Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

CaptainFalcon07
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
With the removal of drone loot, it seems that its the final nail on the coffin of a mining minerals with guns, along with removal of meta 0 modules from npc wrecks.
Since people can no longer really mine mineral with weapons anymore, actual rock mining is now the only real source of minerals. Mining however is very boring and still a very low paying venture despite minerals changes, not to mention with the countless ganks against highsec miners. I really doubt people will start jumping on to mining so easily, it will take a long time for the number of miners to significantly increase. Even then I doubt they could ever mine as much as legions of ratters in the Drone Regions could pull.
With all the changes made, I find it hard to believe that mining minerals will return the supply and prices to pre-change levels.
We can expect Tier 3 Battleships to stay at 200+ million for a good while. |

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right? |

CaptainFalcon07
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right?
Well of course I realize that when Battleships cost half a billion. I'm saying that I really doubt mineral prices will ever fall back down to pre-change levels. Unless CCP decides to add another mineral faucet like they did with drone alloys.
People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk. |

sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Drone nerf is only part of it.
Both bot banning and hulkagaddon, unlike drone changes, are not permanent. The banned bots will be back eventually. And SiSi Hulk material changes (more minerials, less moon goo) will suck the air out of hulkagaddon upon arrival.
Minerial prices will go back up a bit, but how much is anyone's guess. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |

Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
598
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 22:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Overall you are correct. Prices will stabilize at a higher point than when there was gunmining.
However, I highly doubt it will be apocalyptic. Furthermore, if it is, it`s an easy fix.
Long story short, don`t worry about it. You;re too pretty to worry. Now come sit on your uncle`s lap...
*leers greedily* |

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:baltec1 wrote:You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right? Well of course I realize that when Battleships cost half a billion. I'm saying that I really doubt mineral prices will ever fall back down to pre-change levels. Unless CCP decides to add another mineral faucet like they did with drone alloys. People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk.
That is not a bad thing. |

CaptainFalcon07
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Oh no I'm not worried at all about the higher prices of ships, I am actually profiting from the increasing price of minerals. |

Roisin Saoirse
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:CaptainFalcon07 wrote:People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk. That is not a bad thing. Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them.
If you think people are risk-averse carebears now, wait until the cost of ships hits an all-time high. |

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1461
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
Assuming bot-bans continue and bots are eventually reduced to a minority contributor of minerals, prices for minerals will stabilise at the level which actual people can be bothered mining.
With an ongoing ganking campaign, mineral prices will rise and hisec mining will be more attractive. So if you are someone intent on driving miners out of hisec, what you actually need to do is flood the hisec market with minerals such that hisec mining become worth much less than a human would be bothered working for.
|

Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
598
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:Oh no I'm not worried at all about the higher prices of ships, I am actually profiting from the increasing price of minerals.
Ah, I see. Then, yes, from a business perspective you should assume that prices will stabilize at a higher point, it's a little early to predict exactly where though. I would recommend checking the S&I and MD sub-forums occasionally as things progress, as this topic will assuredly come up multiple times over the next few months.
|

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:baltec1 wrote:CaptainFalcon07 wrote:People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk. That is not a bad thing. Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them. If you think people are risk-averse carebears now, wait until the cost of ships hits an all-time high.
They will swap to cheaper ships which means more T1 cruisers which, frankly are much more fun in pvp. |

Virgil Travis
GWA Corp Unified Church of the Unobligated
303
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:baltec1 wrote:CaptainFalcon07 wrote:People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk. That is not a bad thing. Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them. If you think people are risk-averse carebears now, wait until the cost of ships hits an all-time high.
This is a bit of a whacky idea, maybe just me being a bit of a crackpot flake but possibly they could fly cheaper ships, like cruisers and such. How long have people being saying that cruisers have been much overlooked in pvp?
Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method |

Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
598
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:They will swap to cheaper ships which means more T1 cruisers which, frankly are much more fun in pvp.
Ya, considering losses were inconsequential before and t1 frigs and cruisers were all but phased out of the game, there is a lot of leeway for rising prices.
|

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7619
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:42:00 -
[14] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them. No, it's a good thing because it might entice people into flying smaller ships in larger numbers, thereby creating more variety in what you see on the battlefield. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Be a smarter newbie, don't fall into the trap of lvl V skills. |

Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra Gallente Federation
83
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:If you think people are risk-averse carebears now, wait until the cost of ships hits an all-time high. So, even more incentive to go join a Null alliance that takes care of ship/hull replacement?
PS: I hear the Goons had a level 5 CTA mining op not to long ago, how did that go? LOL at Goons mining for their own ships. "I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
|

Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
598
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Mortimer Civeri wrote:PS: I hear the Goons had a level 5 CTA mining op not to long ago, how did that go? LOL at Goons mining for their own ships.
Sounds reliable.
|

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
196
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right?
The only reason this is true is because intro prices are always out of wack due to lack of information and wild speculation by marketeers. I bought my first hulk for 500 mill... not because that was the real value but because there were so few in the beginning and people were still wondering where the price was going to land. Same with my first orca at 800 million.
So no shocker or surprising realization forthcoming. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |

Roisin Saoirse
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Roisin Saoirse wrote:Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them. No, it's a good thing because it might entice people into flying smaller ships in larger numbers, thereby creating more variety in what you see on the battlefield. Because clearly, even more blobs are the best thing for EVE PvP.  |

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:49:00 -
[19] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:baltec1 wrote:You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right? The only reason this is true is because intro prices are always out of wack due to lack of information and wild speculation by marketeers. I bought my first hulk for 500 mill... not because that was the real value but because there were so few in the beginning and people were still wondering where the price was going to land. Same with my first orca at 800 million. So no shocker or surprising realization forthcoming.
Battleships had been in game for several years... |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7619
|
Posted - 2012.06.01 23:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:Because clearly, even more blobs are the best thing for EVE PvP.  Who said anything about blobs?
Smaller ships in larger numbers, as in more smaller ships will be used, replacing those large, expensive ships.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Be a smarter newbie, don't fall into the trap of lvl V skills. |

Doc Severide
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:07:00 -
[21] - Quote
Roisin Saoirse wrote:baltec1 wrote:CaptainFalcon07 wrote:People are dumping their large stockpile minerals and selling them at the high prices, but eventually once that dump is gone mineral prices will raise up to a new a equilibrium. It would not be surprising if Tier 3 Battleships became 300 million isk. That is not a bad thing. Sure, if you like the population of EVE to be players who refuse endanger their expensive ships because it takes a ridiculous amount of time to grind back the money to replace them. If you think people are risk-averse carebears now, wait until the cost of ships hits an all-time high. Exactly !!!
It was said: " You do realise that these prices are still lower than several years ago right?"
But since that time several years ago, you have many many new players who never saw those old prices. Who the hell is gonna fight when a ship that was 50 Million ISK today is 300 Million ISK tomorrow, and the time it takes for a newer player to earn that ISK is rediculous? I dunno, it sounds like crap to me...and I dont want to go back to crappy T1 Frigates because they are cheaper but now still cost as much as a Drake did last week... |

Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
598
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
Doc Severide wrote:But since that time several years ago, you have many many new players who never saw those old prices. Who the hell is gonna fight when a ship that was 50 Million ISK today is 300 Million ISK tomorrow, and the time it takes for a newer player to earn that ISK is rediculous? I dunno, it sounds like crap to me...and I dont want to go back to crappy T1 Frigates because they are cheaper but now still cost as much as a Drake did last week...
Good thing, then, that we're not faced with your farcically hyperbolic 500% increase in prices across the board.
Get a grip. |

CaptainFalcon07
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
A possible way to prevent the skyrocket of mineral price is the complete removal of the insurance system. Doing away with the insurance would remove an isk faucet from the economy.
Why is insurance an isk faucet? Its simple:
You buy a ship from the seller for 100 million isk. Even if you didn't insure the ship, you would receive maybe about 30-40 million back from the ship loss from insurance.
The money given to the seller would not change, but the buyer of the ship gets 30-40 million in place of destroyed minerals.
As a result 40 million is injected into the economy, causing inflation and price raise.
But I assume removing the insurance system would create a massive wave of rage from many players. So I doubt this
solution would never come to light. |

Myrkala
Missions Mining and Mayhem Northern Coalition.
7
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Roisin Saoirse wrote:Because clearly, even more blobs are the best thing for EVE PvP.  Who said anything about blobs? Smaller ships in larger numbers, as in more smaller ships will be used, replacing those large, expensive ships.
It would change 0.0 a little maybe, since loosing a big pile of BS is more expensive... but if you bring enough of those large ships the opposition is less likely to risk their smaller BS fleet since the cost of loosing is proportionally much higher than before. T1 Cruisers aren't going to work well against a good Battleship fleet.
Though since its the base minerals that are being effected the most we will see more T2 and T3 Cruiser fleets... specifically Tengu blobs.
Tier 3 BCs can pick up the slack from less BS, in the form of similar dmg projection but lesser staying power (even though they have much improved mobility) and more vulnerability to smaller ships like frigates.
I'd be really surprised if bringing a T1 Cruiser to a CTA in Alliances across EVE becomes an accepted norm... what is more likely is that alliances with weak industrial backbones that rely on pure monetary income will have a harder time competing with alliances that have good infrastructure. I guess that is a good thing.
I'm not sure how mining is balanced but it would probably be a good idea to decide how long it should take a fully skilled and specialized miner to gather materials for a ship. I can't really give any ideas on what would be a good amount, but 6-8 hours mining for a Tier3 BS sounds good to me. It's all about balancing the time investment to control how expensive the ship should be, but it should always be more worthwhile time-wise to mine and build a ship than to just grind isk. It is really difficult to balance well when you try to factor supply and demand into it as well... |

