Still no love for the WH life? Lame…
2 Likes
@CCP_Fozzie has already said that while they would love to bring this mechanic to wspace or high-sec, it won’t likely be used to mine T2 materials from moons and also not in the initial release. There is already enough supply-side issues with the release and the current mineral economy that I certainly understand not wanting to rock the boat right now with new material sources.
2 Likes
Which is a GOOD thing.
Why? Because it triggers people to deal with ■■■■. Their own choices, the consequences of it. It triggers them to notice pressure elsewhere, the kind of pressure the violates gentleman’s accords. It stimulates people to experiment with different organisational models.
Jeezis tittifucking christ, there was a time where we had frigging wannabee miners with pitchforks roleplaying a democracy out in nullsec complete with everything that it entailed. We had trailer trash roaming like locusts being the elite of the elite predators. We had the equivalent of roman ■■■■■■■ legions complete with internal punishments of decimation. I can go on for hours like this.
Static resource models by their very definition enforce behavioural effects of both greed AND perverse effect types for every human organisational model while simultaneously enforcing an adaptation path towards optimal routines of least energy consumption.
Andys, if anyone points this out, seriously. EVE ain’t a set of mechanical interactions, it’s a pixel village of every type of human concept tossed into a pressure vat. There is absolutely nothing which still generates pressure other than the bling divide lines. CCP should know its customers by now, we do anything to enforce status quo unless we are triggered in such a way that differences and change as a constant rewards different behaviour.
Holy ■■■■, what am I doing again in this place 
Also, how the hell did that emoji make it from Failheap to here 
2 Likes
Wouldn’t that be the biggest PITA to handle for logistics with all the asset and infrastructure relocation? Would wee for example really move our stuff from Delve once it’s mined out to Fountain and then to clown ring once fountain is also mined out and then try to keep wheeling around? I’m no expert in that but this sound like a nightmare.
If the current mineral supply is an issue, why are they adding ore into the moon chunks that will only realistically be readily available to larger nullsec alliances?
1 Like
This looks good , but i have concerns about the cycle time. Given the sky rocket in t2 prices this will create a believe a shorter cycle time of 1-2 weeks would be the better options for market stability
1 Like
Considering that existing anomalies are already infinitely respawning, adding additional supply doesn’t really change much. Infinite plus infinite is still infinite. They adjust the “mineral supply” by the rate of resource extraction.
3 Likes
Because at this moment there is absolutely no need to do it plus we’ve agreed not to do it.
We have a set of agreements and conventions in place, it’s an age of napoleontic and structurally limited conflict. Organisational highways take take of internal dynamics, and the structures and agreements to connect those handle the rest.
My point is that the bigger the organisation, the bigger the finance potential, the bigger the need for demographical reach, the more push towards applying the same old min/max mindset that - as someone else here pointed out - makes people go over the hill and beyond in the blink of an eye.
It is a tired meme that everything introduced in EVE is “only accessible to larger nullsec alliances”
I can’t speak for CCPs thoughts on what the moon materials will do for supply but the fact that it takes active players to gather instead of passive operations means those active players are engaging in moon mining at the expense of something else OR we have a net increase in activity. I expect they believe that the net result will be positive for the economy (materials lost vs. materials gathered) and I’m sure also there are many variables at play here when it comes to how much material will be gathered compared to the current passive mechanisms. At least this new system provides CCP with many new levers to push and pull if they find an imbalance in resources.
1 Like
Sorry, but this is equivalent to a high-school physics problem that ignores things like friction and wind resistance. Mitigating factors exist that prevent this sort of thing.
3 Likes
Its been mentioned before but for the sake of having it here. We broadly have no problem with this kind of mechanic being added to other areas of space, but it won’t be included in this initial release.
8 Likes
CCP bravo for having the balls to do this. No more PL NC Goons holding all dyspro.moon in the whole of eve and gaining billions of passive ISK.
Way to go in the complete redistribution of moons that’s going to be epic and well funny when one min you have a dyspro moon the next it’s a silicate 
great move. LET the chaos begin on that one. Every moon will.need to be surveyed. Brilliant.
This now gives everyone a chance!
Only thing I’m not sure about a random algorithm we all know sometimes things are not quite random and I would worry we get in another situation where north has the best moons and South has the crap or viva versa. Wouldn’t want that again. Maybe run the randomized per region to ensure each region has got its fair share or something.
But well done. Now have the balls to sort stupid ridiculous rental empires because now this will get even worse especially from PL NC and XIX especially.
3 Likes
Nah. It would make consequences of actions relevant again. Leave it up to CCP to figure out the statistics, sustainability, pressure factors and such. Not to mention there’s a hell of a lot of room for grand game design feature sets and mechanisms within a dynamic environment.
It isn’t much different from once upon a long ago when players in one region had to do Multi-billion isk (which unlike now was stupid money) deals to trade one type of mineral for another because of regional distribution. It isn’t much different than previous map changes in resource distribution. Players always adapt, and the best organisations find the fun in adaptation - or forcing others to embrace or die from adaptation.
There’s no secret to economics overheating, it’s been three years now of CCP trying to tweak and curb matters. The irony is that the simple foundation of it is that it is all based on engines of destruction and redistribution, not on creation or consumption - those are important, but they are derivative and facilitators.
Seriously, it is a really fun thing to compare Tq with the Chinese eve in these regards. It demonstrates perfectly where the heat is in tq’s economics and what variables lack pressure. But that’s a different topic.
1 Like
Sounds like a good new mechanic to me. Except one thing: The actual mining itself still is as boring as ever. I wonder if there will be enough willing pilots to do all this additional mining. After all, the old minerals will still need to be mined, but now the moon minerals need active mining, too.
1 Like
It would make sense maybe to at least allow WH dwellers to drag up the standard ore elements. We’ll most likely be using these to run the gas reactions anyway but a means to get ore belts other than waiting for random ore anomolies would be nice.
1 Like
The word “random” might be a bit misleading here, there will be some parameters and restrictions applied to ensure what you are worried about won’t happen, but by random we mean we won’t be deciding exactly which moon in which system gets what and so on. I hope this allays your fears!
5 Likes
So, a general question about the economics of this that I keep asking:
Right now, it’s not unreasonable for a decent-sized alliance to have, say, a couple hundred POS chains set up across their area of influence. With some indy/hauler alts to manage the logistics, a big alliance capable of defending across that space can bring in a pretty hefty income, and supply T2 materials for a sizable demand.
Now, however, let’s take the upper end of your timer for the moon drill array, at 1 month. If that’s the case, now – assuming no changes is income on a moon network with the same mix of value – that alliance has to be running 200 moon-mining ops a month.
That would be an enormous extra workload, one I doubt most alliances would be willing to take on. So the alliances cut way back on their moon harvesting operations. This in turn causes T2 prices to skyrocket, which in turn leads to the moons being much more valuable than previously.
Is this the outcome that CCP is working towards? That alliances control far fewer moons, but derive equivalent income compared to before, with the side-effect that T2 materials (and thus all the ships, mods, etc. that derive from them) are now vastly more expensive? Is that the intended outcome?
If it isn’t, what part of this equation is going to change?
1 Like
This is exactly the kind of thing we could look at, after the initial release is behind us. Thanks!
1 Like
Which is the exact case in behavioural compensation. Organisation is the mitigating factor, not the mechanism for top-strata of organisations. In this we choose to go over the top. Because we crave status quo in security and certainty.
People can try to come up with detail level or abstract distractions from the case in point, but that does not change the nature of our behaviour, or the lengths of it that we will go to.
And maybe some ice ore whilst you’re at it 
1 Like