Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |

Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
41
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 05:41:00 -
[841] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:Vanessa Vansen wrote: The ORE Frigate should be able to gas mine effectively.
They could do that with just one slot; give it a 500% bonus. Three or four highslots could give a whole number that gives just slightly more than other ships. Highsec gas mining is super unprofitable right now, so a frigate that is a low ISK/low skill boat that could mine at the effectiveness of battlecruisers for gas would make a large amount of sense. In the world of ship bonuses, (at least for mining) slots don't matter.
that's one way, another would be to reduce the fitting cost depending on the skill level, similar to covert ops and cloak, but for miners and gas harvester |

Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
148
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 06:38:00 -
[842] - Quote
Honestly, I'm expecting new barge models to support the idea that they all will have roughly similar yields. They'll all need the same number of strip miners.
At which point it only makes sense to remove the ice/merc specialties and go with the tank/bay/yield specialties discussed in the blog. Whether or not you win the game matters not. -áIt's if you bought it. |

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 08:11:00 -
[843] - Quote
Mechael wrote: remove the ice/merc specialties
CCP seems really attached to those specialties. |

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 14:26:00 -
[844] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:Mechael wrote: remove the ice/merc specialties CCP seems really attached to those specialties.
think the other way around
if the Merc miner is better protected this will increase the risk vs reward for this occupation which will increase supply which will decrease prices for merc which will decrease prices for T2's which will decrease the financial risk for T2miner etc etc
Same for ICE
in a way by adding protection to the ships they will most likely influence the market in this case in a way that is unclear how this will effect the balance of the game
personally i think that this is also reason to make the T3 miner/industrial available at that time or in close succession of releasing this "balance" as the risk of an market "collapse" is a serious issue and adding more ships will add new reasons for construction and increases in demand which will then cancel the decrease in value for materials that are easier accessible
i wonder if CCP actualy have looked into this possiblity and ow they look at it .. if its discarded as part of the sandbox ( altough a direct result of there actions ) or are serieusly lokin into that to not mess with the market to much or even something they want to happen as part of evolution of EVE
|

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.28 17:20:00 -
[845] - Quote
also to add to my previeus post :
Quote:Mining output: first and most visible balancing factor, plan is to increase all barge mining output to be within an acceptable margin of the Hulk, not miles behind as it is currently.
this also in the Blog
which means that Yield will change in an upwards direction which will increase the risk of a market collapse due to increased resources becoming availble
ALSO on Fanfest CCP posted abot money sinks and inflation this will just add to that again imo als lower prices means lower taxes
|

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 04:23:00 -
[846] - Quote
SabuMaru ICE wrote:The sky is falling due to probable increased mining output.
I'd have to disagree. The hulk is still going to remain the highest efficiency miner. Per-player, the ceiling for the amount of minerals/ice/merx is probably not going to increase (which is probably why they're working off the original specialties, as to not cause what you're afraid of).
Personally, I'd like some dev clarification on the efficiency, for minerals, on the Mackinaw (will it be comparable to a step below the hulk, or will it be the same as the retriever, as it is now?). |

Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys
21
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 08:28:00 -
[847] - Quote
SabuMaru ICE wrote:also to add to my previeus post : Quote:Mining output: first and most visible balancing factor, plan is to increase all barge mining output to be within an acceptable margin of the Hulk, not miles behind as it is currently. this also in the Blog which means that Yield will change in an upwards direction which will increase the risk of a market collapse due to increased resources becoming availble
they also removed drone alloys and t1-modules from loot. so there are fewer minerals to begin with and overall more gear to be produced. even if noone would by t1 and for t2, t1 is still needed to build t2. i guess, there will be need for some more minerals. maybe the prices will go down a bit but they are quite high atm.
secondly, as MortisLegati mentioned already, they plan to buff only the mining ships which are worse than the hulk atm. so while there will be some more minerals coming from the buffed "noobs" the max yield per character does not change. regarding the big picture, there will not be a big change. |

