open All Channels
seplocked Science and Industry
blankseplocked Mineral Supply Problem: Solution?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Droxlyn
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:05:00 - [1]
 

I think I personally do not like this idea, but...

Problem:
Prices of minerals are falling, which should pull other T1 goods down with it.
There is an over-supply of ore/minerals that gets melted down to ISK by insurance payouts as a basket floor.

Solution:
Mineral pools. Whenever something is destroyed or used, it adds its perfect build cost back into the pool. If it were built less than 100% perfectly, the "Waste" would immediately go back into the mineral pool. When asteroids and reprocessable loot are spawned, the minerals are removed from the pools. If a pool is empty, nothing that uses it can be created by the game.

This would apply to all forms of mineral creation, including gravimetric sites, etc.

Thus, the game would have a limited pool of minerals to work with. Periodically, this pool could be expanded as the player count and collections of shinies absorb the limited stock of minerals.

I would somewhat envision low-sec asteroid belts slowly accumulating large quantities of the mineral pools forcing high-sec lovers and null-sec lovers into low-sec to free up the locked minerals. More so with those who live in high-sec since null-sec would be constantly trying to spawn gravimetric sites due to industrial improvements. But even then, the sites may not spawn until enough low-end and mid-grade minerals are freed up to satisfy the gravimetric site spawn.

Again, I'm not sure this is a brilliant idea or not, but it would enforce a level of scarcity in minerals that would keep their values from dropping to nothing. But you could wind up finding the asteroid belt did not respawn during down-time.

Thoughts?

Drox

Ulviirala Vauryndar
Gallente
Vauryndar Dalharil
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:34:00 - [2]
 

I propose, taking playerbase considerations into account before doing something to the game, that one guy absolutely sure about, and watch things like "Well, lets see how that works out!" Razz

Massive sarcasm quotes.

Dr Nefarius
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:37:00 - [3]
 

My first thought was yes. But no, this is a bad idea imo. Why? There is a huge ammount of minerals locked up in items/ships (just think on the capitals/supercapitals). I am to lazy/ignorant to know the size of that compared to the ammount of minerals/ore that is on the market and pushing down the value, but my guess is that the used minerals is much larger.
Putting a cap on the total sum of the two would mean much higher fluctuation in mineral prices, if the liquid minerals does constitute only a small part of the whole.
Nice seeing people with new ideas (at least I haven't seen this one before), but I don't think it would work out. The increased incentative for lowsec and generally spreading out mining/industry is what appealed to me.

Solution: Crack down harder on macros, and not just the ones involved in rmt. I've seen people talking about 1 or 2 week ban for macroing... Neutral
Just WTH is CCP thinking when they do like that. Put a month ban on first time offenders and permaban the second time. If we could kick out the macros the market should adjust to more reasonable (but likely still low) prices.

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.07.06 19:44:00 - [4]
 

CCP does not want to limit the number of people that can do something.

A limited asteroid respawn that matched destruction would set up a situation where an hour or two after repsawn, all asteroid belts were mined out. Anyone that is at work when the respawn occurs would return home to find no rocks to mine.

They are not going to do this.

More likely would be to limit the number of minerals an individual account can mine. My proposal was to issue mining certificates similar to R&D agents issuing datacores.

The problem is not too many rocks. The problem is too many 'bots mining them 23.5x7.

Of course, each of those 'bots is also a paying account, so CCP can't get too serious about going after them.... Which is why they need to limit how many hours a day each account can mine, not how many total rocks (total number of accounts) that can mined by all.


Droxlyn
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.06 20:04:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa
CCP does not want to limit the number of people that can do something.

A limited asteroid respawn that matched destruction would set up a situation where an hour or two after repsawn, all asteroid belts were mined out. Anyone that is at work when the respawn occurs would return home to find no rocks to mine.




I personally think the roid-respawn should be more random anyway and not fixed to the daily down-time. I've read in the Dev Blog that they want to eliminate the down-time some day. If they were to implement a rolling asteroid respawn, say a system gets a "respawn timer" that is a random time between 6 and 30 hours until the next respawn which is invisible to the players, and each time it reloads the asteroids, the timer is rerolled.

Then again, I'm quite in favor of the idea of eliminating most static asteroid belts entirely and making nearly all of them gravimetric sites. If each system were guaranteed a number of gravimetric sites as they currently have belts of similar compositions, I'm sure that would foil or at least slow down many bots. Keep the ultra-high-sec newbie zone belts so they can get a foothold into the game and prohibit exhumers and barges from mining in 0.9+ systems with the static belts.