Stirko Hek
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 00:23:00 -
[25] - Quote
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:A possible way to prevent the skyrocket of mineral price is the complete removal of the insurance system. Doing away with the insurance would remove an isk faucet from the economy.
Why is insurance an isk faucet? Its simple:
You buy a ship from the seller for 100 million isk. Even if you didn't insure the ship, you would receive maybe about 30-40 million back from the ship loss from insurance.
The money given to the seller would not change, but the buyer of the ship gets 30-40 million in place of destroyed minerals.
As a result 40 million is injected into the economy, causing inflation and price raise.
But I assume removing the insurance system would create a massive wave of rage from many players. So I doubt this
solution would never come to light.
This is a horrible idea and you should be ashamed of yourself. Your argument really is flawed, if we were to follow your logic, NPC bounties should also be removed as well as misison reward pay outs because they're just ISK injected into the economy.
Just, no. |

Ris Dnalor
Black Rebel Rifter Club
339
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 02:55:00 -
[26] - Quote
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:With the removal of drone loot, it seems that its the final nail on the coffin of a mining minerals with guns, along with removal of meta 0 modules from npc wrecks.
Since people can no longer really mine mineral with weapons anymore, actual rock mining is now the only real source of minerals. Mining however is very boring and still a very low paying venture despite minerals changes, not to mention with the countless ganks against highsec miners. I really doubt people will start jumping on to mining so easily, it will take a long time for the number of miners to significantly increase. Even then I doubt they could ever mine as much as legions of ratters in the Drone Regions could pull.
With all the changes made, I find it hard to believe that mining minerals will return the supply and prices to pre-change levels.
We can expect Tier 3 Battleships to stay at 200+ million for a good while.
play long enough and you'll see it happen.
also, buy 1000 of eveything, and store it somewhere safe. that'll be your ticket to riches one day. Wish I'd done that back in 2003.........
... |

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 09:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
Myrkala wrote:Tippia wrote:Roisin Saoirse wrote:Because clearly, even more blobs are the best thing for EVE PvP.  Who said anything about blobs? Smaller ships in larger numbers, as in more smaller ships will be used, replacing those large, expensive ships. It would change 0.0 a little maybe, since loosing a big pile of BS is more expensive... but if you bring enough of those large ships the opposition is less likely to risk their smaller BS fleet since the cost of loosing is proportionally much higher than before. T1 Cruisers aren't going to work well against a good Battleship fleet. Though since its the base minerals that are being effected the most we will see more T2 and T3 Cruiser fleets... specifically Tengu blobs. Tier 3 BCs can pick up the slack from less BS, in the form of similar dmg projection but lesser staying power (even though they have much improved mobility) and more vulnerability to smaller ships like frigates. I'd be really surprised if bringing a T1 Cruiser to a CTA in Alliances across EVE becomes an accepted norm... what is more likely is that alliances with weak industrial backbones that rely on pure monetary income will have a harder time competing with alliances that have good infrastructure. I guess that is a good thing.
Well the people in venal I was flying with managed to defend venal for years with just t1 and t2 cruisers. We had an entire line of caracals which did very well. Even now goons have blackbirds in their main fleets and I still sometimes grab a thorax as they are great fun. Honestly the t1 cruisers are by far the best ships for having fun with. |

Kreeia Dgore
EntroPrelatial Industria T A B O O
31
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 10:12:00 -
[28] - Quote
I still see the mission loot as a major income of minerals into the system. Does anyone have any numbers to either back up or decline my opinion? |

baltec1
1313
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 10:13:00 -
[29] - Quote
Kreeia Dgore wrote:I still see the mission loot as a major income of minerals into the system. Does anyone have any numbers to either back up or decline my opinion?
Didn't CCP remove all meta 0 loot from rat drops? |

Roisin Saoirse
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2012.06.02 13:30:00 -
[30] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kreeia Dgore wrote:I still see the mission loot as a major income of minerals into the system. Does anyone have any numbers to either back up or decline my opinion? Didn't CCP remove all meta 0 loot from rat drops? Only meta 0 loot, there's still tons of meta 1 and 2 that just end up being recycled. |
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |