These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#581 - 2015-04-22 17:09:33 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:

It most certainly is capped. Why would a customer pay more for an item that is inferior in mostly every way?

If only there was another use for T1 modules besides fitting them to ships. If only...

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

Mario Putzo
#582 - 2015-04-22 17:17:46 UTC
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

It most certainly is capped. Why would a customer pay more for an item that is inferior in mostly every way?

If only there was another use for T1 modules besides fitting them to ships. If only...


Working as intended right! Top kek.


Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#583 - 2015-04-22 17:23:02 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

It most certainly is capped. Why would a customer pay more for an item that is inferior in mostly every way?

If only there was another use for T1 modules besides fitting them to ships. If only...


Working as intended right! Top kek.

You really don't know what it is, do you?

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

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#584 - 2015-04-22 17:26:57 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Querns wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

I have been watching this thread since page 12...and goddamn Querns, GankYou, Anhenka, et. al. have been rope-a-doping just about all the high sec people.

Well done.....and if you are part of the et. al., sorry don't mean to give short shrift to your contributions they are good too. Mr Omniblivion, Rowells, EvilweaselSA, Gallowmere, and HarlyQ to name some of the people with good comments.

It's what I do.

The dirty secret here is that none of these people are actually "high sec people" — they're anti-nullsec people.


Why would I be anti-nullsec? I believe the game needs every region to be healthy and draw different kinds of players to the game. I'm just not convinced that this change is a great idea. This actually gets reinforced by the vociferous support from those who will benefit the most. I'm also uncomfortable that players have been able to invest heavily in a commodity available in only one section of space. That smacks of insider trading, especially when you keep mentioning that there is an over abundance of high ends in null compared to low ends. This is tantamount to throwing a stack of ISK at those who already have (or have much easier access to) those high ends.


That is just it, regions (high, low, null) being healthy does not mean they are all the same. High does not have moon goo nor does it have high end ores. It has been explained why this is so, it was done this way on purpose.

Down the road CCP wants to nerf JFs. CCP would like to increase player density in null as well. While it can do the former with or without a carrot, for the latter is must do it with a carrot. And even just doing the former by itself will likely just mean null becomes a complete wasteland in the outer regions by and large. Further, CCP does not want to buff anomalies as it will mean way, way too much isk flowing into the economy. So what to do....oh wait, how about mining. Well given the current conditions that is not viable. Hence the Devblog.

Here is why many of the HS people are complaining. They see this change as resulting in less demand for low ends since NS will be better able to source them there. Less demand means a lower price all other things considered. I get that, but what one should consider is...the current prices are not going to sustain things like Fozziesov, JF nerfs, and increased player density in null. And keep in mind that things like Fozziesov is not very popular with too many null sec residents. Still, taking that and these other goals that CCP is intent on implementing...we cannot keep things as they currently are and have a healthy game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Mario Putzo
#585 - 2015-04-22 17:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

It most certainly is capped. Why would a customer pay more for an item that is inferior in mostly every way?

If only there was another use for T1 modules besides fitting them to ships. If only...


Working as intended right! Top kek.

You really don't know what it is, do you?


There are a few things that T1 mods are used for, T2 production springs to mind (probably the biggest consumer of T1 mods). But if someone is into T2 production then (myself as an example) likely it will be cheaper for them to crank out their own T1 module using their likely researched BPO.

So I don't see the benefit to T1 Production here either. Set up BPO to run X number of T1 mods based on the required amount from your T2 BPC...why use a middleman?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#586 - 2015-04-22 17:40:35 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:

It most certainly is capped. Why would a customer pay more for an item that is inferior in mostly every way?

If only there was another use for T1 modules besides fitting them to ships. If only...


Working as intended right! Top kek.

You really don't know what it is, do you?


There are a few things that T1 mods are used for, T2 production springs to mind (probably the biggest consumer of T1 mods). But if someone is into T2 production then (myself as an example) likely it will be cheaper for them to crank out their own T1 module using their likely researched BPO.

So I don't see the benefit to T1 Production here either. Set up BPO to run X number of T1 mods based on the required amount from your T2 BPC...why use a middleman?