Jonak
POS Builder Inc. Silent Requiem
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 09:23:00 -
[848] - Quote
So the Mack will get a better tank and the Hulks tank will be nerfed? I thought they were trying to eliminate the one-shot kills? |

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 11:45:00 -
[849] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:they also removed drone alloys and t1-modules from loot. so there are fewer minerals to begin with and overall more gear to be produced. even if noone would by t1 and for t2, t1 is still needed to build t2. i guess, there will be need for some more minerals. maybe the prices will go down a bit but they are quite high atm. secondly, as MortisLegati mentioned already, they plan to buff only the mining ships which are worse than the hulk atm. so while there will be some more minerals coming from the buffed "noobs" the max yield per character does not change. regarding the big picture, there will not be a big change.
I'm not only talking about Yield increase/balance only with an increase tank there is a different risk reward situation
and its not that i'm crying .. screaming or what so ever i'm just stating a possible outcome. atm mining is one of the least effective means of making ISK its a long slow process that in some cases is boring to say the least
EXAMPLE currently an Hulk with a good boost is capable of creating an income of 20-30 Mil isk per Hour but that takes at least 2 characters. compare this with a Lvl 4 Mission runner that can earn close to if not more then a 100 Mil Isk per hour. in both cases you need at least 2 players but the difference is about a 333%-500% in income per hour and that difference is not explained by the investment that is needed in time/skill/activity
if the market will decrease both parties will be effected that is true but the mission runner the least of that
as i understand from the CCP fan-fest video's and there Blogs is that they want to make Mining more interesting but if the Reward for it is not on par with the other way's of creating Isk then aren't they actually decreasing the value of being a miner ?
keep in mind i want to exchange idea's about this possibility and not dictated the way the game is balanced i'm trying to look at the bigger picture and not just the miners them selfs |

Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys
21
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 13:05:00 -
[850] - Quote
your last two post convey two different things, at least as i understand them. in the first, the one i quoted, you raised concerns about a collapsing market due to more resources available because "lower" tier mining vessels yielding more ore. in the second post you displayed the differences in income generated by missions and mining. right?
i do not get the point you want to make :( do you suggest, more minerals would bring the mineral prices down to a normal level and thereby further decrease the income a miner generates? then, i fail to see how that would collapse the market. yes, it would make mining even less desireable than it already is, but a market collapse ... dunno. the prolonged hulkageddon seems to be more disruptive, imo. it opens up possibilities for everybody not mining in high sec, but it definitely decreases the economical output of high sec.
or was there another point you wanted to make?
all in all, we have to wait for the changes to be expressed in hard numbers, before any decent conclusion can be drawn, i guess ^^ |
|

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 14:44:00 -
[851] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:your last two post convey two different things, at least as i understand them.
Both make a point, and are connected as i look at this market trend overview most of the mineral market is in a decline at the moment (decreasing demand ) with the highsec minerals going up slightly ( increasing demand ) ( this might be because of the drone changes )
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: in the first, the one i quoted, you raised concerns about a collapsing market due to more resources available because "lower" tier mining vessels yielding more ore. in the second post you displayed the differences in income generated by missions and mining.
i do not get the point you want to make :( do you suggest, more minerals would bring the mineral prices down to a normal level and thereby further decrease the income a miner generates? then, i fail to see how that would collapse the market. yes, it would make mining even less desireable than it already is, but a market collapse
the overview in my opinion shows that the minerals that are harder/riskier to get are starting to lose there value if the balance comes into play there is a risk for a further decline in that aspect . where in the end the market will stabilize around a lower value fort he low/0.0 sec minerals this means that a Miner will lose there income and will eventually be "forced" into missioning for instance as that will be the only way to keep his income or back to high sec to mine there
GÇâ
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: ... dunno. the prolonged hulkageddon seems to be more disruptive, imo. it opens up possibilities for everybody not mining in high sec, but it definitely decreases the economical output of high sec. hulkageddon, when prolonged well have an upwards force as no one will have the minerals stored up for a "year of hell" that means that miners will have to take higher risks and will want to be rewarded appropiatly
with the balance this risk will be reduced. Hulkageddon might even not be viable in highsec meaning prices will drop for the high sec minerals
this added with an increase of high sec miners as lowsec and 0.0 sec might have a lower profit margin will then decrease them even further
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: or was there another point you wanted to make?
all in all, we have to wait for the changes to be expressed in hard numbers, before any decent conclusion can be drawn, i guess ^^
you do have a point about it being hard to predict without some solid numbers but i think its part of our jobs to express concerns and if possible give solutions also i'm bored at work .. so theory crafting
at the end i have fixed feelings about the balancing and are trying to figure out if the other items that will be rebalanced might have an positive upswing in the end
|

