open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Mining
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (18)

Author Topic

Marv Caldarion
Posted - 2011.08.17 08:47:00 - [181]
 

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk


WHAT you need to do is buff 0.0 ice, Example
Blue ice yields 300 isotopes
Thick blue ice yields 350 isotopes.

If 0.0 is higher risk, there isn't a higher reward out there for ice. 0.0 Ice should yield at least a 50% better payout especially with the poor refineries out there.
Ex.
Thick blue ice should yield 450 isotopes for 0.0 mining rather than 350.

Better yet here is an idea for ice.

Highsec - base line - 300 isotopes per unit
low sec - 25% better - 375 isotopes per unit
0.0 - 50% better - 450 isotopes per unit.

This makes a better benefit for 0.0 miners and low sec miners, and leaves high sec unchanged so people wont complain**.

** Note on complaining. People will still complain anyway.


That's the best idea in this whole thread!! This idea is really great and i hope, that CCP will put this into game.

MARV

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 08:54:00 - [182]
 

why just ice do it with ores as well, so you have your three types of veldspar,

lowsec gets the crystalised versions of the three veldspars each 25% better than its high sec equivalent,

null gets the metallic versions of the three veldspars each 50% better than its highsec equivalent,

now any mineral is worth mining in null (though veld pyro and plag might need to be double yield?) but has the distance problem for trying to move it to empire (and JF fuel costs isk eating profit) so it becomes feasable to mine locally for production

Heroltior Ghedonia
Posted - 2011.08.17 09:11:00 - [183]
 

Originally by: Marv Caldarion
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk


WHAT you need to do is buff 0.0 ice, Example
Blue ice yields 300 isotopes
Thick blue ice yields 350 isotopes.

If 0.0 is higher risk, there isn't a higher reward out there for ice. 0.0 Ice should yield at least a 50% better payout especially with the poor refineries out there.
Ex.
Thick blue ice should yield 450 isotopes for 0.0 mining rather than 350.

Better yet here is an idea for ice.

Highsec - base line - 300 isotopes per unit
low sec - 25% better - 375 isotopes per unit
0.0 - 50% better - 450 isotopes per unit.

This makes a better benefit for 0.0 miners and low sec miners, and leaves high sec unchanged so people wont complain**.

** Note on complaining. People will still complain anyway.


That's the best idea in this whole thread!! This idea is really great and i hope, that CCP will put this into game.

MARV


+1

Still need to kill off the botters.

Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
Posted - 2011.08.17 09:24:00 - [184]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
While I find the design goals for mining quite acceptable, a lot of people don't do it because it's just boring.

Are there any plans to change mining gameplay to be more interesting or challenging? If so, can you expand on this? If not, are you not worried people still won't do it - this is a game afterall and the primary goal is to have fun?


Nothing, solid, no. I know this will sound crazy to some of you, but mining's currently filling a pretty decent niche by not being exciting. Most importantly, it's something that gives you an excuse to sit around chatting to people without leaving you destitute. People who like action have missions and PvP and so on; mining doesn't work for those people and doesn't need to be changed so that it does.



So who do you expect to mine those nullsec only abc ores then ? The people you talk about don't leave highsec because they are allergic to any form of excitement, and the nullsec bunch only have bots mining their ore for them ?



Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 09:26:00 - [185]
 

Edited by: Takashi Halamoto on 17/08/2011 09:28:08
actually there are players who do mine ore in null they are just few and far between as the rewards dont match the risk or time sink

the introduction of Grav sites was a good start as it gives miners a chance being in a location that needs probes to find, perhaps modify the mining dedicated ships to be able to mount a probe launcher?

Addergebroed
Posted - 2011.08.17 10:22:00 - [186]
 

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Part of the reason for doing this kind of feedback round is to get precisely this sort of info Smile If you know of some knowledgeable WH types who can give a clear explanation of their perspective on this stuff, then seriously please ask them to come post here. Clear, reasoned perspectives on things are hugely valuable resources for us.

We can certainly do that, and will. But history teaches us that hard data is much more useful than anecdotes, and you have access to the hard data, or approximations to it that will tell you if there is a significant problem in WH space as a whole or in subsets of it (C1-2, for example)

After all, for thousands of years, we had great anecdotal evidence that bloodletting was a cure for all manner of ailments.

Don't bleed WH space without the facts on your side.


This.