Opportunity cost. I do T2 production, but keeping in mind opportunity costs, I don't see the "savings" by making my own T1 modules and robotics as a real savings or increasing the profit margins. I could also just try to sell those items. Thing is where I build I don't have much of a T1 market...so I build that stuff. Similarly with the PI stuff. Plus it limits transport costs and time...which are legit savings/increase to profits.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#587 - 2015-04-22 17:46:40 UTC
Yroc Jannseen wrote:
The high sec vs null sec argument in this thread is hilarious.

This change comes at the exact same time that CCP is making it easier for anyone to try their hand at null sec. And yet you have this mentality where certain players seem to believe they were ordained to only ever mine in high sec.

"Rewarding" null sec is somehow unfair because of some mythical barrier that only allows certain players to mine or play in null sec.

It's been a few years since I started playing but I seem to recall staying in high sec and mining or moving out to null as a choice I made.

But maybe I'm wrong and I was in fact sub-consciously manipulated into to heading out to null to be a goon slave, doomed to suck crok and pay tower taxes the rest of my days in Eve.


There is that as well. By increasing player density in null, the idea will be that current sov holding alliances will pull inwards...this will free up currently held space. Meaning, there is opportunity for people to move into those vacant systems and reap the rewards they are currently complaining about.

Of course, that will mean effort...significant effort over living in HS where you can do just fine even staying in a Noob corp and not doing anything with anyone else in the game. As was pointed out, 200 guys going out and whacking a d**kstar for an hour or more means you have 200 or more man hours there. That is alot of effort. What should that alliance get for that effort? A similar income as a guy who semi-afk mines or does t2 invention in HS and doesn't interact with anyone in the game ever? How about "no" as an answer?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#588 - 2015-04-22 18:09:41 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
Amusing idea. But, what happens if someone flips the can? Does the mining ship just stop moving or does it sail off out of the belt?

Same as orbiting a ship that gets popped. Sail out. I'm sure he doesn't mind doing it with style in his Skiff.
EvilweaselSA wrote:

ladies and gentlemen, our mining expert, who doesn't know how much of a benefit a skiff has over a procurer, who believes the only way to mine safely is to fit for max yield, who can't figure out how to use a can, and who has no idea that it's not 2012

oh, also, he believes that regions that have more bot miners would have more expensive trit than regions that had less bot miners in nullsec, for some reason that is beyond us mortals

Usual gewnspeak, trying to troll, ignoring everything, typical density and no-brain show.
Once again, for special people, and those who are below them, and gewns who are below those:
1) There are no meaningful advantages of Skiff over Procurer.
2) If something attacks the miner and it's not a low-dps rat, the miner is dead, no matter what he pilots.
3) The only defense against said attack is lessen the exposure. Which means mine for less time, compensating with efficiency.
4) Cans are cretin magnets. Use them to bring 1001 ganktards to your belt. Orbiting doesn't work since you're dead no matter what you do if you're hit.


Just did some quick and simple math....keep in mind the simple part---i.e. I didn't sit down and figure damage types, resists, just back of the envelope kind of thing....

Skiff tanked out (needs a 2% cpu implant) with an orca boosting shields gets 133,800 ehp. So, assuming the gank team has to kill you in 18 seconds and they have all the relevant skills my quick estimate was 12 guys minimum for that gank. If you see them coming...and you overheat your shield modules then 161,839 ehp and now they'll need 14 guys, minimum. Want to make double damn sure, 15-16 dudes in catalysts.

And yeah, your mining yield wont be that great either...but better than your mining yield if your ship is dead.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#589 - 2015-04-22 20:26:54 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Skiff tanked out (needs a 2% cpu implant) with an orca boosting shields gets 133,800 ehp. So, assuming the gank team has to kill you in 18 seconds and they have all the relevant skills my quick estimate was 12 guys minimum for that gank. If you see them coming...and you overheat your shield modules then 161,839 ehp and now they'll need 14 guys, minimum. Want to make double damn sure, 15-16 dudes in catalysts.

Actually, in this particular case, you'd probably want to upship to cruisers, or maybe a BC, rather than dessies.

However, in high sec, you rarely run across a fully tanked Skiff - most of them compromise the tank by having some sort of mining upgrade somewhere in the fit. And, they almost never overheat - high sec miners tend to be simi-AFK, probably haven't trained up Thermodynamics, and/or simply forget (or don't know) how to overheat their modules. Most high sec miners have very limited experience with PVP, you know.
Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#590 - 2015-04-22 20:46:33 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
Amusing idea. But, what happens if someone flips the can? Does the mining ship just stop moving or does it sail off out of the belt?

Same as orbiting a ship that gets popped. Sail out. I'm sure he doesn't mind doing it with style in his Skiff.
EvilweaselSA wrote:

ladies and gentlemen, our mining expert, who doesn't know how much of a benefit a skiff has over a procurer, who believes the only way to mine safely is to fit for max yield, who can't figure out how to use a can, and who has no idea that it's not 2012

oh, also, he believes that regions that have more bot miners would have more expensive trit than regions that had less bot miners in nullsec, for some reason that is beyond us mortals

Usual gewnspeak, trying to troll, ignoring everything, typical density and no-brain show.
Once again, for special people, and those who are below them, and gewns who are below those:
1) There are no meaningful advantages of Skiff over Procurer.
2) If something attacks the miner and it's not a low-dps rat, the miner is dead, no matter what he pilots.
3) The only defense against said attack is lessen the exposure. Which means mine for less time, compensating with efficiency.
4) Cans are cretin magnets. Use them to bring 1001 ganktards to your belt. Orbiting doesn't work since you're dead no matter what you do if you're hit.


Just did some quick and simple math....keep in mind the simple part---i.e. I didn't sit down and figure damage types, resists, just back of the envelope kind of thing....

Skiff tanked out (needs a 2% cpu implant) with an orca boosting shields gets 133,800 ehp. So, assuming the gank team has to kill you in 18 seconds and they have all the relevant skills my quick estimate was 12 guys minimum for that gank. If you see them coming...and you overheat your shield modules then 161,839 ehp and now they'll need 14 guys, minimum. Want to make double damn sure, 15-16 dudes in catalysts.

And yeah, your mining yield wont be that great either...but better than your mining yield if your ship is dead.


Or they just bump you and now your Skiff is useless. If only you were in the actual barge, you'd be done by the time they arrive and not there anymore, but no, gotta sit there and troll with Skiffs.

Now without sarcasm, I know Skiff is an efficient solution to troll gankbears. Unfortunately, that's the only thing it's efficient with. You can troll in it, and it fares well, you try to mine in it - you are wrong.

Mining yield of a Covetor over Skiff will pay off the price of a Covetor in about 3-5 hours. So, every 3-5 hours you mine in Skiff, you LOSE a Covetor. That's why Skiff is u-n-v-i-a-b-l-e - trying to mine in it is self-ganking a Covetor every 3-5 hours. Maybe this analogy will get through to you, if numbers are so difficult concept to grasp for you.

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.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#591 - 2015-04-22 21:02:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Mining yield of a Covetor over Skiff will pay off the price of a Covetor in about 3-5 hours. So, every 3-5 hours you mine in Skiff, you LOSE a Covetor. That's why Skiff is u-n-v-i-a-b-l-e - trying to mine in it is self-ganking a Covetor every 3-5 hours. Maybe this analogy will get through to you, if numbers are so difficult concept to grasp for you.


Ok, I really was not planning to get involved again, but let's be clear: This is an entirely useless statement.

If you wanted to go this route the appropriate calculation should have been:

((Covertor Isk Cost / (Average number of hours between being suicide ganked in a Covetor) - ((Covetor Mining Rate - Skiff Mining Rate) Isk/Hr)) = X

If X is greater than 0, Covetor mining is economical compared to skiffs. If it is negative, Skiff is the winner.

Second, at a quick glance, EFT tells me that a Covetor gets almost exactly 20% yield more than a Skiff, while a fully fit Covetor costs 50 million.

So are you seriously telling me the 20% increase from Skiff to Covetor allows you to pay off a 50 mil isk Covetor in 3-5 hours of mining?

That means the skiff in highsec is pulling in 50-83 million an hour! WHAT? That doesn't resemble the 20 million isk/hour numbers I hear tossed around all the time by highsec miners!

I CALL COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT.


But I forgive you, since
Basil Pupkin wrote:
numbers are so difficult to grasp.
Hippinse
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#592 - 2015-04-22 21:06:49 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
So we as nullsec entities run out of game recruitment programs to get thousands of brand new players into eve online. We get them directly into nullsec and try to direct them to easy activities that they can do within a few days. Mining is the worst income per hour activity in the game at this point for an individual.

CCP announces a new change that will fix certain rocks to be rare and more valuable (namely ark) that a new player could cherry pick for some meaningful income. Also, these changes will allow a new player in null to be able to mine their own minerals in null to produce meaningful amounts of t1 items without having to import raw minerals or export a gigantic surplus of high end minerals that they can't use.

Yet- there are people that don't understand the changes that are claiming that this is an unfair boost to nullsec.


All I'm sayin is that highsec hates new players


Just because you're recruiting new players doesn't mean that all the new players are in null. Very nice "think of the children" to try to discredit anyone who isn't you, though. (bonus points for the "anyone who disagrees doesn't understand", and using sweeping generalities while complaining about anything anyone else says that you can twist into a generality.)
Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#593 - 2015-04-22 21:17:42 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Mining yield of a Covetor over Skiff will pay off the price of a Covetor in about 3-5 hours. So, every 3-5 hours you mine in Skiff, you LOSE a Covetor. That's why Skiff is u-n-v-i-a-b-l-e - trying to mine in it is self-ganking a Covetor every 3-5 hours. Maybe this analogy will get through to you, if numbers are so difficult concept to grasp for you.


Ok, I really was not planning to get involved again, but let's be clear: This is an entirely useless statement.

If you wanted to go this route the appropriate calculation should have been:

(Covertor Isk Cost / (Average number of hours between being suicide ganked in a Covetor) - ((Covetor Mining Rate - Skiff Mining Rate) Isk/Hr)) = X

If X is greater than 0, Covetor mining is economical compared to skiffs. If it is negative, Skiff is the winner.

Second, at a quick glance, EFT tells me that a Covetor gets almost exactly 20% yield more than a Skiff, while a fully fit Covetor costs 50 million.

So are you seriously telling me the 20% increase from Skiff to Covetor allows you to pay off a 50 mil isk Covetor in 3-5 hours of mining?

That means the skiff in highsec is pulling in 50-83 million an hour! WHAT? That doesn't resemble the 20 million isk/hour numbers I hear tossed around all the time by highsec miners!

I CALL COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT.
ALTHOUGH I FORGIVE YOU, SINCE
Basil Pupkin wrote:
numbers are so difficult to grasp.



I call your bullshit and raise you a numerical disability.

First, I never lost a barge. Not even once. Put infinity in your (Average number of hours between being suicide ganked in a Covetor) variable and enjoy.

Second, BEFORE the announcement of change, mining hovered at 35-40 million ISK per hour (full yield, orca buffs, scordite), 20% of that in 5 hours is 100%, adding here that your full fit Covetor at 50 million is overpriced (base hull 32 + 3x3 modulated strip miners + 2x0.5 MLU = 42, and rigs are dirt cheap) and 20% advantage is over yield Skiff as opposed to proposed tank Skiff, not even mentioning skillpoint requirements difference, I say that I were completely right.

5 hours is the perfect case, but knowing that Skiff loses a lot more ore on an incomplete cycle and while you switch targets, and there are things like rorqual buffs and pre-announcement gneiss, 3 hours is the opposite case, also quite right.

There is a reason only numerically enabled people can mine.

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.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#594 - 2015-04-22 21:31:15 UTC
I'm on page 30 of CODE. killboard and i havent found a single skiff kill/loss. Can anyone help me?
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#595 - 2015-04-22 21:33:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
Basil Pupkin wrote:

I call your bullshit and raise you a numerical disability.

First, I never lost a barge. Not even once. Put infinity in your (Average number of hours between being suicide ganked in a Covetor) variable and enjoy.

Second, BEFORE the announcement of change, mining hovered at 35-40 million ISK per hour (full yield, orca buffs, scordite), 20% of that in 5 hours is 100%, adding here that your full fit Covetor at 50 million is overpriced (base hull 32 + 3x3 modulated strip miners + 2x0.5 MLU = 42, and rigs are dirt cheap) and 20% advantage is over yield Skiff as opposed to proposed tank Skiff, not even mentioning skillpoint requirements difference, I say that I were completely right.

5 hours is the perfect case, but knowing that Skiff loses a lot more ore on an incomplete cycle and while you switch targets, and there are things like rorqual buffs and pre-announcement gneiss, 3 hours is the opposite case, also quite right.

There is a reason only numerically enabled people can mine.

Yeah, I call bullshit on 40m isk/hr.

Prices for trit/pyer have not changed significantly since any of the announcements, so using modern numbers is fine here. A covetor fit for full yield and perfect orca bonuses only hits 2485 m^3/minute: http://i.imgur.com/qPP0zAs.jpg

Plug that into eve-industry.org's mining profit calculator: http://i.imgur.com/cow0jvt.png?1

Less than 30m isk/hr, and that relies on refining at a POS for the extra yield. This is also an optimistic figure due to the occasional incomplete cycle.

This is a 25% reduction in what you were claiming.

Also, a yield skiff has 90k EHP (before shield bonuses), and a yield of 2229, which is within 10% of the covetor. This works out to a 3m isk/hr yield bonus for the covetor. This works out to 14 hours of mining to "self-gank" a covetor.

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

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#596 - 2015-04-22 21:46:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Basil Pupkin wrote:

I call your bullshit and raise you a numerical disability.

First, I never lost a barge. Not even once. Put infinity in your (Average number of hours between being suicide ganked in a Covetor) variable and enjoy.

Second, BEFORE the announcement of change, mining hovered at 35-40 million ISK per hour (full yield, orca buffs, scordite), 20% of that in 5 hours is 100%, adding here that your full fit Covetor at 50 million is overpriced (base hull 32 + 3x3 modulated strip miners + 2x0.5 MLU = 42, and rigs are dirt cheap) and 20% advantage is over yield Skiff as opposed to proposed tank Skiff, not even mentioning skillpoint requirements difference, I say that I were completely right.

5 hours is the perfect case, but knowing that Skiff loses a lot more ore on an incomplete cycle and while you switch targets, and there are things like rorqual buffs and pre-announcement gneiss, 3 hours is the opposite case, also quite right.

There is a reason only numerically enabled people can mine.

Do you even play? Honestly? "Never lost a barge" means nothing when you don't log in. Especially when a quick glance at Zkill shows me 30 dead covetors dead today alone.

Your numbers literally assume the miner never dies while in a Covetor which is a favorite target for ganking behind Mack/Hulks.
you assume that the ship has perfect orca boosts and does absolutely nothing but mine the most valuable highsec mineral every single cycle, without waste, without warping, instantly ending the cycle and swapping to a new Scordite rock every time a rock would be depleted.

You then go on to say that the skiff has huge inefficiencies and that drives the difference further, while still comparing the altered skiff numbers to the perfect theoretical Covetor numbers. What the serious ****?

1x Covetor @ 32 Mil = 32 Mil
3x Modulated Strip Miner II's @ 3.2 Mil = 9.6 Mil
3x Scordite Mining Crystal II's @ .13 Mil = .5 Mil
1x DCU II @ .35 Mil = .35 Mil.
1 MLU II @ .5 Mil = .5 Mil.
3x Medium Core Defense Field Extenders @ 1.5 Mil = 4.5 Mil
10x Warrior I's = Free
1x Survey scanner = Free
__________________________________
32 + 9.6+.5+.35+.5+4.5 = 47.45 Mil

If you use t2 light drones and have a set of replacement crystals, it hits 49.5 Mil. My bad, I was off by 500k.

And no, the 20% difference was between them with no MLU's. If we are going to use MLU's then the difference shrinks, since the Covetor is likely to use 1 MLU and one 1 DCU while the Skiff uses 2 MLU and 1 DCU. At which point it's a 12 % difference, not 20%.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#597 - 2015-04-22 22:25:45 UTC
Rowells wrote:
I'm on page 30 of CODE. killboard and i havent found a single skiff kill/loss. Can anyone help me?