Drox

Dr Nefarius
Posted - 2010.07.06 20:19:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Droxlyn


Then again, I'm quite in favor of the idea of eliminating most static asteroid belts entirely and making nearly all of them gravimetric sites. If each system were guaranteed a number of gravimetric sites as they currently have belts of similar compositions, I'm sure that would foil or at least slow down many bots. Keep the ultra-high-sec newbie zone belts so they can get a foothold into the game and prohibit exhumers and barges from mining in 0.9+ systems with the static belts.

Drox


Now that is all good, would go a long way towards making mining viable for those interested in it and giving bots a harder time. Has been suggested many times, and I think CCP has implied a long time that they want to move in that direction with mining.. 2015 perhaps? Mad

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.07.06 20:34:00 - [7]
 

I agree on the "making the belts hidden" that have to be scanned down.

Make them small so that a perfectly fit/skilled Hulk could empty one in about an hour. A system should not have more than 2 or 3 belts to prevent someone from scanning and bookmarking them all, then turning the macro on.

Also would take care of the respawn. When one gets mined out, a new one magically respawns, up to a max per system per day.

Buh bye to the 23x7 macros.

Of course, buh bye to the revenue being generated by those macros. Perhaps this is why CCP hasn't done it.

Matalino
Posted - 2010.07.06 22:03:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Droxlyn
Thoughts?
CCP should set up the market so that as the supply of minerals increases the price offered for those minerals decreases, thus decreasing the insentive for people to continue producing minerals that are already oversupplied. ugh

menacemyth
Minmatar
Onyx Brotherhood
STR8NGE BREW
Posted - 2010.07.06 22:09:00 - [9]
 

With the changes that CCP has made to insurance, I'm hoping that mineral prices will adjust until it is just as profitable to mine low-ends as high-ends. Gone will be the days of making 1bil isk/week with 2 hulks from mining abc in nullsec. Unfortunately, with it will go my isk making potential, and macro users will rule the market.

In the end, without a soft or hard floor to prices, they will continue to fall to oblivion. Everyone can't make profit. So either CCP puts in a mechanism that provides a floor, or continue on the current path and FORCE industrialist to make isk other ways.

As things are now, mission running is becoming more profitable and more players are making their isk that way. Prices for faction items will fall as well as competition in that sector grows.

The only way to prevent hyper-deflation is for CCP to create additional ways to consume minerals at profit. Otherwise, over the long term mining and mission/complex running will become less profitable, pvp will become more viable as an income and it'll all balance out.

Kharylien
Gallente
Masked Rider Project
Posted - 2010.07.06 23:24:00 - [10]
 

The point OP has apparently missed: If this were implemented, scarcity would NOT be a product solely of destruction levels.

It would also be set off by people hoarding like crazy, because the more minerals you hoard, the scarcer they become, so the more expensive they get... plus, of course, your enemies will have to struggle more to be able to replace ships if the minerals for them are hard to come by.

It would utterly destroy the game fairly fast.

Droxlyn
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.06 23:38:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Kharylien
The point OP has apparently missed: If this were implemented, scarcity would NOT be a product solely of destruction levels.

It would also be set off by people hoarding like crazy, because the more minerals you hoard, the scarcer they become, so the more expensive they get... plus, of course, your enemies will have to struggle more to be able to replace ships if the minerals for them are hard to come by.

It would utterly destroy the game fairly fast.


It actually was not outside of my thinking. But it would be a major factor. There would need to be "leaks" in the system. Missions also generate asteroids, but these would not necessarily need to count against the limit when created, nor add back in when completed. Thus, mission-miners would generate minerals out of thin air. CCP could arbitrarily inject more into the pool as well.

If I were to initially develop this, I would let the pool go negative initially and basically ignore the cap and see how negative it goes each day. And respawn asteroids as normal using today's rules. Using a normal month's deficiency in the pool, work out some inflation to the system.

Another thought is that whenever minerals are injected back into the pool, add a 1% bonus for inflation of minerals.

But hording minerals would definitely lock them up, but while you're holding them, you don't have isk from minerals either. At some point, the price of the minerals will be high enough to get you to sell.

(Now, off to fix the PC bounty system by recommending perma-death.)

Drox

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2010.07.07 05:30:00 - [12]
 

Supply isn't the problem with minerals, the problem is demand. Add more consumables to game play, increase mins needed for ammo, making PI structures, repairs, etc.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.07 06:54:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: LHA Tarawa
I agree on the "making the belts hidden" that have to be scanned down.

Make them small so that a perfectly fit/skilled Hulk could empty one in about an hour. A system should not have more than 2 or 3 belts to prevent someone from scanning and bookmarking them all, then turning the macro on.

