If you want to complain about "they'll bring more ships" find me the killmail a brick tanked Hulk that was Suicide Ganked.

If by GÇ¥manyGÇ¥ you mean GÇ£noneGÇ¥, then yes.

Non sequitur.

But yes, it's possible by default that none have been posted.

Strawman and onus probandi. So how about you prove it instead, since it's your job to do so.

Non sequitur and red herring.

So you agree then, that you just invented things as you always do since GÇö as usual GÇö you cannot offer any the slightest shred of proof for your claim.

GǪnor is anyone else (except you), but you are the one making claims you cannot prove.

So once again, your fallacies are piling up quite nicely and end up showing that you are pretty much incapable of posting anything that is even remotely close to something that might, with a downright enormous amount of luck, be considered to have a minute chance of being even partially correct.

You made the claim GÇö you prove it.

This link shows Ruby demonstrating why a Hulk couldn't be ganked profitably.

Stop crying to CCP to do it for you, man up and do it yourself. We've been teaching you how to do so for months.

And like I keep saying, gankers don't do things to piss away their ISK just to be contrary.

So you're just lying, then.

So present the proof to support your claim.

So you're still refusing to present any proof.
You're still just lying and you're content with making yourself a bigger liar.

Dodging the question does not alter this course you've picked.

Well when they were getting ganked miners also enjoyed the best profits they have ever seen which is a rather nice thing. It also removed a great deal of bots which is also great for everyone.

But risk for miners doesnt have to be only from pvp.

During HAG, the miners who tanked their ships or mined aligned (or any number of other solutions) reaped record profits.

I produce a large number of t1 hulls and ice products. My profits have dropped sharply over the last few months as the market has adjusted to the lower resource prices. Many hulls have being making a loss o er the last few weeks.

Haha. Why do you keep lying about the most easily refutable things?

November of last year, the Drake was at 30m.
May of this year, the Drake was at 54m.
Currently, the Drake is at 47m and trending down.

That's what you call steady? A 24m ISK price swing.

Caldari fuel has lost almost half of its value after the barge changes.

Of course, he'll never get banned because he only derails threads sympathetic to EvE as the cold, harsh place it's advertised as.

How is this difficult to see?

I espeically like that that's the only issue you wish to clarify, if we're being honest. +1.

Either you want successful miners to earn peanuts, or you want successful miners to earn reasonable income.

My production profits have halfed in the last few months because the markets are flooded with raw materials. Your numbers in fack back up what I am saying as they show a big rise in value at the start of the year then a drop off after the sumer changes.

Just to be clear, you're saying when supply went up, prices went up.

That's not correct.

Value = Demand / Supply

So when supply goes up, value goes down if demand is constant.

I hope this was helpful.

You conveniently neglect the reactionary flood of materials from speculators sitting on large supplies.

Thank you very much for your thoughtful posting.

In an attempt to lower supply for the future.

Lower supply with consistent demand should yield higher prices in the future.

Which is what we were seeing for a while, predictibly.

We can watch prices and not only predict what the supply is, but also the demand, through market history.

At the end of the day, vast speculative mineral stores were opeend up when the game changed in a way that favored selling them at inflationary prices.

I believe some of those reserves still continue to have an impact on prices, for the time being.

Why should he prove something he didn't say? Why are you incapable of posting without lying?

There's a difference between saying supply went up due to something that obviously cut it off long-term but caused a brief spike, and another thing entirely which can adequately be predicted to increase supply ad infinitum.

Demand for ABCs is relatively low due to their low composition requirement in most production.

Demand for ABCs is relatively low due to their low composition requirement in most production.

No. He said GÇ£Lower supply with consistent demand should yield higher prices in the future. Which is what we were seeing for a while, predictibly.GÇ¥

Notice how nothing in those two statements make any kind of claim that supplies are currently the same.

So why should he prove something he didn't say? Why are you incapable of posting without lying?

Do you have a problem with it going for the lowest transaction amount the game allows, as an artificial floor

Before this forever train continues I would just like to point out the the biggest crash has been in the ice markets which were not impacted by gun mining in any way. The low end mineral markets have so far only dropped slightly but because of the large quantities required it has had an impact and the prices will continue to fall but at a slower pace than ice has. Already we are seeing high sec systems utterly stripped clean within hours of the sever shutdown by bot fleets which is something I have never seen in the seven or eight years I have been playing.

But cheaper ice isn't better for the fellow who mines it at peak efficiency 23.5/7. It drives down his profits.

It impacts what players who can't mine 23.5/7 earn, too.

And that's bad for the game.

The fact is we did it for a profit because we could say we didn't like what they were doing over there.

Gankers organized dessie fleets, the Ice interdictions, and HAG as an adaptation to their profession being nerfed in Crucible (insurance nerf more than outweighed Dessies and t3 BCs). And have been nerfed for it.
With the Tornado, Gankers re-introduced a years old emergent mechanic that allowed them to reduce their newly exploded costs. And they were nerfed for it.
Before that, Gankers discovered the joys of cheaply fit, insured ships in response to CONCORD becoming untankable. And were nerfed for it.
Between those times, Gankers adapted to numerous nerfs in the form of reductions to CONCORD. After each adaptation, BAM, another nerf.

But it is, highsec incursion and mission running are very comparable if not better than nullsec ratting in any form. Highsec mining is currently more lucrative than nullsec mining. Exploration is a hobby profession and does not matter. Access to features has nothing to do with reward.