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 20:05:00 -
[852] - Quote
Jonak wrote:So the Mack will get a better tank and the Hulks tank will be nerfed? I thought they were trying to eliminate the one-shot kills?
Anything will only be a Nerf in comparison to other ships. The hulk will most likely actually get an EHP buff in and of its own. |

Sieges
University of Caille Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2012.06.29 22:35:00 -
[853] - Quote
Can the Mackinaw keep it's Ice yield bonus and can its Ore-hold be a multiple of 4 pretty please?? Something like 28,000 m3  |

Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 12:58:00 -
[854] - Quote
Mining Barge/Exhumer role sets A - Mercoxit, Ice, Non-Mercoxit (current exhumer roles) B - Tank, Cargo, Yield (suggested by CCP)
How to implement each role set?
Required dor both role sets: - Unify the requirements (tiericide), i.e. one for mining barges and one for exhumers
Optional: - Adjust n¼ütting numbers for ice modules to be inline with ore modules - Introduce Ore Hangar expanders, e.g. low slot modules (and rigs) with n¼üxed amount, or similar to current cargohold modules (and rigs) - Introduce Gas Strip Harvester I and Gas Strip Harvester II (around 2.5 times the yield of gas cloud harvesters, reason follows later)
Role set A - Mercoxit, Ice, Non-Mercoxit Adjust the bonus of Procurer and Retriever to copy that of Skiff and Mackinaw, e.g - Procurer - 50% more yield bonus for Mercoxit Mining Crystals per level - Retriever - same role bonus as Mackinaw (double yield but 25% penalty on duration), 4% reduction for duration of ice harvester per level - Covetor - as it is currently
Role set B - Tank, Cargo, Yield - Unify number of high slots, e.g. 2 for each mining barge and exhumer (other numbers would be possible, too) -> graphics will have to be changed - Double yield of Ice Harvester I and II (simalarity to Mackinaw) - Double yield of Modulated Deep Core Strip Miner II (similartity to Skiff) - Increase yield of Strip Miner I and Modulated Strip Miner II by 50% (similarity to Hulk) - Tank Bonus: additional EHP per level - Cargo Bonus: additional Ore Cargohold per level - Yield Bonus: increase yield or shorten duration to achieve same yield in the end as Exhumers currently (slightly less for future yield mining barge) - Decide which role is covered by the pairs Procurer/Skiff, Retriever/Mackinaw, and Covetor/Hulk, ev. grant a ship transformation via a GM or at least a rig reimbursement
Both role sets will easy the introduction of the mining frigate, i.e. it would be possible to give her up to 5 high slots. Due to the 2 high slots and the Gas Strip Harvesters having around 2.5 times the yield of their Gas Cloud Harvester counterpart, the mining frigates will be either slightly better (factor < 2.5) or slightly worse (factor > 2.5) in gas harvesting assuming that the frigate can n¼üt 5 gas cloud harvesters. |