Dadder
Quantum Revolutions
Posted - 2011.08.17 10:41:00 - [187]
 

So far i really like what im seeing here, some suggestions of mine would be:

1. Putting ice fields only in 0.0 is a good idea. Including them in low-sec i think is an even better idea.
2. High end ores should follow the pattern of the ice fields. The introduction of the drone regions had a huge impact on mineral values. It may be time to give drones bounties and remove their mineral drops...
3. As for increasing low end yields. I would personally like to see the introduction of a new ship class, possibly orca sized, that is specialized for mining low end mins only. People have been wanting a capital mining ship for years and i think it could be a very viable option now. If limited only to null sec like the rorq it would definitely fill a needed role.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.08.17 11:20:00 - [188]
 

Edited by: catinboots on 17/08/2011 11:25:42
Edited by: catinboots on 17/08/2011 11:23:04
Originally by: Marv Caldarion
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk


WHAT you need to do is buff 0.0 ice, Example
Blue ice yields 300 isotopes
Thick blue ice yields 350 isotopes.

If 0.0 is higher risk, there isn't a higher reward out there for ice. 0.0 Ice should yield at least a 50% better payout especially with the poor refineries out there.
Ex.
Thick blue ice should yield 450 isotopes for 0.0 mining rather than 350.

Better yet here is an idea for ice.

Highsec - base line - 300 isotopes per unit
low sec - 25% better - 375 isotopes per unit
0.0 - 50% better - 450 isotopes per unit.

This makes a better benefit for 0.0 miners and low sec miners, and leaves high sec unchanged so people wont complain**.

** Note on complaining. People will still complain anyway.


That's the best idea in this whole thread!! This idea is really great and i hope, that CCP will put this into game.

MARV

Great thinking, nowcombine this with a small buff to null sec manufacturing ,and research slots to make them as good as high and low sec slots and you got a good start in boosting nullsec industry
Ccp might even consider introducing superveld for nullsec or a t2 ore compression system to make it complete
Keeps everybody happy
Maybe also introduce t3 industrial subsystems (5% yield per lvl and 5% time for icemining per lvl, 3 highslots1 auxillery high slot 10 % cargospace per lvl) that fits on the current t3 ships and that replaces the offensive subsystem so the mining ship can tank those nullsec rats, true a hulk can do it aswell but you sacrificing so much yield it is not fun anymore especially if you are your own

Nullsec delenda est

Velicitia
Gallente
Open Designs
Posted - 2011.08.17 11:21:00 - [189]
 

Edited by: Velicitia on 17/08/2011 11:21:49
Originally by: Dadder
If limited only to null sec like the rorq it would definitely fill a needed role.



y'know... you *can* bring a rorq into lowsec Cool.

Killing off hisec ice in a single blow is a bad thing (tm). Reducing its usefulness (e.g. 200 isotopes/refine, no stront as has been suggested) could help to some degree, at least before finally removing it, if that's what's intended. Or simply shut off the respawn and let them die naturally...

However, this is not to say that I think ice should be removed 100% from empire (leave *some* in lowsec for people to get).

I like the idea that adding scarcity would be beneficial -- a good start would be to bring back the old re-spwan rates for systems < 1.0 (maybe incl 0.9)... or if not that, then randomize it more (maybe it'll spawn today at DT... maybe not) ...


Lorkin Desal
Caldari
Lone Star Partners
Posted - 2011.08.17 11:59:00 - [190]
 

Lots of wormhole space operation relies on having the membership to log on and run the high class combat sites that you were commenting on adding ore to.

If, for instance we had a fleet of 3 or four competent pilots, who would dearly like to make some ISK by running high class combat sites, they cannot, they simnply have to wait for more people to log on. Gravimetric and Ladar sites fill the void where there would be otherwise nothing for theese people to do.

This invalidates your suggestion of putting rocks only in combat sites. What you could do is increase the number of sleepers spawned by some of the gravimetric sites, so that it would require a competent gang with logistic support to clear the sleepers and run the site, effectively excluding daytrippers. Additionally ore could be changed in higher class wormholes (4-6) to ancient condensed mercoxit or w/e, seen as these rocks are supposedly new to scanners and have never been found before from an RP perspective. The new ore would have a higher yield (offsetting the 75% yield problem) but would have a much higher volume and could only be refined once compressed (vis rorqual).

As a rule of thumb, many of the big w-space corps and alliances dont export ore from w-space. The logistics involved are ludicrous unless you turn what you have mined in to a rorqual (in c1-4) or jump in a rorqual to an adjacent low/nullsec hole (c5-6).

