These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[April] Ore, Mineral and Nullsec Mining Anomaly Revamp

First post First post First post
Author
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#401 - 2015-04-20 20:42:13 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
Currently, the best way to mine (in terms of managing one's sanity) is to gang together in small groups and shoot the shit on Mumble while you suck crok. This means a lot more people hanging out in space, in general.

lol... this is exactly how mining used to work throughout high sec, until CCP decided it was too passive and too safe - and figured that encouraging more high sec PVP to counter this type of game play would somehow make mining more exciting and eventually bring in more subscriptions.

And how has this changed?

Sizeof Void wrote:
Well, you don't want to make null sec mining too safe or boring, either.... so, maybe null sec mining should be restricted only to systems where a hostile alliance has sov - ie. miners cannot mine in their own space and are forced to go to hostile space in order to mine. I can see it now... fleets of mining barges grinding rocks while being guarded by supercaps...lol.

Not sure if serious...
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#402 - 2015-04-20 20:48:51 UTC
Querns wrote:
Hotdroppers roam Deklein nightly. Deklein is also a favored target for most wormholers looking for easy nullsec ganks. Goonswarm Federation's newbie-friendly recruitment policies ensure a wide buffet of folks in space without significant "street smarts."

Uh, yeah, sure, I forgot... those WH folks have been a non-stop serious threat to GSF, roaming freely to hunt those poor null sec noobs and miners. WH bloggers do nonthing but gloat about their nightly ganking sprees. Damn... CCP really should do something about that, before null sec players start quitting the game in droves.

Querns wrote:
If you seriously think anyone is belt ratting in TYOOL 2015, you have serious misconceptions about contemporary Eve: Online. CCP removed belt chaining years ago, turning a pretty poor PvE activity into hot, buttered sewage.

No, I agree that anyone for whom a 2B ISK carrier is just chump change certainly would not spend much time ratting.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#403 - 2015-04-20 20:51:10 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
Currently, the best way to mine (in terms of managing one's sanity) is to gang together in small groups and shoot the shit on Mumble while you suck crok. This means a lot more people hanging out in space, in general.

lol... this is exactly how mining used to work throughout high sec, until CCP decided it was too passive and too safe - and figured that encouraging more high sec PVP to counter this type of game play would somehow make mining more exciting and eventually bring in more subscriptions.

You must have missed the part where CCP has repeatedly nerfed suicide ganking over the years. During the first gallente ice interdiction, I scored a pentakill of exhumers using a smartbombing raven, AND got insurance money for my loss.

This is impossible today.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#404 - 2015-04-20 20:56:29 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
Hotdroppers roam Deklein nightly. Deklein is also a favored target for most wormholers looking for easy nullsec ganks. Goonswarm Federation's newbie-friendly recruitment policies ensure a wide buffet of folks in space without significant "street smarts."

Uh, yeah, sure, I forgot... those WH folks have been a non-stop serious threat to GSF, roaming freely to hunt those poor null sec noobs and miners. WH bloggers do nonthing but gloat about their nightly ganking sprees. Damn... CCP really should do something about that, before null sec players start quitting the game in droves.

Querns wrote:
If you seriously think anyone is belt ratting in TYOOL 2015, you have serious misconceptions about contemporary Eve: Online. CCP removed belt chaining years ago, turning a pretty poor PvE activity into hot, buttered sewage.

No, I agree that anyone for whom a 2B ISK carrier is just chump change certainly would not spend much time ratting.

You've got a disturbing penchant for misreading basically anything that is put in front of you.

The first thing was to describe that Deklein is not as safe as you implied it is. Threats exist. I'm not calling for the threats to be extinguished from without by change of game policy; merely pointing out that they exist.

The second thing was to point out how out of touch you are by your implication that anyone would ever belt rat when combat anomalies exist, especially when belt ratting's only redeeming feature was castrated back in 2012ish.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#405 - 2015-04-20 21:16:36 UTC
Querns wrote:
You must have missed the part where CCP has repeatedly nerfed suicide ganking over the years. During the first gallente ice interdiction, I scored a pentakill of exhumers using a smartbombing raven, AND got insurance money for my loss.

This is impossible today.

Hmm... guess that not everyone got the message that suicide ganking is "impossible today".

Looks like you are the one who is woefully out of date. The Gallente Ice Interdiction was a short-term llimited activity, as were the old Hulkageddons.