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 16:31:00 -
[855] - Quote
Vanessa Vansen wrote: - Unify the requirements (tiericide), i.e. one for mining barges and one for exhumers
- Introduce Ore Hangar expanders, e.g. low slot modules (and rigs) with n¼üxed amount, or similar to current cargohold modules (and rigs)
-That's not the whole idea for tiericide. The tiericide portion that applies most directly to barges was the elimination of stepped requirements and overall statistics gain between ships with lower and ships with higher skill requirements. By giving barges all the same requirement and allowing it to be a decision between different yield/tank/cargo stat combinations, skill-wise, the tiers are gone.
-This defeats the entire purpose of the 'conversion' to ore bays on some ships (notably the Hulk; they don't want you using it as a solo ship without gimping your effectiveness, it's part of tiericide, elsewise it would lead everyone straight to hulk(what they're stating they're trying to get rid of)). They want people to choose between (extra) tank and yield, not tank/yield/cargo between the barges
Vanessa Vansen wrote: Role set A - Mercoxit, Ice, Non-Mercoxit Adjust the bonus of Procurer and Retriever to copy that of Skiff and Mackinaw, e.g - Procurer - 50% more yield bonus for Mercoxit Mining Crystals per level - Retriever - same role bonus as Mackinaw (double yield but 25% penalty on duration), 4% reduction for duration of ice harvester per level - Covetor - as it is currently
I have literally no idea where you're going with this, since by homogenizing each ship type between T1 and T2 causes a 'tier' again, rather than a Generalization>Specialization, which, for industrial ships, implies operating on a different level (apples and oranges) than its peers within its tech level. (Personally, I feel the Hulk disrupts this to some extent but at the same time I feel it fits snugly.)
Vanessa Vansen wrote: - Unify number of high slots, e.g. 2 for each mining barge and exhumer (other numbers would be possible, too) -> graphics will have to be changed
Honestly, I feel like people hover over this in their heads far too much when they think of 'make yields closer to the hulk/covetor'. Strip miners not multiplying the yield can be explained through a multitude of different reasons without making a complete overhaul to the mining ship lineup (think manufacturing here). It makes sense, still, to keep the same number of highslots as we have, if even just to maintain visual uniqueness.
Vanessa Vansen wrote: Role set B....
This would make some significant bit of sense if it applied solely to exhumers, but it's never stated. (Basically, you're saying that the same 'specialization' could be maintained between T1-T2 by doing the same anti-tiering as was operated through their Tech 1 variants.(Yet, by maintaining the same T2 yield bonus as the hulk, you've literally created a 'tier' between T1 and T2; no specialization beyond the option to be able to mine merx and ice.(I'm going to avoid saying gas, because...)))
Vanessa Vansen wrote: Make the mining frigate a gas harvester
Is probably the one thing I could say the current philosophy put forth by the changes as they've been designed will agree with.
I'm really speaking from what I can pull from through meditation on the general philosophy the team tasked with making the mining changes is operating under. It's folly to try to turn a developer's head away from a particular way of doing things unless there's a valid reason (something's majorly ****** with the way they're doing things, etc) to scrap it and go with an entirely new set of balance calculations/arguments (back to the drawing board). |

Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 17:27:00 -
[856] - Quote
I thought the problem would be that the Procurer is not used at all, since the 1 strip miner is outmined easily. Hence the idea of passing down some of the exhumer bonus to the mining barges.
Well, we'll have to wait and see what the devs will come up with. I just stated some basic ideas. The mining barges take the first step and the exhumers specialize in that direction. |

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
12
|
Posted - 2012.06.30 18:15:00 -
[857] - Quote
They were talking about pushing yields closer together between the smaller and larger barges. The most obvious way they would do that would be to give a large multiplier to yield on ships with fewer turrets. It kind of makes me think of a stacking penalty for strips . |

Gallinari
Diablo Industries
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.01 00:04:00 -
[858] - Quote
Absolutely loving the mining ship changes. I want that ORE frigate just for fun...ill probably never use it though but its damn sexy. |

Esceem
Suns of New Eden
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.01 10:43:00 -
[859] - Quote
"No" to the barge plans as they are now.
Removing the few racial minig frigates and cruisers is the wrong way: Thus, miners only have ships of one faction while ships of all races and factions are available to combat pilots.
Instead, every race should get it's own full range of mining ships.
All ORE ships could then become the miner's equivalent to prirate faction ships. Reworking these is a good idea, though. |