Regardless, compression is the only reliable way of export for high-end ore; (Even the orca is out of the question with the amounts you are talking about uncompresssed). Also at most w-space can get a yield of 75%, losing out to nullsec, and making mining returns very poor in comparison.

All ore types are required in wormholes to build materials for w-space operation. both for ammo and in the reaction of hybrid polymers from ladar raw materials. It would be completely unacceptable to remove access to any mineral type from w-space as it would directly effect occupancy (seriously why to I want to do logistics when I can run c5 mags at 2Bn/hr+??)

LSE has a small stash of compressed or that is used for manufacturing. Its more then our lifes worth to export, as we will simply run out of stuff to fire at our enemies or minerals to use in t3 production.

While I applaud your idea of introducing ore to combat sites, I would urge you to look at perhaps keeping gravimetric sites, but making them rarer and harder, with a greater reward.

Perhaps new, greater skills would be required to mine the new types of ore as discussed above, but you simply dont want to remove grav sites, you need to improve them so that they cannot be run by a solo pilot (and then compressed and potentiall exported).


I have plenty more to add, but have encouraged all the members of my corp to weigh in on this discussion, and we are eager to hear your thoughts on what to do.

I'd also like to invite you, or someone in your team to appear on the podgoo.com podcast, to discuss some/all/none of the above as allowed by NDA, and perhaps fill the community in on your thoughts about w-space mining as a whole.


Sampanion
0ccam's Razor
Posted - 2011.08.17 12:56:00 - [191]
 

I'd just like to say that I support the idea that mining should be of some strategic significance.

I have often lamented that a difference of interests between those weird people who like mining and industry and us normal people who like PvP has been the undoing of many a corp and alliance. I've heard miners argue with PvPers very often that mining is necessary and important, and it has never really been true - it makes no difference how rich your corp-mates are form mining if they are still mining. How many macharials they can afford only matters if they stop mining and join the fleet.

So; if mining materially benefited the corp. or alliance of the miner - we would have a much more favourable situation, perhaps even that ideal vision of harmony where people actually do want to protect their worker bees and don't consider them leeches exploiting the security which PvP strength provides.

Even if that can't be achivef, making 0.0 mining more attractive means more KMs for me, so it's win/win.

Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
Posted - 2011.08.17 13:05:00 - [192]
 

Edited by: Super Whopper on 17/08/2011 13:09:43
Originally by: Marv Caldarion
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk


WHAT you need to do is buff 0.0 ice, Example
Blue ice yields 300 isotopes
Thick blue ice yields 350 isotopes.

If 0.0 is higher risk, there isn't a higher reward out there for ice. 0.0 Ice should yield at least a 50% better payout especially with the poor refineries out there.
Ex.
Thick blue ice should yield 450 isotopes for 0.0 mining rather than 350.

Better yet here is an idea for ice.

Highsec - base line - 300 isotopes per unit
low sec - 25% better - 375 isotopes per unit
0.0 - 50% better - 450 isotopes per unit.

This makes a better benefit for 0.0 miners and low sec miners, and leaves high sec unchanged so people wont complain**.

** Note on complaining. People will still complain anyway.


That's the best idea in this whole thread!! This idea is really great and i hope, that CCP will put this into game.

MARV


Do explain how more means higher income when it was the introduction of hidden belts that killed Megacyte and Zydrine? Megacyte went from 4500-5000+ to 2800 and Zydrine went from 2500-3000+ to 750.

Unless CCP increase demand somehow ice prices will drop, not increase. The proposal to increase ice prices is by having either ice rocks despawn/be mined out (pop) or greatly reduce their yield.

You lot think that isotopes are only used as POS fuels. Do tell us how these super large fleets of capital ships move around, without using the millions of isotopes they do on a daily/weekly basis. The problem isn't that isotopes aren't used, it's the quantity.

When we still required to spam a system with poses to maintain sov alliances used billions of isk a week to maintain sov, now that's no longer necessary and a system, as mentioned already, only requires to have a few of these structures. There were bots mining ice then too but isotopes were, on average, much higher than they are now.

As you see this isn't an easy problem to solve.

Xearal
Minmatar
SOL Industries
Black Thorne Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 13:08:00 - [193]
 

The biggest problem with ore mining in null sec, as I see it, is that people are 'forced' to mine the low end stuff in order to get more of the good stuff out there. Think of mining 'The Spod', something that needs to be done a lot, to keep a mining system high in it's development index.
Because of this, Spodmodain is one of the lowest profit asteroids in the game, simply because it is mined so much, the minerals it produces get pushed down.

The best way to improve null sec mining, imho, is to simply remove the low ends from the grav sites over there altogether. Make the sites smaller, with just high end stuff. ABCM mainly, with maybe a few other roids. Make them the size that say a 10 man mining op can deplete one in 2-3 hours.
As soon as this happens, a new site will spawn, just like combat sites are doing now in null sec.
This would allow for miners over there to mine the profitable high end ores as much as they want, without problems of 'the good stuff is at downtime'.

The complaints about having not enough trit over there are imho very moot. there's plenty of trit out there, it's just not profitable to mine it compared to the high ends. Thus logistics steps in and moves it from High sec, where the masses of newbies and carebears mine it to their heart's content.
If Null sec would not be reliant on high sec for the low end minerals, it would be able to far easily mass produce capital ships and super capital ships.
The logistical nightmare of moving that much tritanium to build a titan out to the system where you're building it is one of the reasons that not every man and their dog has one. Same goes for super carriers.
IMHO, this should remain as is, making logistics a viable part of the game. The only reason that this isn't done more, is because it's hard to find people willing to do this, within null sec powerblocks. Freighter pilots are not the type of people who like to get their big assed ship out into a place where it can be shot at. Add to this that you can't dock at every station you want, and it makes it impossible for any entrepreneur to set up a shipping line of goods going out from high to null sec with the stuff they need.
Now, why the reason you can't dock is obvious, and should remain, however, simply putting massive amounts of low ends in null sec would not solve this problem.
As for moving Tech 2 production out to null sec, the reason manufacturing is done in high sec, is because of risk/reward. Why on earth would someone be willing to fly a loot pinata full of goodies and BPO's and whatnot around out there, if they have such a massive risk of getting shot, have the station their BPO's are in taken over, and the many other risks, while the margins for T2 invention are so small?
The main profit from T2 is already in low/null sec, Moon Goo. This is the most costly component in manufacturing T2 stuff, and it's exported in massive amounts from null to High, simply because making stuff with it in null requires things that null simply doesn't have.
A good easy to access market with a large pile of input materials available, good stability and safety for the manufacturer to do his thing in their POS, station etc. and above all, a wide array of people willing to buy their product.

and easy access to the minerals required.

Xearal
Minmatar
SOL Industries
Black Thorne Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 13:15:00 - [194]
 

Now moving on to ice mining.

There's a Looot of posses out there in High sec, mainly used for research and manufacturing. They are all dependent on Ice to keep going. If ice were to be removed from high sec, they would die. It's that easy. High sec is the place to manufacture/research things because of it's relative safety. WIthout that guarantee, it is simply not profitable to do so, if this was to be forced to low/null, then profit margins would have to be increased by the manufacturers, because of the added risk involved in getting their stuff blown up, thus prices for ships and mods etc. would skyrocket.

Instead of nerfing ice in high, buff ice in low/null sec. The best source of Isotopes at the moment, is high sec, simply because it's safe to harvest, and the amounts that you'd get with massive increased risk in low/null, are negligable. The best way to improve ice mining in null is to increase the yield of Thick Blue Ice isotopes, as proposed in other replies to this thread. I would be more radical though, and say, 50% increase for isotopes in belts.
And in addition to regular belts, like the ones in low sec, add comets to developed mining systems, with ice that yields 100% more isotopes. Thus making them on par with Dark Glitter and the like.

Xearal
Minmatar
SOL Industries
Black Thorne Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 13:52:00 - [195]
 

As a final note:

When you compare professions like mining and ratting, you're comparing apples and oranges. The biggest difference being, that income from mining is not fixed. While income from ratting is.
IE:
A ratting ship can blow up X ships, giving him Y isk in bounties. increase X, and you increase Y.
A mining ship can mine X amount of minerals, which sell for X * P = Y. Where P is the price of the mined goods.
Now, the difference is, if more people mine, the amount of minerals on sale increases, thus lowering the price of said mineral, making the profit for the same amount of effort less. Because of this, simply making mining easier, or increasing availability of minerals will not increase the profit of mining.
If you want mining to be a 'fixed' income for people then the price must be fixed, which would defeat the whole purpose of industry.
This is why certain ores are more profitable to mine than others.
Velspar's very stable price is because it's universally available, and the base material needed for just about anything, in significant quantities. This makes it very cheap, but the volume makes up for this. In high sec this is no problem, but in null sec, where there are far more profitable options to mine, it generates a bottleneck for manufacture of (mainly) capital ships. IMHO this is not a bad thing, it means that there's more needed to manufacture over there than just mining for a few hours and then building a capital ship.
Scord/Plagio/Omber fluctuate more, because of the flavor of the month ship, thus their requirements.
Pyrox is the only high sec mineral that gives a small amount of nox, which has made it quite valuable because of the spike in nox since last year.

