not manufacture anything.


Now your argument is back to isk/hr. Which has already been established as irrelevant. If everyone wanted ISK/HR then the market would have an even harder time supporting these changes.

Need more people mining, or less people building that is what happens when you reduce mined mineral capacity by a net 10% and reduce reprocessed mineral capacity by 45%.

There is no math in the world that makes this remain at the current status quo...let alone a net increase.


What 10% reduction?

You will mine the exact same amount in high sec in the summer as now. POS will be refining even more and Null up to 20% more. That 45% reduction in refining junk is so small it amounts to less than 5% of a mission runners takings if the mission runner kills and loots everything.

And while we are at it, how long do you think a ship building company will last if it makes no profit? Isk/hr is everything in this area.


The 10% net reduction in refined minerals is the average refining amount in New Eden, across HS, LS and NS. The economy of the game is not just restricted to specific security in encompasses everything. There isn't a region in space that experienced a reduction. At best you are pushing refine numbers to what they were in HS, LS and NPC Null, into one place Sov Null where you will at best break even with todays market.

When you take 37% from 100% and only put 8% back that is not net gain, it is a net loss. HS, LS and NPC Null will all refine at a net loss, with Sov Nulls bonus pulling that net loss across all space to 10% instead of the 19% or so it would normally sit at. Unless all refining is done in Sov Null. (highly unlikely).

Less Minerals entering the market.

Reducing minerals from reprocessing by 45% means those people who build on reprocessed minerals now buy from the market.

More mineral demand from the market.

Less Supply + More Demand =/= Maintaining the status quo.

Go ask Mynnna what supply and demand is and how reducing net supply and increasing net demand produces a net reduction in market capacity.



so you're saying mining will be worth more meaning more people will go do it?


kind of like supply and demand?

Edit: causing market forces to do their thing

If you've never tried PvP in EvE it's quite possible you've missed out on one of the greatest rushes available in modern gaming.
Mario Putzo
#562 - 2014-03-25 19:43:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
samualvimes wrote:

so you're saying mining will be worth more meaning more people will go do it?


kind of like supply and demand?

Edit: causing market forces to do their thing


No thats the beauty of it, only way mining becomes profitable is if it starts happening in NS. I mean ya it will be "profit" but for the individual the ISK/HR will be far below just grinding missions.

For the economy as a whole, you will need more people mining (keeping the price the same) or less people producing (keeping the price the same).
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#563 - 2014-03-25 19:45:12 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Mario Putzo wrote:


The 10% net reduction in refined minerals is the average refining amount in New Eden, across HS, LS and NS. The economy of the game is not just restricted to specific security in encompasses everything. There isn't a region in space that experienced a reduction. At best you are pushing refine numbers to what they were in HS, LS and NPC Null, into one place Sov Null where you will at best break even with todays market.

When you take 37% from 100% and only put 8% back that is not net gain, it is a net loss. HS, LS and NPC Null will all refine at a net loss, with Sov Nulls bonus pulling that net loss across all space to 10% instead of the 19% or so it would normally sit at. Unless all refining is done in Sov Null. (highly unlikely).

Less Minerals entering the market.

Reducing minerals from reprocessing by 45% means those people who build on reprocessed minerals now buy from the market.

More mineral demand from the market.

Less Supply + More Demand =/= Maintaining the status quo.

Go ask Mynnna what supply and demand is and how reducing net supply and increasing net demand produces a net reduction in market capacity.


Go read the dev blog again, miners will be mining more so there is infact no change.
Mario Putzo
#564 - 2014-03-25 19:46:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Go read the dev blog again, miners will be mining more so the is infact no change.


You don't think I included that in my calculations? Something so important as to an increase in mining yield would have slipped my mind?

God damn son.
Mario Putzo
#565 - 2014-03-25 19:52:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
The only benefit to this whole change is Sov Nullsec Mining and Production.

Not that there is anything wrong with it getting some love. But stop pretending that its some great thing for all of EVE, it is a net reduction for all of EVE, to benefit an industry that is nonexistent as is.

(and that is assuming the Sov has the proper starbase in place)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#566 - 2014-03-25 20:17:34 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
The only benefit to this whole change is Sov Nullsec Mining and Production.

Not that there is anything wrong with it getting some love. But stop pretending that its some great thing for all of EVE, it is a net reduction for all of EVE, to benefit an industry that is nonexistent as is.

(and that is assuming the Sov has the proper starbase in place)


There is no loss for the rest of EVE.

Everyone gains from there being a reason to leave high sec for miners, refiners and industrialists.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#567 - 2014-03-25 20:20:55 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
I didn't say it is a bad thing, I said that the market will not be the same as it is now in terms of mineral abundance or production capacity (one or both will suffer). I agree the undo button is silly. But pretending that everything is going to be the same is delusional the math does not support it.

It will most certainly hurt the NS market, and the LS market, and the HS market. Unless of course you suddenly convince people to start mining regularly in LS and NS. Once again this doesn't make miners more valuable, it leave miners at best equal in their current state, that is the design of it. The only way a miner is going to become more valuable is if production remains the same, and no new miners enter the workforce, which will put a net drag on production capacity in EVE.
Mario Putzo wrote:
You don't think I included that in my calculations? Something so important as to an increase in mining yield would have slipped my mind?

God damn son.
Mario Putzo wrote:
The only benefit to this whole change is Sov Nullsec Mining and Production.

Not that there is anything wrong with it getting some love. But stop pretending that its some great thing for all of EVE, it is a net reduction for all of EVE, to benefit an industry that is nonexistent as is.

(and that is assuming the Sov has the proper starbase in place)
I am 100% certain you have no idea what you are talking about. It looks like you are just jamming a few random figures together I've seen thrown about by idiots in other threads.

The short of it is that there are very few people using gun mining to manufacture anything and those that do aren't manufacturing much, since it's so horribly inefficient to do. The overall volume of minerals refined in high sec won't go down much, since to compensate for their reduction in refining amount the overall amount of minerals in ore has been increased, so to suggest a net decrease on minerals is pretty ridiculous.

If you can show me evidence that you have information on volumes of minerals from gun mining vs regular mining and have put some actual math together to show how you arrived at your conclusion, by all means present it. Until then I'll continue to believe it's just a knee jerk jump to a conclusion.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mario Putzo
#568 - 2014-03-25 20:28:30 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
The only benefit to this whole change is Sov Nullsec Mining and Production.

Not that there is anything wrong with it getting some love. But stop pretending that its some great thing for all of EVE, it is a net reduction for all of EVE, to benefit an industry that is nonexistent as is.

(and that is assuming the Sov has the proper starbase in place)


There is no loss for the rest of EVE.

Everyone gains from there being a reason to leave high sec for miners, refiners and industrialists.


Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#569 - 2014-03-25 20:37:30 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!



You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.
Mario Putzo
#570 - 2014-03-25 20:39:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!



You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.


272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#571 - 2014-03-25 20:43:04 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!



You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.


272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.


Explain the 272% maths again to me.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#572 - 2014-03-25 20:43:14 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!
You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.
272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.
Especially when it's your math and it's wrong. Well done.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#573 - 2014-03-25 20:47:00 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!



You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.


272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.
272% you say? How do you arrive at this figure?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mario Putzo
#574 - 2014-03-25 20:51:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!
You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.
272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.
Especially when it's your math and it's wrong. Well done.


Easy math friend go check the isk m3 prices and punch the numbers up for yourself. Or would you prefer the 192% average isk/m3 mining all the things. Null Sec is better in every way for mining (but not refining in terms of sov null). But w/e recycled arguments are a waste of time. This change results in less overall production capacity for an increase to Sov mining potential.

So wooopdeee doo. Grrr Goons and all that.

The math isn't hard 19% combined reduction across HS, LS, NS, and an added ~20% in Sov NS =/= status quo. Unless of course all refining is done in Sov Null...but of course we know that isn't going to happen.

This of course ignores the unquantifiable 45% reduction to reprocessing which is a blanket nerf across all space and will dip into markets in HS, LS and NS equally. Which equates to a net reduction in materials available for production, meaning more people will have to mine, or less people will have to produce.

All to benefit a nonexistent Sov Null mining industry. But hey im sure you are right, why would people not jump all over 20% more refining yield when they left 192% isk/m3 sitting there all these years.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#575 - 2014-03-25 21:01:28 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Whatever you need to tell yourself, it was already more profitable to do all these things in NS. If people didn't want to leave before this probably isn't going to encourage them to leave either.

But lets keep playing the imagination game.

I get it though, you want to down play the "Grr Goon" Folks. I think its great Sov Null is getting indy love, but you need to stop telling blatant falsities. This is a net loss in production capacity, and NS is the only one getting an added gain.

Hope you guys got mining lasers ready!
You have already been told dozens of times that it is currently not more profitable to mine in null, hence why high sec has the vast bulk of both players and bots.

There is no loss to production, they will have just as much if not more minerals as they do now.
272% more isk/m3 max mining in null than HS is a considerable income advantage, I get it though math is hard.
Especially when it's your math and it's wrong. Well done.


Easy math friend go check the isk m3 prices and punch the numbers up for yourself. Or would you prefer the 192% average isk/m3 mining all the things. Null Sec is better in every way for mining (but not refining in terms of sov null). But w/e recycled arguments are a waste of time. This change results in less overall production capacity for an increase to Sov mining potential.

So wooopdeee doo. Grrr Goons and all that.

The math isn't hard 19% combined reduction across HS, LS, NS, and an added ~20% in Sov NS =/= status quo. Unless of course all refining is done in Sov Null...but of course we know that isn't going to happen.

This of course ignores the unquantifiable 45% reduction to reprocessing which is a blanket nerf across all space and will dip into markets in HS, LS and NS equally. Which equates to a net reduction in materials available for production, meaning more people will have to mine, or less people will have to produce.

All to benefit a nonexistent Sov Null mining industry. But hey im sure you are right, why would people not jump all over 20% more refining yield when they left 192% isk/m3 sitting there all these years.


This is nothing but tosh.

You manage to blow your own arguments out of the water posting rubbish like this.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#576 - 2014-03-25 21:02:02 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Easy math friend go check the isk m3 prices and punch the numbers up for yourself. Or would you prefer the 192% average isk/m3 mining all the things. Null Sec is better in every way for mining (but not refining in terms of sov null). But w/e recycled arguments are a waste of time. This change results in less overall production capacity for an increase to Sov mining potential.

So wooopdeee doo. Grrr Goons and all that.

The math isn't hard 19% combined reduction across HS, LS, NS, and an added ~20% in Sov NS =/= status quo. Unless of course all refining is done in Sov Null...but of course we know that isn't going to happen.

This of course ignores the unquantifiable 45% reduction to reprocessing which is a blanket nerf across all space and will dip into markets in HS, LS and NS equally. Which equates to a net reduction in materials available for production, meaning more people will have to mine, or less people will have to produce.

All to benefit a nonexistent Sov Null mining industry.
OK, so your 272% is comparing Mercoxit isk/m3 to Veldspar isk/m3. So you are comparing the highest isk/m3 to the 2nd lowest.

You also seem to think that isk/m3 = income, which it doesn't. Mercoxit yields are considerably lower than a regular ore (you knew that right?) so pulling the same m3 of Mercoxit vs Veldspar takes a considerably longer time. Mercoxit also comes in smaller amounts meaning the income is not scalable, so you can't just average it out. Imaigne if I took the highest drop I've seen in a high sec anom (just over 200m isk) and used that to determine the value of high sec anoms. It's the same idea.

You then go on to miss out that it's a fairly regular occurrence to see Hedbergite and Hemorphite in high sec, which are the 2nd and 3rd highest isk/m3 (in income terms are higher value than Mercoxit due to yield).

Finally, you miss out the relative safety of the mining operation, meaning a highsec mining operations can operate uninterrupted for long periods of time (in theory, infinite amounts of time), while nulllsec mining operations can be frequently interrupted.

So please, continue to give me math lessons.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#577 - 2014-03-25 21:02:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Mario Putzo wrote:


Easy math friend go check the isk m3 prices and punch the numbers up for yourself. Or would you prefer the 192% average isk/m3 mining all the things. Null Sec is better in every way for mining (but not refining in terms of sov null). But w/e recycled arguments are a waste of time. This change results in less overall production capacity for an increase to Sov mining potential.

So wooopdeee doo. Grrr Goons and all that.

The math isn't hard 19% combined reduction across HS, LS, NS, and an added ~20% in Sov NS =/= status quo. Unless of course all refining is done in Sov Null...but of course we know that isn't going to happen.

This of course ignores the unquantifiable 45% reduction to reprocessing which is a blanket nerf across all space and will dip into markets in HS, LS and NS equally. Which equates to a net reduction in materials available for production, meaning more people will have to mine, or less people will have to produce.

All to benefit a nonexistent Sov Null mining industry. But hey im sure you are right, why would people not jump all over 20% more refining yield when they left 192% isk/m3 sitting there all these years.
So is it 272% or 192% and how did you arrive at that figure? (figures)

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mario Putzo
#578 - 2014-03-25 21:25:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Mag's wrote:
So is it 272% or 192% and how did you arrive at that figure? (figures)

Depends, are you looking for MAX Profit? Or just mining everything?

If you are looking at max profitability you are comparing Mercoxit to Veldspar, if you are looking at mining everything then you need to average out the profitability for everything.

On a one to one case basis everything in NS is more profitable than everything in HS in terms of profitibility. Even Gneiss (which is only about 30% more profitable.)

You could make the argument that measuring against veld is misleading, but it is the best selling HS ore in terms of making cash now instead of later due to its singular mineral type, just like Merc. Since it is better to move minerals from Point A-B it is easier to buy the best Mineral volume for your buck...which is mostly always NS ores, exception being of course, Trit from Veldspar.

So for max mining in Null you target Mercoxit vs Max mining HS Veldspar for 272% more isk/m3 and for just mining anything in your belt you net 192% more isk/m3 in NS vs HS.

NS mining is and always has been more profitable than anything you can do in HS. Mostly because NS mining is non existant and the market is very demand heavy not supply heavy (keeping prices high.)
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#579 - 2014-03-25 21:27:22 UTC
Tee hee, I think someone has me on their ignore list! Either that or he thinks repeating something that's terribly wrong makes it more correct.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mario Putzo
#580 - 2014-03-25 21:34:18 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Tee hee, I think someone has me on their ignore list! Either that or he thinks repeating something that's terribly wrong makes it more correct.


Ya when you bring up risk/reward when we are discussing how NS has a clear advantage in isk/m3 mining profitability (due to its risk/reward i am sure) It kinda seems redundant.

Would you like a gold dish to go with your gold spoon? Or would you just toss it aside and complain that so and so's bronze dish is better?