Maloraki en Cedoulain
Honest Engines Inc
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 02:10:00 -
[860] - Quote
Lots of interesting changes to look forward to. I'm particularly looking forward to trying out a drone Navitas. On the other hand as a frequent explorer I'm worried the Imicus's drone capability will be nerfed. I dearly love being able to easily clear Radar/Mag (high sec mostly) sites with it's current drone capability. Please don't nerf it to bad, pretty please? |
|

Thelron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2012.07.02 12:20:00 -
[861] - Quote
Esceem wrote:"No" to the barge plans as they are now.
Removing the few racial minig frigates and cruisers is the wrong way: Thus, miners only have ships of one faction while ships of all races and factions are available to combat pilots.
Instead, every race should get it's own full range of mining ships.
All ORE ships could then become the miner's equivalent to prirate faction ships. Reworking these is a good idea, though.
Confirming that Moas have long been known to auto-destruct if launched with mining lasers.
Now that Dessies and BCs have come along the racial lineups all have reasonable options for someone who wants to mine their way up the ladder, so it isn't like the "old days" when Caldari pilots looked at Gallente pilots and became physically ill. None of these options require built-in bonuses... the ships with those bonuses are certainly nice stepping-stones or cheap options when you don't mine often and rarely in the same place, but their removal isn't going to suddenly screw everyone over.
Additionally, the ORE ships in a lot of ways already ARE the equivalent to pirate ships, without the whole "buying them with LP" bit. They're the bigger, better, weirder, balance-bending entries in the list of "ships that break rocks," from a faction that's ALL about breaking rocks. Hence, their utter lack of any intentional offensive capabilities (anomaly-running Rorquals notwithstanding)... much like the pirate ships are generally wholly unsuitable to anyone not interested in blowing things up (as they tend to work off the same "double your guns" bonus style they tacked on to turn things like the Osprey into a part-time mining vessel).
Basically,
No. |

Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
170
|
Posted - 2012.07.03 17:58:00 -
[862] - Quote
Many people are suggesting a lot of interesting ideas, but nobody can predict what the Devs will really do. That being said, many players in this thread seem to be directly and/or indirectly suggesting T3 ORE ships. It sure seems like a T3 mining vessel would solve the "tiericide" issues by being massively flexible, and offering capabilities based upon loadout/build/skills. I seriously doubt we will get a T3 ORE ship. That being said, I give two thumbs up for the proposed rethinking/balancing of mining ships.
So, I encourage the Dev Team to give the specs to the fellow who wrote EFT so we can be working out builds for these new ORE ships well before release. |

Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2012.07.03 18:15:00 -
[863] - Quote
Urgg Boolean wrote:Many people are suggesting a lot of interesting ideas, but nobody can predict what the Devs will really do. That being said, many players in this thread seem to be directly and/or indirectly suggesting T3 ORE ships. It sure seems like a T3 mining vessel would solve the "tiericide" issues by being massively flexible, and offering capabilities based upon loadout/build/skills. I seriously doubt we will get a T3 ORE ship. That being said, I give two thumbs up for the proposed rethinking/balancing of mining ships.
So, I encourage the Dev Team to give the specs to the fellow who wrote EFT so we can be working out builds for these new ORE ships well before release. I support giving out the proposed specs so that we can see the EFT, PyFA and EveHQ fits (even though I doubt they'd do it). You should also be able to go on SiSi around that time and start fitting for cheap too.
+1 to T3 ORE ships +1 to releasing specs well ahead of time and LISTENING to subsequent feedback HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression -á- The only way to go! |