Also would take care of the respawn. When one gets mined out, a new one magically respawns, up to a max per system per day.

Buh bye to the 23x7 macros.

Of course, buh bye to the revenue being generated by those macros. Perhaps this is why CCP hasn't done it.


You have something against corp level mining ops or simply you haven't thought about them?

Your suggestion sum up to:
- make mining a single player option
- make the mining foreman skill useless (really, training it for 2-3 people? LOL)
- make the orca and rorqual useless in their main function.

Rolling Eyes

For the OP:

1) you are forgetting the mineral that are generated without mining: mission loot and drone alloys. Even completely removing loot from missions you still have drone alloys and changing them to something different will be a problem.

2) people tend to accumulate wealth. I look my hangars and see 9 BS around the EVE universe.
Some are there for specific reasons (0.0 pvp against high sec missioning ships), others are ships that I have tried, found not to my taste, but never sold as they can still be useful.
And the number of those ships will generally increase as, if I lose one for some reason, I will buy/build another. So people like me will tie up a lot of minerals.


A large quan

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2010.07.07 07:12:00 - [14]
 

Buy up all tritanium in eve to win the game and see outro and credits Laughing

Xessej
Posted - 2010.07.07 07:53:00 - [15]
 

Actually the problem has a rather obvious cause and also fairly obviously when that cause is fixed mineral prices will rebound.

What is that cause? Fleet fight lag. The biggest absorber of minerals is ship construction, primarily T1 BS and cap ships. With lag at unacceptable levels big fleet fights simply are not occuring. Therefore lots of ships are not being destroyed and supply vastly exceeds demand and prices go down. When lag finally gets fixed a bunch of big nullsec alliances will start pummeling each other which will require new ships to be built which will restore demand for minerals and prices will rebound.

Ari Chu
Posted - 2010.07.07 09:02:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Xessej
Actually the problem has a rather obvious cause and also fairly obviously when that cause is fixed mineral prices will rebound.

What is that cause? Fleet fight lag. The biggest absorber of minerals is ship construction, primarily T1 BS and cap ships. With lag at unacceptable levels big fleet fights simply are not occuring. Therefore lots of ships are not being destroyed and supply vastly exceeds demand and prices go down. When lag finally gets fixed a bunch of big nullsec alliances will start pummeling each other which will require new ships to be built which will restore demand for minerals and prices will rebound.


This. When even forming a fleet results in lag issues, there is a problem. If CCP wants smaller fleets - then they better do something about the HPs of POS/SOV structures. Cause a 30 man BS fleet isn't going to knock them down anytime soon. But that's a rant for another forum.

Ulviirala Vauryndar
Gallente
Vauryndar Dalharil
Posted - 2010.07.07 11:04:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Ulviirala Vauryndar on 07/07/2010 11:04:22
Originally by: Matalino
Originally by: Droxlyn
Thoughts?
CCP should set up the market so that as the supply of minerals increases the price offered for those minerals decreases, thus decreasing the insentive for people to continue producing minerals that are already oversupplied. ugh


With lower mineral prices, people need to supply even more minerals to maintain a certain income, it doesn't really decrease the insentive to supply minerals, as suggested by the downward spiral that the mineral price trend is still running on.

Droxlyn
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.07 12:12:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul


For the OP:

1) you are forgetting the mineral that are generated without mining: mission loot and drone alloys. Even completely removing loot from missions you still have drone alloys and changing them to something different will be a problem. If the pool is empty, the drone would have no alloy.

2) people tend to accumulate wealth. I look my hangars and see 9 BS around the EVE universe.
Some are there for specific reasons (0.0 pvp against high sec missioning ships), others are ships that I have tried, found not to my taste, but never sold as they can still be useful.
And the number of those ships will generally increase as, if I lose one for some reason, I will buy/build another. So people like me will tie up a lot of minerals.


A large quan


1) I said "reprocessable loot" which would include mission loot and drone alloys. Anything that can be turned into minerals uses up the mineral pools and if the pool does not have enough supply to generate the item, then the item just never happens. If the item must happen, then the pool goes negative and nobody else gets anything until it returns to the positive.

2) The problem is, there is currently an effective "infinite supply" of minerals. No matter how much is used today, there's always more to be had tomorrow. With the mineral pools, that's not quite true any more. In this system, the asteroid belt can't reform until there is enough ship dust in the system to make a new one. As I said, there can be a few "leaks" in the system that people can work at to get more that doesn't remove minerals from the pool and the pool should get free minerals from the space dust naturally generated by stars.

