The only place there is zero challenge or chance of failure in mining is hisec. And that’s iffy.
But, I haven’t mined in hisec since 2010. So I’m not even sure how it is anymore.
1 Like
Opened again.
2 Likes
So as I’m skimming through this thread, I’m seeing a lot of talk about how this patch might impact mission runners. I’m the Co-Head of a group, the United Standings Improvement Agency [USIA], that has hired and paid hundreds of players to run missions over the past 11 years, and here is my personal take:
Excluding the opportunity to get paid to run missions by working for us… , yes, it is true that prices will increase while ISK income from missions (rewards + bounties) stays constant, so only considering those elements the value of mission running has decreased. Missions as a whole are in a poor state and need to be completely and totally redone. However, ISK isn’t the only revenue from missions - there’s also loot, salvage, and LP. As a rule of thumb, it is generally not worth L1-L4 looting mission except from using an MTU, which is only feasible if using a BS in L4s (or maybe an alt using a Noctis if you have literally nothing better to do with the alt… not going to lie, there are better uses for simultaneous revenue generation), and it is generally never worth salvaging missions at all (Noctis alt aside, you can get more salvage of higher quality - including T2 + T3 relics - in a shorter amount of time from relic sites); however, the value of the loot you do get will now have increased value. Why? Because more players will be willing to reprocess modules since their relative yields will have dramatically increased, and more reprocessed modules = lower market supply = increased prices given the same demand. It is also likely the demand will increase since fewer players may be willing to use T1M0 and T2 modules given their increase in prices, opting instead for T1 Metas (similar performance, easier to fit, fewer penalties than T2), thereby increasing their value further. And of course, mission runners can reprocess the modules themselves and enjoy their increased relative yields - reprocessing scrap is more worthwhile than it was before.
Let’s not forget the LP: LP store prices have not changed while the value of all LP store items that require T1M0 tradeins and BPCs are likely to increase as a result of this patch to a greater extent than T1/T2 items being manufactured. I expect this to be particularly true of Faction drones, Faction ammo (esp. Navy), and Faction ships. Given the opportunity to purchase a now-more expensive T1/T2 ship or a faction ship, faction ships may be favored to a greater extent than they were before since they have better relative value cost-wise. If more players opt for faction ships, the supply will decrease, and the prices will increase - and players will STILL favor them as being offering more bang for the buck in many instances - particularly in factional warfare where faction ships are permitted while T2 are not in some sites. Mission runners procuring pirate faction goods and those procuring navy goods from FW NPC corps (where many navy goods are sold at discount compared to “normal” corps - also, FW NPC corps are the only source for navy drones and certain navy ships such as the Typhoon Fleet Issue) should be looking at a nice profit moreso than mission runners running for “normal” corps. (For the record, I have never done FW missions neither for personal gain nor for USIA, and I feel they should be removed from the game)
I think it is possible for nullsec and FW mission runners to gain from this (not sure about mission runners working “normal” corps) depending on 1. if runners invest in faction items 2. if the corp offers redemption options that don’t require T1 counterpart trade-ins (this may or may not matter) 3. if change in prices for faction items rise more than they do for T1M0 counterparts (in the long term).
In any case, USIA runners are not concerned. They are paid very handsomely for their efforts and almost the entirety of their income comes from what we pay them rather than the missions themselves 
3 Likes
If you are running the anom for the 1000th time, what meaningful chance is there of losing your ships to the NPC’s, unless you are deliberately doing a “I am bored and trying a different ship just to see if I can make it work”.
1 Like
There is zero chance of failure anywhere in PvE, once you learn how to do it properly. That’s why it’s so easy to make those nullsec farming bots. The only threat of loss comes from PvP threats attacking you while you try to do PvE, and I’m sure it’s 100% coincidental that this change is moving minimal-risk highsec farming into space where there are far more PvP threats.
2 Likes
Eve 2007… No anoms, everything is expensive, no citadels, outposts are absurdly expensive, nosferatu’s work correctly, armageddon is a proper battleship, capitals aren’t everywhere, rorquals aren’t mining 250m ISK per hour, supers aren’t getting 120 mil ticks, belt ratting is a primary source of income for many. All that and much, much more has changed yet Eve persists. Amazing.
8 Likes
BS and you know it.
One thing that’s nice is that being a veteran on the forums (something I never asked for) is it seems I don’t need to click “View ignored content.” to see the post!
3 Likes
I have no interest in seeing where this game goes. I will keep a minimal connection as I’ve been playing since 2007. As a solo player, the Triglavians and recent resource and market changes either bore me to annoyance or infuriate me as to their exposure of CCPs impotence and inability to control their own game.
I’d rather get heavily self-medicated and play my guitar or listen to live concerts on YouTube. AMF, and I don’t mean “Adios My Friend”.
2 Likes
Don’t toss your stuff. You never know…
Nono, do toss your stuff but toss it to me!
@Ghengis_Tia This really isn’t a big deal, it’s not going to have anywhere near the impact people are doom & glooming over. EVE was like this for more than a decade and it was perfectly fine. It was actually removing this kind of separation that started the issues.
@Rose_Darksun CCP are listening. They are just listening to people with facts, figures and coherently structured arguments. Not rage quitting doom & gloomers who aren’t even reading the Dev blog fully half of them.
1 Like
Players forget that dynamic redistribution is being released at the exact same time as the final step of resource shortage. CCP has not yet released a dev blog as to what step 1 of dynamic redistribution will entail, but I am fairly certain it will reseed to some extent ores that were taken away.
Hey, I wanted it 1st! 
(kinda)
Instead of bashing your head into the flat screen, take a 3 mo break.
1 Like
Ut oh…
I have removed several more non-constructive and frankly insulting posts. I understand that people are upset but that is no reason to launch personal attacks on CCP and ISD. As stated before, warnings have gone out as a result, and if it continues, will be escalated further. Thank you.
5 Likes
After reading this all day, I wanted to push it. Thanks for the reminder. 
CCP has done well managing Eve. Literally every change has people crying and threatening they will unsub. When carrier dps was reduced, same thing. When broker relations changed, again. Yet so far the changes seem to have actually helped Eve for 99% of players. Instead of thinking “omg this is horrible!”, Try asking yourself FIRST, what good could honestly come from this? I see lots of good potential. Thanks CCP! People just hate change even if for the better
2 Likes
I will be plain and clear. CCP, if you continue down this route I will permanently leave this game.
2 Likes