EVE General Discussion

Ah....ehrm...you do realize that these are virtual minerals were talking about, right?

As in, CCP can at any time adjust the spawn rate of the said minerals thus averting "The great mineral crisis of 2015 bicoz too many missiles fired at NPC-s..."

Just sayin'...

You're entitled to your opinions. Whether anyone believes ammo is the biggest mineral sink in eve or not isn't really relevant to my post though.

And besides, the amount of minerals needed to cause 24,000,000,000 damage to NPCs every single day is significant by any standard, even if it isn't a larger amount than the amount sunk into PVP losses.

Really? I do just fine in most pve with my pvp fit ships.


Malcanis put down some excellent stats earlier in the thread. I recommend reading his posts until someone can come up with some that are more complete.

Also, I fully support the OP's request for information. I would love to see the exact stats about the mineral consumption of ammunition in both pvp and pve as a comparison. I would also like to see this side by side with the mineral consumption of ships and structures destroyed in pve and in pvp. I will say that the minerals/hp stat is useless as calculated against the base HP of ships because of logistics and local reps though. That stat would only be useful for looking at reported killmails. In addition, the actual resistances of pve ships is poorly documented online. There is a huge amount of info about which resists are higher or lower, but very little about actual percentages and local rep amounts.

I don't think it was linked in order to refer to the first chapter. How it's organised and where the information is located is secondary to the messages:

Section 5.3 (page 15):
In EVE Online, any player may attack any other player if they choose to, no
matter where they happen to be. This is because EVE Online is essentially
a PvP (Player versus Player) game at its core.

Section 7 (page 22):
The essential core concept of EVE Online is that it is full time PvP in a sandbox
environment.

Being passionate about a position and arguing it is one thing, ignoring fact and calling it fabricated bullshit does nothing but undermine credibility in a discussion.

A couple of issues:

Structures will still get destroyed, just not by shooting them. The Entosis link will do it. So that mineral sink remains. In fact it could get bigger as we will be able to destroy outposts.

I mine and build. I use far more minerals making a few ships and I do making many different types of ammo. So my guess is ship destruction is more important as a mineral sink.

A different mineral sink is players leaving the game, abandoning huge stocks of ships, and sometimes minerals, in inactive accounts.

So, I went to eve-industry.org to get an idea of how much tritanium went into making a titan. 3,429,807,599.00 units (went with the Erebus). Then I looked how many to make a cruise missile, 1,658.00. That is it takes 2,068,641.50 worth of cruise missiles to provide the same amount of tritanium that is in a titan. Using Malcanis' 1 missile/second and dividing 2,068,641.50 by 3600 we get 574.62 hours of continuous missile shooting or about 24 days. Assuming our raven pilot is playing a more reasonable, yet still pretty impressive, 4 hours a day it would take 143.66 days of playing expend enough cruise missiles to equal the amount of tritanium that is in 1 titan.

And on the front page I see three dead titan and a dead Aeon, and a dead Nyx. All in the last 7 days. So, lets say 2,050,000 cruise missiles/titan for a grand total of 6,150,000 cruise missiles. And 1,080,000 cruise missiles for the 2 supers. A total of 7,230,000 cruise missiles need to be fired for the PvE guys to match what was destroyed in the last 7 days alone for just the big kills. And another 285,000 cruise missiles for just the obelisks killed on the front page of freighter kills. 305,526.37 for the eight charon kills today as well. We are closing in on almost 8 million cruise missiles.

Ishtanchuk, you have ALOT of ratting to do.

Edit:

For freighter, from April 10 to May 4 there were 50 Obelisks killed. That is a tad under 35 million cruise missiles, using just tritanium if we assume that is a reasonable monthly number and multiply by 12. And when we multiply by the other racial freighters we are talking about 140 million cruise missiles over the course of the year for just freighters alone.

That is a alot of ****ing cruise missiles ratters are going to have to shoot.

Edit 2: Whoops, missed 3 obelisks that died on the 10th of April on the second page. But what the heck, lets just keep the above numbers. You get the point, PvP seems to require quite a bit of minerals.

Edit 3: Well, I seemed to have picked a cruise missile with...well not a low tritanium requirement, but given the ranges on tritanium requirements for different cruise missile damage types I should have probably gone with an average. Oh well...this is just pall bark number crunching. We can see that we are talking about 100s of millions of cruise missiles once we factor in all the destruction in New Eden. While I am not trying to denigrate PvE players (hey, those miners do the rather thankless job of getting that ore on the marekt), I think the importance of PvP should not be underestimated now or in the future.

Ok. so lets try an pretend what you said made sense.

what are you getting at ? what difference does it make how the minerals in game are consumed ?

their consumed and consumed voraciously, it matters not how they are consumed, who consumes, or for what purpose they are consumed.

there is nothing in game gained by knowing who consumes more minerals.

if you really want some true insight into the eve market place look at the freaking QEN and draw some conclusions from it.

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Quarterly_Economic_Newsletter

for example this lil nugget right here ...



you could have used that in your post and twisted it into all kinds of fascinating ways...


unfortunately this was not the case. and were left with a confusing post about who uses up more minerals pvps or pves.

and no reason for why it matters.

I'm the other guy.

The New Player FAQ is an official CCP publication. PvP initially comes up in a chapter named Basic Game Play, this is not an accident, nor is it inappropriate.

The What Is Eve Online chapter hints at Eve being a PvP environment, several times. You'd know that if you read it thoroughly, as you claim.

With that in mind; pray tell, what about the two posts that refer to the New Player FAQ quotes are fabricated bullshit?

This seems to be yet another case of simple misinterpretation. A more accurate saying would be the one mentioned in this video:



a good video, if I may add. I recommend watching it in full.

You failed to read it.