Jaspet/Hemo/Hedbergite have a good quantity of the high end minerals, but their M3 -> mineral amounts leave to be desired, making them less valueable than the top end ores, but more than high sec ore.

ABCM is the top end, fluctuating between eachotehr depending on the flavor of the month that gets blown up most.

Spod is a crappy material, simply because it's mined to death, and it only contains mega and trit. Thus making it the bastard child of null sec, being worthless compared to other ores, but it must be mined for the mining index to remain high ( and to get rid of the sites ), this makes the spod a very hated target.

Thus, there is no way to increase profit from mining, except to make it either harder so less people do it, or create some kind of artificial mineral sink that eats minerals, increasing demand. Either way is not desireable.
The only way to increase demand without negatives, would be to have more stuff explode, thus requiring more demand for ships, which would increase demand for minerals. To do this, make the ships that require boatloads of minerals more vulnerable, aka nerf supercaps so they get blown up more. I remember a while back there was a huge battle in Uemon I believe it was, where insane amounts of ships and capital ships got blown to bits. I also noticed a spike in demand for minerals shortly after.

Now moving to wormholes.
Ninja Mining ABC in C1s and C2s is a nice income, but in no way is it depressing mineral prices imho. The sheer amount of PITA that goes into exporting stuff from wormholes simply makes this impossible, also add to this that any C1/C2 where someone sets up shop to mine ABC all day, with a static high sec for 'relatively easy' export, will run out of sites to clear out very very quickly, and there's no guarantee on them respawning immediately like in null sec.
Also, the very fact there's a high sec static means that there will be more visitors, which in turn means more people to kill your mining ops.
Add in no-local, all the flavors of toys you can have in null sec to stop people from escaping and blowing them up, and a total reliance on K-space for ice products for your POS, and the risks in a wormhole are imho well justified to have ABC there.

Mindnut
Posted - 2011.08.17 14:04:00 - [196]
 

Edited by: Mindnut on 17/08/2011 14:21:22
Hi all,
I read through this thread and I'm surprised how this turned into a debate whether to nerf high sec or not and why...

I think that there are means to change very little but with high efficiency. I wouldn't start by nerfing anything here but by eliminating the main reason the prices are dropping - bots. With a simple change in the mining mechanism CCP could eliminate them or at least make botting unprofitable. I suggested something simmilar a while back and so have other players on this forum...

1. Make the belts a lot bigger (more like ice field)

2. Make 80% of the asteroids useless to a miner – “dummy roids” – empty. The other 20% contain ore.

3. Empty roids do not disappear but become empty of ore - “dummy roids”. Instead of spawning roids on downtime have them filled again with ore but randomly so that miners will not be able to use the same bookmark again. They would have to fly around this gigantic belt again to find deposits in other places using survey scanner.

4. Change the survey list window so that it can't sort by ammount of ore in the roids
This is how the survey result would look like:

Veldspar 5687km 0 units
Scordite 1234km 200 units
Veldspar 5687km 0 units
Plagioclase 1287km 1 units
Veldspar 2434km 0 units
Veldspar 5097km 0 units
Plagioclase 5213km 12 units
Veldspar 5123km 92345 units
Veldspar 5457km 0 units

5. When the roid is depleted and becomes a "dummy roid" the laser doesn't deactivate.

This way if a bot warps to a field and locks 3 first roids on the overview list there is a very low chance that these roids will contain any ore. Same if survey scanner list is used.

To make mining a little safer, more fun and profitable in 0.0 I'd like to suggest the following changes.

1. Give mining ships, orca/rorqual a bonus so that they can shield tank bs rats in 0.0
That way we won't have to keep switching to bs's to kill rats when we're mining solo. Right now if I'm using 3 accounts to mine in highsec I can fly 2 hulks and an orca but if I do that in 0.0 I have to use a tanking ship on one account or stop mining to switch to a bs. This makes 0.0 mining less profitable when it comes to mining low-end ore.

2. Make the drone bay bigger and allow these ships to use bigger drones so that they can kill rats in belts. Not so fast as combat ships though. This way mining will be a little more fun and profitable.

The next bit is something I suggested in the "HOME" thread
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1565838=2#33
If you introduce "CAPITAL SYSTEMS" and "Internal System Security" that add bonuses to ship statistics mining ships will aso get a bonus to yield.

As for the ice fields...
1. Remove all ice fields from the game
2. Add some ice roids into every asteroid field but make them deplete like everything else making the amouts available limited.

I don't think that nerfing high sec is going to do us all any good. I'd apply these small changes and see how it all works out before I go and flip everything around and make people angry by spoiling their game.

Fly safe,
Mind

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.17 14:31:00 - [197]
 

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.

Susiqueta Muir
Disturbed Blood Astrometrics
Posted - 2011.08.17 14:37:00 - [198]
 

Edited by: Susiqueta Muir on 17/08/2011 14:49:30
The risk vs. reward and availability of minerals and in fact all resources should be on a sliding scale where all corners of the galaxy are in some way dependant on others.

High sec should need products which are only available in null or low (i.e. ABC's), but likewise nullsec should be dependant on resources only available in high. (i.e. Ice).

the reason for this is that it promotes movement of players between the systems, trade links, pinch points for conflict to break out and ultimately the migration back and forth of isk, resources and people.

If any region could become self sufficient from any other (i.e. if Ice was in WH's) then you may as well close that section off from the rest of the galaxy. there would be no requirement for people, resources and isk to flow through the regions and the only travel you'll get will be mass warfare/invasions as there will be no point in sitting in the middle in a pirate ship or in a small roaming gang as the amount of traffic/targets will dry up.

highsec should have lots of low value stuff to mine and use and tiny amounts of high value. Nullsec the reverse.

Setting up shop in highsec (in a pos) SHOULD be costly and cheap in nullsec. Missions should be more available in Highsec (as it's much more developed space) though the payouts should be less than any you can do in Nullsec.

This balance seems to be in place for most things.

We have however the T2 Moon Goo issue where the ONLY source is in 0.0, likewise for boosters etc. there should be more of a spread of these resources around the place. i.e. you should be able to find some moon goo in high sec, but the method of extraction would be different. ie. moon harvesters not allowed in highsec (so no big mining/Hoover-POS') but PI could be extended (why not if we can build on gas giants and lava planets ffs) to Moons as well, giving "Moon goo" harvesting setups a chance, albeit producing far far less per cycle than a 0.0 based tower.

If there is no sliding scale of availability for ALL the resources then it will limit trade, growth, traffic, migration and all the fun pvp.:)

Sure, add ice to 0.0, but have very few small ice chunks but which are much more concentrated than the highsec systems, then set lowsec up as something inbetween. You can steadily churn away licking lollies in highsec for a guarenteed steady income or coud risk it all in an intense mine and grab operation in 0.0. Lowsec could give a balance in between, more risk and less ice than highsec, more ice and (potentially) safer than null. I would foresee lots of mining ops heading for lowsec to try and make a fast buck, but likewise an upsurge in lowsec pirates to try and cash in on this as well.

A lot of the current setup fits in with this model, but there are areas (moon go and ice as two clear examples) which need addressing.

The inability of independants to force a small and relatively secure 0.0 presence without having to kowtow to the big alliances (as covered off under the "Smallholdings" concept) is another issue to be addressed.

TL;DR - Remove interdependancies between the regions and the amount of player driven activity will fall, isolating pockets of space from eachother as there would be no reason to travel.

Availability, risk and profit should all scale and are interwoven.

SM.

Susiqueta Muir
Disturbed Blood Astrometrics
Posted - 2011.08.17 14:39:00 - [199]
 

Originally by: Dadder
3. As for increasing low end yields. I would personally like to see the introduction of a new ship class, possibly orca sized, that is specialized for mining low end mins only. People have been wanting a capital mining ship for years and i think it could be a very viable option now. If limited only to null sec like the rorq it would definitely fill a needed role.


I want my own Veldnaught... A "Chribba-class" industrial ship.. :) (Yum).

SM.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.17 14:43:00 - [200]
 

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...

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:01:00 - [201]
 

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?!

Psihius
Caldari
Anarchist Dawn
U N K N O W N
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:07:00 - [202]
 

CCP Greyscale
Living in the C2, we have some miners and I have an Orca/perfect miner character myself.

Together with a corp we have chewed about 3-5 grav sites at most. And then I had to get it to refine facility. 2 600 000 m3 of it when it piled up. That was the last time I EVER, I SAY _EVAR_!!! i have done that mistake. 3.5 hours jumping in and out of empire, warping to station, refining, bringing back and scanning new wormholes to find new empire exists. It takes 4 jumps out and 4 in to close highsec wormhole. Orca can take 180 000 m3 (190 000 m3 if using t2 cargo rigs) at All V level tops (mine is not level 5). It took me closing 5 wormholes and eating the last 3/4 to do that. I'm probably one of the most stubborn players in EVE for my "heroic" move, that I actually finished.
Funny part is - no minerals got to the market, we have put them to good use to build ships, ammo, etc.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:08:00 - [203]
 

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.

Psihius
Caldari
Anarchist Dawn
U N K N O W N
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:19:00 - [204]
 

Edited by: Psihius on 17/08/2011 15:24:59
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.

It can be explained actually. Bigger ABC quantities are in C5-C6. C5-C6 are where large groups live, and they have carriers, dreadnoughts and very angry neighbors. That makes them cautious about when they do mining. Even when they run sleeper sites - they close all wormholes witch lead to any active WH's and bubble the hell out statics and have a scout looking out for enemies. They have the manpower to do all that. And hulk isn't as lucrative target as a few dreadnoughts are. Hulks have time to warp off and they usually do have some protection. That's why hulks are not dieing as covetors do :) Also it's a good idea to use a covetor instead of hulk - no rush to mine the grav site (it's small) and cheap to lose :)

And really, as people have said - low and mid ores are quite low on amount to be able to do some production. We had to import everything except trit (trit is abundant in scrapmetals witch we reproccess).

lushn
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:25:00 - [205]
 




Originally by: CCP Greyscale
... 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. ....


Those %60 must be experianced players and %26 is new players. Every experianced players knows that number one rule. "Never bring HUlk in to W-space" You risk 200mil cost ship or 14mill cost ship? I cant buy couple covetor to use in Wormhole instead of riskin my hulk.



Lord Wulfengheist
Amarr
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:32:00 - [206]
 

Edited by: Lord Wulfengheist on 17/08/2011 15:54:15

Adhocracy Incorporated has been in wormholes since they came out, and that includes me.

A hulk is, when fully fit, nearly 200m.
A covetor breaks what? 20 if you try really hard?

We've already established that wormholes are dangerous. Before you can begin to make the connection that "experienced pilots are safer" tell me this. Which ship is flown more? What is the ship distribution? Could it be that 26% of hulks die in W space because only 30% of the total hulks in game are there?

More likely, the kill discrepency is the result of more covetors being flown more than simply hulk pilots getting away. After all, a covetor is worth a tenth a hulk, so they're a surer bet to fly.

But even if you are perfectly right, and W space is as "safe" as nullsec, why should ore be pulled from WH's then? If it's en par safety wise with nullsec, any boost to nullsec should by applied to wormholes, or at the very least, wormholes should not be nerfed.

Someone else in the past mentioned the logistics they go through. Even a rorqual does not aid that too much despite the ore compression. The ore still needs to be moved out, refined, and brought back or refined locally at a 25% loss rate. But I've heard talks of day trippers ruining the market. That's BS as well.
Usually, the only thing they go home in is a body bag, but assuming they mine completely alone.

Mass:
Orca (we're going to go full on mining operation here to even make it worth it)
250kt each way, so assuming it only goes back and forth, 500kt
Covetor, x5 [or hulk, but mass is the same]
40kt each way, times 5, so 400kt
Support fleet (this, more often than not, is left in K space, but we're going for a realistically safe fleet)
Average for Cruiser/BCs, about 15kt. Assuming 5 ships, which would probably deter 1-3 t3's, that's 150kt.
Mammoth haulers (make math easy and say 30km3 holds)
30kt per trip, for the 5 covetors w/bonuses, you'd want 2, so 60kt per trip. We'll say they make 5 trips, for a total of 600km3 hauled and 300kt through the hole.

That adds up to 500+400+150+300=1350kt easy through the wormhole. Depending on the system, that may not even make it all through, even dropping the support fleet. (Wormholes allow for roughly 1000kt through and up, with most of them allowing around 2000kt, though to support the orca, the latter mass limit is most likely).

So, assuming they find a completely empty, unused hole, and do not die, what did this shindig make?
Let's use Grey Scales numbers!

This load, assuming it's all ABC, would be: 37% ark, 29% bistot, and 34% crokite.
For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume the ore is simply sold as ore, as refining is fairly heavily player dependent.

6937 Ark @ 2500ea (Buy) = 17,342,500
5437 Bistot @ 2100ea (Buy) = 11,417,700
6375 Crokite @ 2300ea (Buy)= 14,662,500

So, assuming you sell outright, you've made 43m. Put up a sell order, ideally you make 86m. Refine, sell all minerals, etc, you get what, 150m?