Buried in the noise. The fail-tank Retrivers, Macks, Covs and Hulks are a lot easier to kill with only 1-2 dessies and with much less prep time, so you'll see a ton more of them for each Skiff kill.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#598 - 2015-04-22 22:31:35 UTC
Looking at skiff losses overall is pretty easy: https://zkillboard.com/ship/22546/losses/

Going back a few pages, I see one suicide gank in highsec by Karmafleet ( :shobon: ) on a hilariously anti-tanked skiff, and another by three taloses (and at 70m a pop, they lost money on that gank. I hope it was worth it!) The vast majority of Skiff losses are in nullsec.

Meanwhile: https://zkillboard.com/ship/17478/

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

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#599 - 2015-04-22 22:36:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Omniblivion
CCP Fozzie


I know there has been a lot of random junk in this thread, but hopefully you're still reading. It's time for me to give some constructive feedback for your consideration.

Mercoxit


I believe that we need a strong candidate to make cherry picking (or "Ninja Mining") a profession, and Mercoxit would serve that purpose greatly. Morphite is also greatly oversupplied at the moment and is a near negligible cost in t2 equipment. Therefore, I'm suggesting that we completely remove Mercoxit from all ore anoms that spawn from nullsec industrial upgrades. Here's why:

Oversupply
As nullsec mining becomes more worthwhile, more people will be stripping and cycling ore anomalies. With a consistent cycling of belts, the supply of Mercoxit/Morphite will continue to increase, further dunking the price. Mercoxit alone is large (40m3), but compressed Mercoxit is only 0.1 m3 (wtf?), so it is exceptionally easy to get to an upgraded refinery and ship to empire. This means that most mercoxit mined will easily get to market.

Low Income per Hour
While an individual Mercoxit rock is "valuable", Mercoxit is 40m3 per unit. Furthermore, Mercoxit is mined significantly slower than any other ore.

A fully boosted hulk mines ore at about 3421 m3/min excluding drones.

A fully boosted hulk with mercoxit rig mines Mercoxit at about 2165 m3/min (drones are not possible). This means that you're mining about 54 units of mercoxit a minute in a hulk, equating to approximately 8262 units of morphite every hour- approximately 57 mil per hour assuming you have a hauler.

As the refine rate of mercoxit increases from 293->300 and as the overall supply increases, that isk per hour will fall even further. A max hulk pilot can make upwards of 70 mil isk/hr on other ores with existing prices. (note: not many people use hulks in null because of clicks and risk)

Suggestion
Remove mercoxit from all ore anomalies. Leave mercoxit in static belts and in scannable sites in nullsec. Reduce the m3 on mercoxit to a reasonable size that allows for smaller (ninja) ships to mine it. Perhaps give a mercoxit mining bonus to mining frigates.

Potential Results
In making those changes, Mercoxit will turn cherry picking into a profession. There will be meaningful rewards in any player traversing nullsec looking for Mercoxit deposits and scan-able sites with Mercoxit. There are no sites that currently are a huge "win" for a miner or explorer- but making this change would enable the mining types to have "jackpots" where they have potential to make some serious ISK mining Mercoxit. This would also make it worthwhile for anyone in the game to scan down wormholes and seek out mercoxit in wh space- even for highsec miners.

Arkonor/Bistot
I would not consider these ores of being worthy of ninja-mining even with the upcoming changes. There will be a consistent supply of Arkonor/Bistot coming from ore anoms, and without mining boosts, the income of ninja mining Arkonor and Bistot would still be pretty low for an individual account.



A change such as the above would give all players an opportunity to do some high risk ninja-mining that would lead to greater rewards, rather than making all mining a rather repetitive task with no real chance of "hitting it big".


Thanks to Querns for helping with this data.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#600 - 2015-04-22 22:41:03 UTC
Seconding the idea that Mercoxit live only in static belts and randomly-spawned anomalies. Making this mineral rarer will help get it out of the dumpster it is currently in.

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