In today's EVE Online, high sec suicide ganking is a 23.5/7 activity, and not merely limited to a few ice fields.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#406 - 2015-04-20 21:19:00 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
You must have missed the part where CCP has repeatedly nerfed suicide ganking over the years. During the first gallente ice interdiction, I scored a pentakill of exhumers using a smartbombing raven, AND got insurance money for my loss.

This is impossible today.

Hmm... guess that not everyone got the message that suicide ganking is "impossible today".

Looks like you are the one who is woefully out of date. The Gallente Ice Interdiction was a short-term llimited activity, as were the old Hulkageddons.

In today's EVE Online, high sec suicide ganking is a 23.5/7 activity, and not merely limited to a few ice fields.

There you go again, misreading the post.

Let me rephrase so you understand the actual meaning of the message: "Barges received a massive EHP buff after the gallente ice interdiction, and CCP removed insurance payouts from losses to CONCORD; therefore, you can't do the same thing today."

I did NOT say "suicide ganking is impossible today." Come on, man.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#407 - 2015-04-20 21:23:19 UTC
Querns wrote:

The second thing was to point out how out of touch you are by your implication that anyone would ever belt rat when combat anomalies exist, especially when belt ratting's only redeeming feature was castrated back in 2012ish.

No, again, I fully agree. Anyone who can fly a carrier can easily solo combat anomolies, and null sec combat anomalies pay out way more than belt rats, even when belt chaining was still possible.

Certainly, combat anomalies also need a major nerf in terms of payout, in order for null sec mining to ever compete as a desirable method of grinding ISK.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#408 - 2015-04-20 21:24:38 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:

The second thing was to point out how out of touch you are by your implication that anyone would ever belt rat when combat anomalies exist, especially when belt ratting's only redeeming feature was castrated back in 2012ish.

No, again, I fully agree. Anyone who can fly a carrier can easily solo combat anomolies, and null sec combat anomalies pay out way more than belt rats, even when belt chaining was still possible.

Certainly, combat anomalies also need a major nerf in terms of payout, in order for null sec mining to ever compete as a desirable method of grinding ISK.

Nah. They already pale behind L4s and highsec incursions in terms of isk/hr.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#409 - 2015-04-20 21:44:41 UTC
Querns wrote:
Nah. They already pale behind L4s and highsec incursions in terms of isk/hr.

Yep, as I stated a bit earlier, payouts for high sec L4s are out of proportion with their risk and have long needed to be nerfed.

Incursions are a game design balance blunder - plain and simple. They have been easily exploited since day one and CCP has never gotten around to fixing them.

So, it still comes down to this: if you want null sec mining to work, it has to be comparable, or superior, with respect to reward/risk per hr payout, to other activities. Probably superior in payout, since it is a lot more boring.

However, simply increasing the value of null sec mining isn't the solution - this sort of nonsense has already caused too many problems in the game. It is long past time for CCP to nerf the sources of ISK farming.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#410 - 2015-04-20 21:53:08 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
Nah. They already pale behind L4s and highsec incursions in terms of isk/hr.

Yep, as I stated a bit earlier, payouts for high sec L4s are out of proportion with their risk and have long needed to be nerfed.

Incursions are a game design balance blunder - plain and simple. They have been easily exploited since day one and CCP has never gotten around to fixing them.

So, it still comes down to this: if you want null sec mining to work, it has to be comparable, or superior, with respect to reward/risk per hr payout, to other activities. Probably superior in payout, since it is a lot more boring.

However, simply increasing the value of null sec mining isn't the solution - this sort of nonsense has already caused too many problems in the game. It is long past time for CCP to nerf the sources of ISK farming.

Actually, making mining more lucrative does the opposite of what you're thinking -- it actually REDUCES the amount of isk coming into the game.

Ore and minerals do not generate isk from the game. Players have to spend existing isk to acquire them, which is subject to market taxes. Alternatively, they have to use the minerals for industry, which comes with its own attendant taxes. Both of these acts reduce the total amount of isk in the game.

Additionally, making mining more lucrative may turn players from shooting red crosses, an act that increases the total amount of isk in the economy (much to the chagrin of CCP) to shooting asteroids. This reduces the incoming amount of isk in its own way, but the degree to which is pretty speculative, as human behavior is hard to predict.

CCP will ALWAYS prefer to reward players in ways that do not increase the total isk supply in the game. This is why, e.g., the patch that saw the Encounter Surveillance System reduced bounties globally by 5%, then added the extra reward for suffering them as LP (which reduces the amount of isk in the game by virtue of LP store offers costing an amount of isk in addition to LP.)

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#411 - 2015-04-20 21:59:41 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Sizeof Void wrote:
It is long past time for CCP to nerf the sources of ISK farming.


You mean Level 4s and Incursions in Hisec? Smile

As early as 2008, I remember making dank ISK with no rISK involved. It still appears to be the case nowadays.

Money for nothing, and chicks for free! Cool

Incidentally during that time period, there was a chance to move Level 4s to Lowsec, but alas, due to heavy forum debates™ nothing was done.

Sizeof Void wrote:
It is long past time for CCP to nerf the sources of ISK farming.


You mean Level 4s and Incursions in Hisec? Smile

As early as 2008, I remember making dank ISK with no rISK involved. It still appears to be the case nowadays.

Money for nothing, and chicks for free! Cool

Incidentally during that time period, there was a chance to move Level 4s to Lowsec, but alas, due to heavy forum debates™ nothing was done.

Querns wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
Querns wrote:
Nah. They already pale behind L4s and highsec incursions in terms of isk/hr.

Yep, as I stated a bit earlier, payouts for high sec L4s are out of proportion with their risk and have long needed to be nerfed.

Incursions are a game design balance blunder - plain and simple. They have been easily exploited since day one and CCP has never gotten around to fixing them.

So, it still comes down to this: if you want null sec mining to work, it has to be comparable, or superior, with respect to reward/risk per hr payout, to other activities. Probably superior in payout, since it is a lot more boring.

However, simply increasing the value of null sec mining isn't the solution - this sort of nonsense has already caused too many problems in the game. It is long past time for CCP to nerf the sources of ISK farming.

Actually, making mining more lucrative does the opposite of what you're thinking -- it actually REDUCES the amount of isk coming into the game.

Ore and minerals do not generate isk from the game. Players have to spend existing isk to acquire them, which is subject to market taxes.


Indeed, but only if the current ratters specialise into mining. Smile

All things being the same, the new dynamics from Zyd & Mega should absorb some of that dank ISK that wanders aimlessly in search of applying its inflationary pressures Eden-wide.

To my knowledge, the current real Faucet:Sink ratio is at 1.66 - CCP is confident that there are enough resources being generated + (healthy) economic growth to match the leftover ISK.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#412 - 2015-04-20 22:15:05 UTC
GankYou wrote:

Querns wrote:

Actually, making mining more lucrative does the opposite of what you're thinking -- it actually REDUCES the amount of isk coming into the game.

Ore and minerals do not generate isk from the game. Players have to spend existing isk to acquire them, which is subject to market taxes.


Indeed, but only if the current ratters specialise into mining. Smile

Yeah, I'll admit this is a big "if." However, if the isk/hr is good enough, people will do it! There's also stuff we can do, alliance-side, to promote it over ratting.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#413 - 2015-04-20 22:21:14 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Someone has to do something about CONCORD and its unlimited ISK funds facility - Almost like real life! Pirate

I can totally see a barter system successfully working in Eve, with slight improvements to the contract system and the ran-sacking of BPO-holding corporations together with Universities for the Skillbooks, heh-heh.

Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#414 - 2015-04-20 23:15:06 UTC
Querns wrote:
GankYou wrote:

Querns wrote:

Actually, making mining more lucrative does the opposite of what you're thinking -- it actually REDUCES the amount of isk coming into the game.

Ore and minerals do not generate isk from the game. Players have to spend existing isk to acquire them, which is subject to market taxes.


Indeed, but only if the current ratters specialise into mining. Smile

Yeah, I'll admit this is a big "if." However, if the isk/hr is good enough, people will do it! There's also stuff we can do, alliance-side, to promote it over ratting.


So all of the Deklein ratting bots will be "promoted" to mining bots?
Well, like I were saying, whoever has the biggest bot fleet wins the mineral rush.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Eodp Ellecon
Air
The Initiative.
#415 - 2015-04-20 23:24:54 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
No matter which side of the argument you are on this type of thinking is awful. Would it be okay to cut your paycheck by 50% if we buffed the paycheck of your neighbor since you live in the same general area...NO!

Especially if your neighbor has a completely different job than yours. Yes there may be some crossover in terms of income from each yet they remain different jobs being done by different people.



I've been thinking about this post for days exercising some restraint.

The Real Life part...

When you get out of High School you'll soon find out that people do indeed get paid different wages for the same job, even sometimes when working alongside the miner next to them. Race, education, charisma, gender, regional economics all play factors. After those things are settled in the immediate environment the same issues come to bear on an international scale - copper mines in South America affect global price indexes which affects whether a local mine in SW USA stays open or not. This carries across into economics of others not involved at all in the original activity, ie someone else's wages get cut unrelated.