Derick Deninard
ParlanguaCo Blue Meanies
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 07:41:00 -
[864] - Quote
I like the idea of rebalancing the mining ships, and while I have not read all 40 some pages of replies so I am not sure if this has been suggested or not, I belive that there should be a ship class capable of transporting between 50,000 and 75,000 m3 base with decent amout of speed for a ship that size say 90mps and warp around 3 AU/s. Give it some decent sheild and armor and a couple of slots to customize it. Maybe even a turret or lancher slot depending on race. Maybe I'm alone in this thinking, but we have something like a pickup truck size craft, or a tractor trailer size ship with no delivery truck catigory. It just seems like a long way to me between 6,000m3 even maxed out with rigs and expanders around 42k m3 and the standard freighter of over 720,000 m3 cargo hold. Seems like there should be ships capable of transporting an out post but not an entire station. |

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 09:59:00 -
[865] - Quote
Derick Deninard wrote:I like the idea of rebalancing the mining ships, and while I have not read all 40 some pages of replies so I am not sure if this has been suggested or not, I belive that there should be a ship class capable of transporting between 50,000 and 75,000 m3 base with decent amout of speed for a ship that size say 90mps and warp around 3 AU/s. Give it some decent sheild and armor and a couple of slots to customize it. Maybe even a turret or lancher slot depending on race. Maybe I'm alone in this thinking, but we have something like a pickup truck size craft, or a tractor trailer size ship with no delivery truck catigory. It just seems like a long way to me between 6,000m3 even maxed out with rigs and expanders around 42k m3 and the standard freighter of over 720,000 m3 cargo hold. Seems like there should be ships capable of transporting an out post but not an entire station.
ORCA ?
90.000M3 cargo hold 50.000M3 ORE hold 40.000M3 corporate hanger
no turrets
hence there are remarks made about makin a T3 industiel/Miner that can forefill part of that roll
|

Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
80
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 13:49:00 -
[866] - Quote
SabuMaru ICE wrote:ORCA ?
90.000M3 cargo hold 50.000M3 ORE hold 40.000M3 corporate hanger
no turrets
hence there are remarks made about makin a T3 industiel/Miner that can forefill part of that roll
edit : on the outpost remark : 1 outpost takes multiple Freighter loads to online .. that is Egg + startup fuel a station will probably requere dozens of Freighters
jumpfreighters are NOT counted as they have 200-300K capacity and as such not usefull It would be really useful if people would actualy think before they post.
Derick Deninard is asking for a mini-freighter, NOT an ORCA.
Freighers are required for Outposts - leave that alone.
HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression -á- The only way to go! |

SabuMaru ICE
MINE THEM TO DEATH Coalition of the Unfortunate
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.05 18:47:00 -
[867] - Quote
mis clicked |

Cloned S0ul
Blood Fanatics
162
|
Posted - 2012.07.06 09:21:00 -
[868] - Quote
I have no idea about ship balance but top mining bargers should get enough mining boost that give to miners ability to earn more money per hour and get a bit close to, lvl 4 mission runers, here is still big disspresion betwen benefit form missions lvl 4 and mining while solo. I dont whine here, just give you my opinion, i have exhumers on lvl 5 and pro mining skills on one of my mining character, and one character with tengu with well skiled missile etc, tengu pilot is able to earn like 30-40% more isk per hour (only form bounty) while runing mission lvl 4 than this miner. Teemo for president. |

MortisLegati
Caldari War Materiel
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.06 15:59:00 -
[869] - Quote
Cloned S0ul wrote:More yield will let miners make more ISK.
This is a common fallacy. More supply drives down profit since minerals are based around a supply/demand market. If every miner suddenly doubled their mineral production, mineral prices would nearly half. It would do nothing but make ships cheaper, in reality. |

Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.07.06 16:32:00 -
[870] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:Cloned S0ul wrote:More yield will let miners make more ISK. This is a common fallacy. More supply drives down profit since minerals are based around a supply/demand market. If every miner suddenly doubled their mineral production, mineral prices would nearly half. It would do nothing but make ships cheaper, in reality. QFT. When I mine, my purpose is to pull in as much ore as possible in the shortest amount of time. Why? Because I can then go on to do other things in the time I have available to me. HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression -á- The only way to go! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |