No one belt mines in null.
2 Likes
Not right now. If they remove all basic ores from moon like that article said, people will be though. Moon ores donât carry the materials found in abc/spod ores. Unless they are changing that about moon ores too.
Like I was saying. The lack of information about exactly how the moon changes and ore distribution will be have made it difficult to project where the future of mining is.
No, they wonât.
Nullsec belts have so little ore theyâre not even worth the Heavy Water for a single Indy Core cycle. At worst, theyâll just go back to mining in the Ore Anomalies.
The bounties in null are just easier to grind than high security space missions.
Mining sucks in ISK/hr for most areas and has for a long time.
Its not the bounties that are the problem, its that massive super fleets with nothing to do pretty much print ISK.
More profitable, yes. More profitable than any other profession? No.
People without other options belt mine in null.
Its future was bleak yesterday, its bleak today and itâll still be bleak for all eternity because the market is just a race to the bottom.
Thatâs probably the point.
I hope so, that would be quite useful to see.
Then those people arenât relevant to the discussion.
Hah. Not even close.
Bounties in null are higher than in highsec/lowsec, yes. The rats are also a bit more amped up. And there definitely are thousands of players[1] farming rats every day.
They have adjusted bounty payouts in the past. As for missioning⌠hah. Missioning in null is a pittance. Even if it werenât, go look through threats in the past where theyâve just talked about trying to work on the mission system. The sheer volume of outraged cacophony from HS players is staggering. And it happens every time[2].
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahah. Belts. Thatâs funny.
Still wouldnât be in belts. Weâll just cycle the amazingly-reduced anoms faster, and move around more. Itâs not like we actually mine ore on moons now, you know? Goo, baby, goo.
More like massive super fleets that nobody can afford to lose (because theyâre too necessary for deterring someone elseâs super fleet from attacking).
1. Are there bots? Anyone whoâd claim there arenât is an idiot, and I am not an idiot. If you find someone doing something you believe is botting, please, report them to CCP. Let CCP investigate it. They have the tools to do that, and whatâs more, they actually get paid to do that. But there are definitely thousands of actual non-bot players out there ratting every day, too. Bots donât get on comms to call for help. Bots donât bungle getting on comms to call for help so badly that the defendersâ biggest regret is âwe didnât get to kill you ourselvesâ. And that happens every damned day, more times than I care to count.
2. Iâm not at all surprised they didnât tell anyone in advance that they had a small number of brand new missions going in. People would have demanded the new missions be exactly like their favorite mission, only, you know, different. But not different enough to be different. And then theyâd have started yelling at one another about which missions the new ones should duplicate, because for every âI love this missionâ, thereâs people out there that hate that specific mission, and will yell and kick and scream about it on the forums every time itâs brought up.
Quite Fun to see all the Mimimimi about Frat ratting like crazy in Oasa 
You dont need Rorqâs in the belt , dont forget all the barges we used in the old days of mining before the Rorq.
No, but you do need rorqs if you donât want to instantly explode to the 200-man bomber fleets. The ecosystem has changed.
1 Like
Limit of 25 ships per covert cyno, as per filaments?
Maybe CCP could release a Covert Cyno Jammer citadel structure, even at $100 million a day it would be worth it.
1 Like
Why would that matter? First thing you bridge to the covert cyno⌠is more covert cynos. 1 dedicated blops for the covert/nullified T3Cs, half a dozen more for the dps.
Ok, so now youâve got every system where people mine in null running one of those, and the whalers crying again just like they do over every other change that lets people defend themselves even a little bit more.
Knowing itâs like discussing things with the ocean, could you link some examples of this? I have found that the most vocal of the critics arguing against any change in the mission system are the same secondary,tertiary, and even more distant toons of null sec players upset that their speed running of the same missions for LP/isk might be disrupted by having to actually fit an omni tank or have an unknown variable thrown into a set mission. While I agree that there are some vocal opponents to any change in the set in stone mission system, there are far more players looking for changes in both mission and exploration sites; changes which are carefully thought out, spread out, and minor enough that incremental tweaks can be added to adjust to fair/good/quality gameplay.
You would be upset if a bunch of HS players advised CCP on what should be done in NS or WHs and rightly so.
Let CCP use their long touted data mining ability to actually ask those players who mainly do specific areas or tasks what they are looking for instead of listening to just the loudest? Remember this has nothing to do with FOBs,RW,Abyssals,Invasions, NPC mining fleets, or conduit changes; changes that actually were never asked for or addressed what many players were looking for (despite CCP and the CSM arguing that was EXACTLY what we were asking for).
Anyway, I wanted to voice my concern and dismay that you felt that mission could never change because you felt that too many people wanted things to remain the same. Perhaps in another year or so, any demand for newer missions/sites/variables will no longer be there as the number of players continue to dwindle. Sorry to see anyone leave; we as a community and game are stronger with retaining long term players.
Dude, youâve been in those threads⌠but when I have some time later, Iâll go looking for the discussions Jinâtaan or Brisc facetanked since the new forums came out.
There are absolutely more people who want changes than oppose them. Unfortunately, the majority of the highsec pilots who want changes in general donât engage on these forums. And a fair chunk of those who do want âchangeâ⌠but tend to object to suggested changes for one reason or another. So the feedback CCP sees⌠is negative. 
Iâm generally annoyed that a bunch of lowsec players who havenât spent more than a few days living in null (with a few exceptions) do make all the decisions about what changes happen in NS. Larrikinâs from Null. Most of the rest of the devs? Lowsec, or theyâve been playing in J-space. Even now, so far as we know most of them are not getting any experience with life in null while they design changes for null.
I would totally agree with this⌠but they seem to not do it, donât they?
Hold my teeth.
Canât activate a cyno within 250km of another cyno? I can already hear the cries from those focused on capital escalation gameplay cringing. Anything to break up the mechanic of 1 ship being all that is needed to bring in the power of 100âs. The inability for every ship in the game to fit a cyno for the super umbrella to jump is a better balance, no?
Whaling in null is about as welcome in the game as infinite war declarations were in high security space.
If Whalers want to PvP, maybe they should go through the effort of forming a real fleet and attack infrastructure like citadels or engage in enosis gameplay to blow up iHubs that make colossal ore sites.
Its already apparent that forcing miners to mine the belts in null is almost the worst thing you could do to them.
Oh, right, that requires actual workâŚ
You mean like 1 Covops frigate scanning down a WH to bring in a huge fleet of bombers?
I have no problem with the cyno changes. I never like interceptor cynos in the first place, and stuck w/Force Recons through the last 6 years. But taking the position of âeven if you use a reasonable amount of preparation and planning, that shouldnât count for anything because the other guy didnâtâ is⌠ridiculous. And thatâs what it always seems to come down to.
Right now, the landscape is tilted toward defense. Why? Because people have put in the time and effort to figure out how to organize large groups so they can defend themselves. The people who object to that are basically making a claim that that time and effort shouldnât count for anything, because they donât want to have to put in a similar amount of time and effort.
They think itâs unfair that they should have to do the same amount of work. The hunters who donât? The ones who donât mind putting in a reasonable amount of effort? Theyâre out there, and theyâre real good at what they do. Itâs just that âwhat they doâ doesnât always line up with perceptions. Theyâll come here ahead of changes to tell CCP âthis is what will likely happenâ. Theyâll even suggest ways to mitigate the negative side-effects. But once things go live? They just get on with doing what they do. And âwhat they doâ doesnât including coming onto the forums to whine. 
Nah, itâd just be the most pointless thing you could do. If you want people living out in null, you have to give them reason to do it. Belt-mining is garbage. The belts are crap, and theyâre extremely limited crap. Itâs like that in HS, too, where the populated areas see the belts mined out within an hour of downtime, every day. But HS isâin theoryâlower risk. So if you push people into the belts⌠well, youâre going to see what youâve already seen, only more: prices go up on T1 hulls in highsec, because mineral supply dropped.
Belt-mining would mean it drops even more. As it is? It will drop even more. So get ready for everything to cost more in Jita, just like itâs already been doing.
1 Like
off topic question, not sure where to direct this. Was this made using R or python and matplotlib? Great report.
Change the whole game because the little guy is hurting the bottom lines too much but Delve is working as intended. lol