Consider at least your retirement isn't connected to a municipality or corporation that may be going broke so you'd be faced with a perma-cut to wages you had considered contractual.



The EVE part...

If mining in EVE doesn't pay you enough in the months following patch and prices settling out, you will do what everyone with self-direction does, skill train.

The whole thread is about changing 1 part of mining in Null. The world has not ended and CCP says it's to go in a direction they had desired but effectively mis-allocated during initial programing based on expectations of use. If it gets broke, they'll adjust again in 6-8 months like they already have regarding Ore content in the past 3 years multiple times.

I have mined in HS and null. I mine belts, rat belts (yes, Querns I'm dumb), mine anoms, rat anoms, build stuff, import stuff and modestly pvp. I've done LVL IV missions too. Yes there are optimal isk-hour situations. I've also watched Null miner isk-hour go to ZERO while a single cloaky AFK bomber roamed 1-2x a day between just a couple systems effectively shutting down 16h-23h a day in opportunity where all you stuff is based.

Eo
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#416 - 2015-04-20 23:36:36 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:

So all of the Deklein ratting bots will be "promoted" to mining bots?
Well, like I were saying, whoever has the biggest bot fleet wins the mineral rush.

Why use a bot when a Mackinaw does 95% of what a bot does without the attendant risk of being hellbanned by CCP?

The same thing applies to ishtars and ratting.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#417 - 2015-04-20 23:42:51 UTC
Querns wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

So all of the Deklein ratting bots will be "promoted" to mining bots?
Well, like I were saying, whoever has the biggest bot fleet wins the mineral rush.

Why use a bot when a Mackinaw does 95% of what a bot does without the attendant risk of being hellbanned by CCP?

The same thing applies to ishtars and ratting.


Because as long as they make enough, you don't care if they're banned. CCP can hellban individuals, but not alliances.
And you cannot manage 20 Mackinaws while you're asleep. The same thing applies to carriers and ratting.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Colonel Sanderzs
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#418 - 2015-04-20 23:57:12 UTC
I have mined both high-sec and null ores for over a year each and my thoughts are:

This change is an increase in the value of mining in null and a decrease for high-sec mining while giving null sec more access to high-sec ores. At this point it's difficult to determine how much of a hit the value of high-sec ores will take and so I understand *some* of their posts and concerns while a quarter of them are misled. However as stated by others, with mining or any other activity you need to take into account risk vs reward without stupifying it and accept that ccp may want to tilt risk vs reward to balance the payout of mining in different environments.

For example, I have a friend who only mines in high-sec because he can mine all day semi-afk and take home 100+mil per day. Sometimes his ship will sit there for hours if he gets tied up but at the end of an average day he makes more than I do. For those that haven't tried it, the null environment is never safe and you always rely on a dozen or more other players for defense, boosts, etc whereas in high-sec you don't. You cannot mine afk in null and you cannot always mine with boosts or mine at all pending on the situation. You lose ships in null and have worse npc rats in null, so while some of you think we're rich with millions, well some of us are but we didn't get there semi afk.

So I think generally it's ok to make ore more valuable in null to reward for additional risk, but ccp should be careful that high-sec ore doesn't take too big of a hit. But seriously mining in high-sec with little to no risk should not be taken for granted. It is the goose of high-sec.

I also agree that it does not make sense to have ore anoms accessible to ship scanners without scan probes. Why would you encourage pvp ships to go after mining ships?

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#419 - 2015-04-21 00:12:11 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Querns wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

So all of the Deklein ratting bots will be "promoted" to mining bots?
Well, like I were saying, whoever has the biggest bot fleet wins the mineral rush.

Why use a bot when a Mackinaw does 95% of what a bot does without the attendant risk of being hellbanned by CCP?

The same thing applies to ishtars and ratting.


Because as long as they make enough, you don't care if they're banned. CCP can hellban individuals, but not alliances.
And you cannot manage 20 Mackinaws while you're asleep. The same thing applies to carriers and ratting.

This might work if mining characters didn't require a lot of SP to operate, and if CCP was too stupid to ban one bot, but not notice the other 19 you're running. Getting one pile of bots banned means that you have to start over training new pilots, which means running at severely reduced yield for months.

And what says CCP can't ban alliances? If CCP hasn't done it in practice, it's because "entire alliances" aren't botting.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#420 - 2015-04-21 00:16:53 UTC
I might be late to the party with this one, but it seems that with these changes you could get at least 1 battlecruiser worth of minerals per hulk per hour, plus some extra might be enough for a cruiser also.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.