Drox

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.07 23:47:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Droxlyn
Originally by: Venkul Mul


For the OP:

1) you are forgetting the mineral that are generated without mining: mission loot and drone alloys. Even completely removing loot from missions you still have drone alloys and changing them to something different will be a problem. If the pool is empty, the drone would have no alloy.

2) people tend to accumulate wealth. I look my hangars and see 9 BS around the EVE universe.
Some are there for specific reasons (0.0 pvp against high sec missioning ships), others are ships that I have tried, found not to my taste, but never sold as they can still be useful.
And the number of those ships will generally increase as, if I lose one for some reason, I will buy/build another. So people like me will tie up a lot of minerals.


A large quan


1) I said "reprocessable loot" which would include mission loot and drone alloys. Anything that can be turned into minerals uses up the mineral pools and if the pool does not have enough supply to generate the item, then the item just never happens. If the item must happen, then the pool goes negative and nobody else gets anything until it returns to the positive.

2) The problem is, there is currently an effective "infinite supply" of minerals. No matter how much is used today, there's always more to be had tomorrow. With the mineral pools, that's not quite true any more. In this system, the asteroid belt can't reform until there is enough ship dust in the system to make a new one. As I said, there can be a few "leaks" in the system that people can work at to get more that doesn't remove minerals from the pool and the pool should get free minerals from the space dust naturally generated by stars.

Drox


Lol, you have just made drone region totally useless.

Droxlyn
Caldari
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:13:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

Lol, you have just made drone region totally useless.


Maybe, but remember, every missile you fire, each round of ammo, and each time a crystal wears out, they add back into the pool. Every time a player's drone goes boom, that adds back into the pool. Every time a refine is not 100% in an NPC station, it adds back to the pool.

These would allow your NPC drones to have a good chance at having some loot.

Drox

Flesh Slurper
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:24:00 - [21]
 

Um.. No..

If minerals are cheaper as they are, so are the things made with minerals, so it balances out. I have less money but also I pay less for things.. so there is no issue whatsoever. I like cheap battleships.

If people don't like the low pay for mining they can do many other things to make isk. No-one is forcing them to continue. Maybe they could stop mining and PVP a bit to increase the demand by blowing up ships (or loosing them lol).

In any MMO, as well as real life, certain markets become over saturated with sellers and people will either continue to loose money or make low money and complain, or be smart and move with the market.

Flesh Slurper
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.07.08 00:29:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Ari Chu


This. When even forming a fleet results in lag issues, there is a problem. If CCP wants smaller fleets - then they better do something about the HPs of POS/SOV structures. Cause a 30 man BS fleet isn't going to knock them down anytime soon. But that's a rant for another forum.


lol.. POS and sov structures can easily be taken by 30 BS unless the enemy has a similar defense fleet, but then again that could be said for any size fleet. I almost think POS are kindof weak for what it takes to maintain them.

Agente
Posted - 2010.07.08 15:06:00 - [23]
 

And now a good omen for all you worried miners.

Always remember that the prices will not drop forever. Unlike you, the macro miners and farmers do it for a profit, a real money profit. Once the income coming from mining is below their cost (computers, internet conexion, farm, chinese farmers clicking all day, expected benefit) they will stop doing it.

It's in your hands to drive the macro miners and farmers out of this game!!!!

Deflaction for the win!!!!

Tamarana
Minmatar
C.L.A.W.
Posted - 2010.07.09 12:10:00 - [24]
 

The problem is that people already mine in missions.
They do the mission, dust the Hulk and mine there.
You could take away the belt everywhere and simply people would mine in missions.
A band of miners would simply open a few missions, kill fast the rats and mine the roids.
If big enough they could simply start killing the rats and during the combats others would start mining and hauling.
Rookies would be unable to mine anything if you take away the belts in High Sec.

Your suggestion, also, run against the spirit of EVE, that is free market and free enterprise for all.

Stafen
The Workers Union
Posted - 2010.07.09 13:33:00 - [25]
 

This idea was originally tried in ultima online, and it failed as resources were hoarded.

I recommend you read Ultima Economy and see how they tried to limit minerals, namely "Hoarding and The Failure Of The Closed Economy"

Javajunky
Posted - 2010.07.09 15:38:00 - [26]
 

Going to have the throw up the fail flag on both suggestions. First idea just doesnt fly, too much to even get into.

The second suggestion, yeah motives to go to low sec, no thanks, us null sec players have enough going on for us to be screwed with having to import low ends from empire, build, watch for neuts/wt's. If we're going to go to low sec, we'd take it over - gate camp and make everyone freakin miserable and who's got time for that Null sec people are busy enough, don't need another layer and that is low-sec crap.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only