EVE Search - Nullsec design goals feedback: Mining

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Nullsec design goals feedback: Mining

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.17 14:43:00 - [1] Wow CCP, you're really not thinking this through, are you. If you remove ice from high, prices will skyrocket and resources will drop to the point you can't maintain your pos in wormholes any more. Take ABC from wormholes, now that cripples T3 production which REQUIRES ABC ores to make. IF you take ice from high, you need to put enough in wormholes to be able to maintain our POS's. Taking out ABC... flat out stupid. As for the "WH ore problem"... there is none. These mythical "day-trippers" are just that... a mythical problem created simply to justify an unnecessary nerf. I've yet to ever see anyone even consider coming into our hole to mine the rare grav site that should happen to spawn ever couple weeks. Wormholes are the last frontier of Eve, the only true nullsec remaining. Don't nerf them based on lies about things the people lying don't even know about. And please, dont' kill WH space over these strange desire to force people into areas they simply don't have any desire to go. Ice isn't broken, it doesn't need fixing. Adding ice to wormholes, enough for self-sufficiency, would be a nice touch though... Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.17 15:01:00 - [2] Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 17/08/2011 15:02:57 Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 17/08/2011 15:01:50 Originally by: CCP Greyscale According to the latest data I have, 27% of Arkonor, 21% of Bistot and 25% of Crokite is mined in wormholes (including the improved ores). If you assume the standard T1 1:4:16:64:256:1024:4096 relationship between different ore needs (which is skewed further away from the highends if you're concentrating on stuff like ammo, IIRC), and if you assume that all the veldspar mined in w-space is used for production (which incidentally is something like 0.7% of total veld mined, and I'm ignoring trit from other ores here), there's approximately 100 times more megacyte being mined in w-space than is needed for production; that "100x" number goes up the more ammo is being built, and it goes up if you factor in trit from other ores. It's hard to see what people would be doing with all that mega other than selling it on the market. On the safety front, I checked kills and it turns out that if you consider just kills in nullsec and w-space, 60% of covetors and 26% of hulks die in w-space, which suggests that newer players mining in w-space are dying a lot, but experienced ones are about as safe in w-space as they are in nullsec. Safer than I thought it was going to be, TBH, I stand corrected on that - hadn't looked at those particular data recently. I'd be happy to exchange 50% of the ABC in wormholes for more lower end rocks... we need more trit and the like in wormholes. Also, for manufacturing... there's little T1 production that I've seen... except for ammo. More T2 ammo and T3 products. Now, if you take the ABCM out of T3 then there's no need for the ABC and it's unlikely to be missed. I think it's safe to say, regarding mining, we need what we need, beyond that wormhole mining is a time-filler. If we don't need ABC anymore then fine, send it off to less-dangerous bot-controlled spaces for all I care. But if you make our production dependant on the bots of null then you're doing it wrong. Hmm... take away the need for ABC in T3 production at all, take most or all the ABC ores and in exchange can we have ice and more lower end rocks? Our POS's burn ice products just like everyone elses... interesting would be that it could be hit-or-miss on getting the isotopes we need... and with the volume a chunk of ice has, you can bet your arse that you won't see these non-existant day-trippers pop into being to get at it either. Wait a minute... there are no improves ores in wormholes. Who's leg you trying to pull anyhow?! Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.17 15:08:00 - [3] Originally by: CCP Greyscale On the safety front, I checked kills and it turns out that if you consider just kills in nullsec and w-space, 60% of covetors and 26% of hulks die in w-space, which suggests that newer players mining in w-space are dying a lot, but experienced ones are about as safe in w-space as they are in nullsec. Safer than I thought it was going to be, TBH, I stand corrected on that - hadn't looked at those particular data recently. Before you bask in the numbers reflecting safety... keep in mind that that 60% of covetor kills and 26% of hulk kills are happening in space with maybe 3% of the population of Eve. Think kills per unit population and you have a whole different tale to tell. Also, hulks are killed less because experienced wormholers don't fly hulks in wormholes much... the cost/benefit between a hulk and covetor greatly skews the ideal mining vessel to covetors. For one tenth or so the cost we get a small drop-off in mining... hulks aren't worth the risk in wormholes. Data only makes sense in context. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.17 16:58:00 - [4] Originally by: Learath So, 24%ish of ABC is mined in WH, discount for terrible refining, tough logistics, higher risk and the lack of higher quality ores, minus ore lost before reprocess, are we really talking about a problem here? Also, every vet WHer I've met recommends cov over hulk, for the reason everyone in this thread who has been in a WH has mentioned. I don't really think the risk ever goes down. Also, 60% of all covetor losses? That's a lot of ships. Especially when you consider it's what... 3% of the entire population of Eve in wormholes? "Safe" isn't the word I'd choose. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.17 17:36:00 - [5] Originally by: CCP Greyscale Yeah, one of the potential options I'm considering right now (another is "do nothing") is to just change the makeup of WH grav sites so that they give you all the mineral types in approximately the right ratios. If you're building it means you can strip a site and have everything you need, while if you're just mining to export it's going to significantly slow the overall rate of mining due to people (presumably, based on previous player behavior and feedback) not clearing the low-ends, so the sites won't despawn quickly. (The improved ores are mentioned because I'm explicitly including improved ores mined in nullsec in the overall calculation.) OK... this clams the nerves quite a bit. Reduce ABC a bit, boost the lower end, I could regain the warm and fuzzy feeling. Throw some ice into the mix (provided you do reduce or remove it from high sec) and maybe consider small niblets of mercoxit in lower holes (we use that too) and yo ucan have numbers that definitely aren't worth this mythical "day-tripping" thing while making hole residents feel like we're not the proverbial red-headed step-children of Eve. Some of those higher density ores... that would be tasty... how about a new ore as well, Anoikite, found only in wormholes that contains smaller yet more spread out amounts of the higher end minerals? You could give ore crunchers a bonus at processing it while in wormhole space... Ah man, you've awakened the dreamer in me...! Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.18 13:25:00 - [6] Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 18/08/2011 13:27:57 CCP Greyscale, a quick question if I may... how much of that "units of ore mined", can you accurately determine, exit holes for market and how much remain in the holes for consumption? Although it's been a few weeks since we had a grav, the last couple we did have spawn we sucked dry, processed at the POS (at considerable expense, relative to empire mind you... >.< ) and kept inside for missile production for the alliance, etc. I'd be curious to see how much from the different areas actually makes it to market, so to speak. Still liking the idea of increasing our lower end ores, btw... Any thoughts on adding ice to holes (especially if you remove it from high)? Oh, quick aside, I'm currently producing... um... fulleroferrocene I think... the one that used tritanium... pulled 17K out of this batch so far, that's 170K trit burned for that lower end gas product, and no gravs spawned in weeks... Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.18 14:51:00 - [7] Originally by: Super Whopper Remember everyone, nefing WH's won't entirely solve the problem, so, don't run around screaming nerf WH's as if that will be the end of the super low mineral price. WH's added to the problem but they're not the sole cause. Clinging to them as the last fig leaf will not solve a thing and we will be here again the next time 0.0 improvements are proposed. Bah, nerfing wormholes won't affect the problem at all. It's a minority source of minerals from mining, and mining is a minority source of minerals from drone guts and reprocessing. If Grey rebalances wormhole gravs to be more in line with what's actually needed in holes all you'll see are happy wormhole residents and no change in the mineral market prices. The problem lies well outside wormholes and more outside mining than within it. But, nerfing or removing industrial upgrades would help... reducing what drone guts process into would help... actual problems taken care of. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.18 15:38:00 - [8] Originally by: Super Whopper Changes need to be made to low ends, as several times suggested in the thread. It's ridiculous that the largest rocks of Veldspar only yield 150k units, whereas it's possible to upgrade a system to lvl 5 and have a rock that's nothing compared to veld rocks yield over 100k ABC's. An increase in the yield of low ends has been suggested numerous times, to no avail. But it's something that needs to happen. You're talking about nerfing null sec I take it? You can't upgrade wormholes, and when you say "low ends" is sounds like low end holes. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.19 11:58:00 - [9] I'm still surprised that the myth that wormholes are these vast spigots of high end minerals into high sec is still prevalent. As it stands right now, with the current balance, there's indeed a bit of a surplus on megacyte as needed for our production, meaning my hole alone, I can't speak for others... and as an example, our last two gravs we were nearly able to suck dry (this was a good three weeks ago, no gravs since). From those two graves, 15K megacyte was deemed excess and brought to Jita. The remainder of all minerals stayed in hole for production. From that 15K mega, we purchased loads of tritanium, pyerite and ice fuels, digging into our wallets to get everything. I did notice an interesting thing... the stock markets around the planet crashed after we sold the megacyte. Coincidence? However, the Jita markets were unaffected... Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.19 14:24:00 - [10] Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 19/08/2011 14:25:24 Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 19/08/2011 14:24:58 Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 19/08/2011 14:24:22 Originally by: CCP Greyscale It turns out that if my understanding of T3 production is correct and there's ~200 units of megacyte in each T3 ship, then the amount of mega used to make T3 ships over the period I'm looking at is effectively negligible (it's like four orders of magnitude lower than the amount mined in w-space over that period). That said, I'm slightly less worried about the current situation than I was, and by the sounds of it normalizing the mineral amounts more makes everyone pretty happy and resolves most of our concerns. (Also for anyone who's not following we're leaning towards just making ice in empire non-infinite rather than removing it, but I realize most people coming in to post aren't actually reading the thread first, I just wanted to say this so people couldn't say we hadn't said it.) From my perspective, normalizing would be pretty sweet to be honest. Megacyte isn't a major source of income, and really serves the purpose of off-setting costs required to bring in lower end minerals that we simply don't have enough of. As long as there's enough for our goodies all around I think as a whole the population would appreciate that as a change. Just make sure you leave enough of the "good stuff" so we don't wind up having to import significant quantities of that. Now... what's up with the spawn rate on gravs? We haven't had one in three weeks now and are mineral starved. I hope you take that into consideration with rebalancing... the numbers across the board don't reflect individual holes... you could have an unpopulated C2 with static Null/C5 with half a dozen or more gravs sitting there while our hole starves. At this point in time, there simply isn't enough minerals available in our hole to make a single missile even if we use Sleeper guts and duct tape. Having them die off after a period if untapped would help cycle them around better, or at least an increase in the spawn rate. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.19 14:38:00 - [11] Originally by: Kotami Originally by: CCP Greyscale (Also for anyone who's not following we're leaning towards just making ice in empire non-infinite rather than removing it, but I realize most people coming in to post aren't actually reading the thread first, I just wanted to say this so people couldn't say we hadn't said it.) HATE. Adding ICE as a possible Gravimetric exploration site result. Less hate. Including Ice gravimetric sites in wormholes, undying adulation and cookies in the mail. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.20 12:12:00 - [12] Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 20/08/2011 12:13:27 WOOT! Finally! After three weeks... Common Perimeter Deposit. Don't worry... I somehow don't think you'll see much of an effect on Jita prices... In case anyone is wondering what this means... after three weeks, we can now mine: Arkonor 10k Bistol 15k Crokite 20k Dark Ochre 10k Gneiss 20k Hedbergite 60k Jaspet 100k Kernite 150k Omber 150k Plagioclase 450k Pyroxeres 260k Scordite 240k Spodumain 15k Seriously, no veldspar? That wasn't a disturbance in the force you felt... that was the force yawning. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.22 11:34:00 - [13] Hate to be a pain on this Greyscale, but have you considered the effects on wormhole pos's if ice is removed from high sec, or even greatly reduced? It scares me to think we'd be dependant on null sec for our fuels... Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.22 12:16:00 - [14] Originally by: S8nt Originally by: Ingvar Angst Hate to be a pain on this Greyscale, but have you considered the effects on wormhole pos's if ice is removed from high sec, or even greatly reduced? It scares me to think we'd be dependant on null sec for our fuels... All T2 producers are dependent on null sec alliances for a lot of their T2 materials. Not sure why you think this is such a big issue. If there is demand there will be supply. Big difference... pos's can be forced to shut down if the fuel supply is cut off or becomes over-priced. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.22 12:43:00 - [15] Originally by: S8nt Originally by: Ingvar Angst Big difference... pos's can be forced to shut down if the fuel supply is cut off or becomes over-priced. So can T2 production? Shut off T2 production and your POS won't die, forcing you out of wormholes, for example. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.22 18:21:00 - [16] So, if one of these T3 mining barges pops, does Astrogeology go form V to IV? Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.26 15:35:00 - [17] Originally by: Dee Lectable If hisec ice disappears then newbie or small corps will lose access to hisec POSes. That's the end of a lot of research and my POS will almost certainly come down in a short order. If CCP wants to treat ice as a target for scanning like other grav sites that's fine with me but simply pulling the plug on that part of the game will drive many players (who don't want to be part of a giant nullsec alliance) out of the game. The only problem with ice as a scannable resource only is there could still be a dramatic decrease in available fuel which would still skyrocket prices and produce a similar result. Simply put, the more I think on it, the more I realize ice is too important of a resource to screw with in any way dramatic. To hold ice fuels hostage in order to get people to move to null... too Republican. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.29 15:17:00 - [18] Originally by: Crexa Ship construction T1: 100% ore mined minerals T2: 50% ore mined minerals, 50% moon goo T3: 33% ore mined minerals 33% moon goo 33% WH gas A simple way to increase the need for minerals. Increase demand not supply. Eh... since you're not familiar with T3 construction apparently, please refrain from adding horrible input. Moon goo in holes. lol Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.30 12:48:00 - [19] Originally by: Crexa Ship construction T1: 100% ore mined minerals T2: 50% ore mined minerals, 50% moon goo T3: 33% ore mined minerals 33% moon goo 33% WH gas ... I was not suggesting that Moon goo be found in WH space. Rather a redistribution of its use, especially if you think ahead to T3 ships of other class sizes! A little contradictory here. Either you would need goo in holes, or you'd need to import goo products into holes for T3, making T3 construction partially dependant on null sec. Either way, no thanks... T3 is fine, no need to screw it up. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.08.31 17:52:00 - [20] Of course... this brings up the counter point... it's null sec. It's supposed to be hazardous, not secure. So where do you draw the line regarding security and making null softer than it already is? That may be a debate for a different thread though. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.09.01 13:27:00 - [21] Originally by: Acac Sunflyier I am really happy that ice is going to be null only! Never owned a pos in a wormhole, eh? Try it, come back in six months and we'll all laugh together about how stupid you looked today. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.09.06 19:18:00 - [22] Originally by: Josie Callahan Originally by: Ya Huei 3. if u do end up removing abc's from w-space then strip the requirements for those minerals from t3 production chains. sry m8, but last time I checked, t3 production requires sleeper materials, not minerals of any type except for the r.a.m. tools. Sry m8, lrn 2 check. The gas processes, for example, require minerals to create. Look up, for example, a fulleroferrocene reaction and see what the ingredients are. (Hint: One of them is a mineral) Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!
Ingvar Angst Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United	Posted - 2011.09.06 19:22:00 - [23] Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 06/09/2011 19:23:11 Originally by: Alabugin Arent they proposing to make t2 research ONLY possible in nullsec anyway? Therefore if this was done, the ice in highsec would become worthless anyway. I dont see the cost of ice skyrocketing, as the demand will decrease, as well as the supply. If highsec poses dont need the ICE for research, then they dont need the ice - its a win/win situation really. Then the only point of ice mining wouldnt be to make ISK (deter the bot miners) and only to supply nullsec POS fuel. Right? Wrong. Wormholes. T3 research and production. Needs fuel, we get the fuels from high sec when bringing things to market. Items come out, fuels come in. Wormholes require a sufficient supply of ice fuels for your tengus, lokis, etc. Without them, your T3 ships will skyrocket in price as most smaller corps won't be able to survive and the larger ones charge a premium in order to make up the cost increase moving ice to null would cause with fuels. Monocles are so two weeks ago. Sparkle ships are the future!

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.