Congrats, a few hours worth of work has left each pilot 20m (with no support fleet).

Ergo, hisec day trippers are not a factor. And I will also back up everyone else saying that mining is a time killer more than anything.

But, I will end this wall with a restatement of a previous point. If WH's and Nullsec are truly equally safe, which you're data then should the rewards not be the same?

PS: I don't even know what to say about your production data. Tell my exactly what is produced and what it costs and what had to be left over, not just an assumed relationship, and I might listen.

Salpun
Gallente
Paramount Commerce
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:35:00 - [207]
 

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.


Good info whats the ratio of ore available to ore mined percentage wise daily for each type of space and type of rock common, rare, ABC ,M?
I do not buy the hulk/ cov arguement becouse a corp that does corp mining ops uses retreavers and cov becouse they are easy to replace.
Any way to tell class of wh?

If there was more things to do in wh space to make isk for single players in all classes of wh's it would be better for all envolved.

While mining can be safer if there are not a lot of people scanning and opening up static wh's when a mining fleet dies in wh space like most sleeper running fleets/ships everyone dies including the orca support.
Is there a way to tell how much ore mined is lost when ships get detroyed or cans time out?

Or the rato of ship value lost in destroyed SMA and CHA's in the wh's verses ore extracted/ mission loot optained and sold.

To survive in a c-4 large towers carriers, roquals and some times dreads are required to just feel prepared for an attack. All that value is lost as soon as someone decides to come in and destroy you and if the attack is well planed all that value, all the extra ships are lost and all the players get is a free trip to hs in a clone body.
Lets have some more factsTwisted Evil so we can realy debate the issue.

Cuhlen
Tower of Ravens
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:43:00 - [208]
 

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).


So to turn this around, 73% of Arkonor, 79% of Bistot and 75% of Crokite is mined in 0.0/ls
So how is it that wormhole mining is depressing the value of high-end minerals again?
How much of each is estimated to be mined by bots?

Macro miners are the primary reason for the depression of mineral prices. Deal with them first, then revisit this issue in the future.

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

It's hard to see what people would be doing with all that mega other than selling it on the market.


This is the problem... it's hard to see without real data. I imagine it would be possible, and not even all that hard, to query the job lists of assembly arrays located in WH systems and see just what is being produced and how many minerals are being consumed, etc. Going back 90 days should be enough to give a good estimate, or better yet, use the same date range that was used to calculate the above percentages.

But all of that aside - WH mining and HS ice are not the problem, macro mining and the inherent difficulties of mining in ls and 0.0 are where your problems lie. Fix those issues first please.





Grady Eltoren
Minmatar
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:47:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Takashi Halamoto
why just ice do it with ores as well, so you have your three types of veldspar,

lowsec gets the crystalised versions of the three veldspars each 25% better than its high sec equivalent,

null gets the metallic versions of the three veldspars each 50% better than its highsec equivalent,

now any mineral is worth mining in null (though veld pyro and plag might need to be double yield?) but has the distance problem for trying to move it to empire (and JF fuel costs isk eating profit) so it becomes feasable to mine locally for production


AGREED. Scaled reward.

Dense Veldspar is only in null (and WH although in less abundance) Medium veld in low (with occasional dense maybe) and hi-sec just has regualr veld, etc etc. Industry still goes on in hi-sec as there will always be a niche market here or there you can sell if you are willing to move your few goods you build...i know - I do it all the time (I can still sell Ravens for 90m a piece). Same with ICE MINING. Dense glitter, etc in NULL and scale it down from there.
In regards to T2 moon mins - that I say needs to have some in hi-sec in the form of COMET mining!
T3 - that (since it it salvage based mainly) needs to stay in WH's as planned. Good seperations alowing for all types of industry and TONS of conflict/PVP. :) Everyone is happy.

lushn
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:54:00 - [210]
 

Edited by: lushn on 17/08/2011 15:54:52


This is sounds like new plot how to flow money to big nullsec aliances. As you know most of them owned by old players. many friends of CCP devs. So lets help them make more isk. Ohh there are solo miners in Highsec. Mining peacefully their veldspar. Lets do Highsec Less mineable then They have to go Nullsec and pay Aliance Fee, system rental fee, ABC ore mining tax to those old guys. Is this What CCP wants? Its True null sec can be pretty safe and low risk as soon as they pay CCP's old belowed friends.



Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... : last (18)

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