That’s another thing. Why remove Veld from null when people still have Arkonor. But if belts still had Spod and if its content there would be improved, people would go there. People mine in belts already and this should be encouraged instead of punished.
The way CCP went about this it’s just another poorly implemented thing. One can only hope they improve in the next steps. The first step does not bode well, however.
@Daoden exactly that.
Same reason CCP removed Walking in Stations. Because no one used it. Duh.
" It is also understood that certain changes require precise communication in advance in order to give pilots enough time to prepare, so other more gradual plans that exist for changes will be communicated in this fashion"
What fashion? In a blog 3 days after its happened?
Moan, Moan, Moan ! Don’t you null-seccers ever stop complaining ??
As mentioned in another thread, they aren’t telling people in advance because it stops people playing the market.
Understandable, but wouldn’t be an issue if the changes were announced in that day’s patch notes.
You were being inaccurate and I felt the need to fix it.
I disagree. There was zero reason to announce it. “We don’t know before it happens” definitely can not be considered a good reason simply because it’s irrelevant. All the complaints I’ve been reading through fail to explain the motivation behind them.
Or, to put this into more accessible terms: Why would you need to know in advance?
Please be aware that “because I’d like it” or “because it’d be nice” are answers I’m already aware of and not actually explaining the underlying motivation.
By this logic, we don’t need patch notes at all, right? I mean, why would we ever need to know what changes were made to the game
Whenever someone starts a sentence with “by this logic” it usually means they did not actually think it through and only looked at that tiny part that’s relevant to them.
There was zero reason to announce it. Unlike other changes like ship changes, fitting changes, module changes, name changes and others I can not immediately think of, this change had no reason to be announced. If you don’t understand why the above are actually important, compared to this one, then feel free to ask.
The question stands unanswered: Why would you need to know in advance?
Why are those changes more important?
You are deliberately evading the question that seeks to resolve this matter entirely.
Because people would jump into their ships expecting certain performance and not getting it, ultimately losing their ships and pods without them being at fault at all. The same is valid for ship and module changes.
Name changes need to be announced, because people are expecting to find what they know the names of. Changing the name of an item unanounced would create a LOT of support tickets.
These ore changes did not require to be announced. You have had enough time thinking of an answer to the question:
Why would you need to know in advance?
Because people would jump to belts/anoms expecting certain ores and quantities thereof, and not getting it. We’re not going to lose ships, but does that mean only changes that risk losses should be documented?
So exactly what changes should and shouldn’t be outlined?
If you want, I can pull about 10 examples from the dev blogs of things that we don’t really need to know in advance, but it sure is nice.
Also you’re entirely missing the point of this thread - I couldn’t care less about the change itself. In fact, I trust CCP to make good decisions regarding stuff like this. Not letting us know until days later is shitty though.
There is no reason to assume you’re capable of assessing which changes may not need to be unanounced.
I wish to converse with someone who puts more thoughts into his arguments. You do not. The potential for losing ones ship does not change because there is less ore to be found = The risk level stays exactly the same.
Why?
Why do you need to know in advance?
I will keep steering the conversations in this thread towards this question. It is ultimately the most important question and you, for some reason, refuse to answer it. There is no doubt that you would be having some advantage and the existence of this thread and your behaviour make that apparent.
Or, to make it more accessible: You are not to be believed, because your actions differ from your words explaining them.
Why would you need to know in advance?
Since you’re apparently incapable of seeing the parallels with your own logic, let me explicitly say: for literally the exact same reasons we should be told about any other change to the game. And those are many, and varied. And, crazily enough, depend on the context of changes! 
But since apparently you need an explicit reason why anyone would need to know about this specific change - due to this change, my small corp, with a very small, and relatively new, nullsec op, have to move up our plans for setting up moon mining. (yeah, we’re noobs. leave us alone)
Now, is this as big a deal as, say, sweeping changes to ships or something? Certainly not. Does it matter to me - and by extension, others? Yes.
But again, the change itself is irrelevant to the point I’m trying (and apparently failing) to make - it doesn’t matter the context or size of updates. We shouldn’t be left in the dark when they’re released. (Again, I realize why they wouldn’t announce something like this weeks in advance - but including them in that day’s patch notes would avoid issues like gaming the market before the change hits)
Now, if you think the context of updates matter, then I encourage you to read through the dev blogs (not patch notes) and ask yourself “Why did we need to know about that in advance?” You will certainly end up with examples like yours earlier - changes to ships, names, structures, etc.
But you’ll also end up with a lot more things that, if they were just introduced without warning… no immediate harm would be done, and players would pick it up and adapt quickly.
Now, if you really think that’s okay - that only “important” changes should be documented - that’s cool. I respect that people have differing opinions on how CCP should do things. I certainly hope you do too.
Thank you for finally providing a better picture.
Yes, I do in some parts. From my perspective there need to be far more stealth changes to make the game feel like it’s actually alive. “Weather patterns”, as CCP Hellmar called them. The whole point of these is to actually impact the players exactly like they’ve impacted you and your group.
The thing about a “living, breathing universe” is that unexpected things can happen. That’s what makes it more realistic, because in the real world unrealistic things can happen and will happen. Less predictability and more dynamic player behaviour should always be encouraged. Both of these points are covered by simply not mentioning certain changes and the threads complaining about it are a perfect display of it working as intended.
“Controversy makes money.” People complaining is more desirable than people being silent. People who complain rarely quit. It’s also free marketing when used right. In this case, the message sent to the world is “this game changes in unpredictable ways and CCP does not fear the reaction” and that’s a message plenty of people will be loving to hear, myself included.
Have you tried a brighter portrait? Maybe it’d make you less grumpy. 
I was hoping I could guide you to the picture - I didn’t realize I had to take it and break it over your head.
When they released invasions all they was they are in the game, they didnt tell us how many ships, how much dps they do etc. All they did here was reduce the amount of resources in belts and anoms. The game has been static for years and i would love if they made all belts and mining anoms have somwhere between 1-200% of what they normally give, making it more dynamic with the chance of getting alot more.