One thing I hate about this is the circumvention of our CSM and just going ahead with some plan they have and they expect us to have faith it will all work out. They also say that if they tell the CSM about it that there has been a history of people leaking it… I guess why do we have it then when we are all just a bunch of cucks that way?
On the other hand I am looking forward to the challenge of these fractured trade routes and how the minerals are divided up will affect everything.
literally none of the ships you mentioned can fit a covert ops cloak and thus cannot warp cloaked. Only the blockade runners can fit that cloak and warp while cloaked.
So, cloaky warp only refers to warping when also using a covert ops cloak? Whereas the cloaky warp trick, which was what I was referencing to, is a “trick” that does not in fact impart any aspect of cloaky warp?
Who knew. (Bizarre technical language in use at times in EvE.)
Well, everyone, thats why we pointed it out and I clarifyed that what the person you replayed to was talking about and what you were talking about were different things.
The clarification was appreciated, but my point still stood. Despite my lack of full understanding of the language, I wasn’t convinced the OP had made sufficient argument for a “cloaky warp” mineral ship when a “cloaky warp trick” mineral ship already existed. Still don’t.
This is why, in turn, I tend to refer to it in shorthand as “cloaky warp”, without the trick. Just in the same way the OP actually referred to wanting a “cloaky” ship. Which y’all understood, and I didn’t.
Its cool. YEah, he was a bit unclear, but I didnt think it was important (for me) to labour the point as your solutions are totally valid, and did underline that the original point being made to the OP.
Actually, can you quickly explain CWT (the “trick”) to me?
Semi-relevant. I’ve used miasmos in LS many times and trick works by the numbers. Cloak, spool up MWD to 75% of regular speed, jump. And it jumps.
Recently, I have also been using on T1 indys, instead of just relying on quick align & warp core stabs. Problem is, I’ve been tagged a couple of times. Best guess is that when I get to 75-80%, because I still get that white line with notification that warp is starting, I am still vulnerable and not actually moving?
Trial and error indicates that using different fits/ ships, I might need to get up to 200% of speed before it appears to instawarp. In other words, its absolutely linked to MWD spool time and not the shorthand everyone talks about of reaching 75% speed? Does that sound right?
Im only quickly looking over this, but it loooks ok. There is a margin for error, tick, manuever, align combination of events that can catch folk out, Im just not able to go into detail right now, rushing off to work.
But there’s always someone around here who should be able to clear it up for ya!
Not providing a cure for each disease, but loading whole cabinet full of drugs into a mixer and then serving that drink to every patient. Thats the impression I get seeing those changes.
The mineral changes did not have to look like that when some mechanics changes would be in effect. But with mineral changes they affect everybody, is it good or not.
Scarcity isn’t necessarily the outcome of this scenario, as it requires multi-directional trade - scarcity would come from interruptions to the supply chain, and protecting those supply chains as risk management, secures them as it does make them targets for conflict. It potentially makes for meaningful conflicts.
Yes, as long as you increase mineral yield and get the cloaky mineral ship they are.
I am starting to think you are posting this comment on every single thread that talks about mining you see.
Well, the mining equivalent of NPSI (public mining fleets) don’t really exist (not to my knowledge). What I’m saying is that the goal of miners forming fleets and combatting pirates is a good direction for eve, so we should incentivize them to do so.
Hmm… well, there should be a cloaky transport ship that could carry two mining fleets’ worth of ore loot. (yes that would mean travel time stops mattering, which sucks, but maybe you can find a way to solve that)
No. I want a buff to mineral yield at the same time to make mining worth it. Yes, ore price depends on demand and demand only, but I don’t see ore prices jumping as much as they nerfed mining, so… maybe because of market inefficiencies that we could buff mining incomes??
Speaking of which, if we do this change it means there would be much more people who think killing miners (in all areas of space) is lucrative, and do exactly that, which would counteract this increase in yield’s negative impact to the price of ore.
Like the reason I don’t hunt miners is because they don’t drop a good amount of ore, nor can I carry them.
I bet I mined less than your alts.
Hmm… so maybe we should get them to start doing that again?
Yep. It’s hard to find a mining fleet though, and hard to form one (and hard to form any kind of group overall). Like changing that is definitely changing eve for the better. Also, some of them kind of just depend on luck, so they don’t bother. We should change that as well (by incentivizing people to kill miners).
Yes, but not enough profit. A highsec miner could get much more profit than some guy roaming around nullsec, and that isn’t fair risk-reward. (unless you count fun as a reward, which I do, but then I don’t want anyone to choose between earning isk and fun)
And that’s exactly the problem. Because I want eve to be a place where people actually hire mercs to protect themselves from pirates (because that’s a cool concept, and also it makes player interaction, content, and isk making pvpers)
Hmm… well, I’d say that we should at least balance things so kitchensink nullsec response fleets don’t overpower smart needlejack fleets made under heavy theory-crafting, and that these smart fleets should at least get isk positive.
And why did no one hunt those rorquals who have 3b in their cargoes?? Because they can’t carry them…
Killing miners is a much better way of doing that (decreasing number of miners) because it gives more content and destruction.
And yes, an increase in mining income decreases amount of miners because they get hunted more.
Yep.
That incentivizes defenses for a miner (through hiring of mercs, or joining a fleet)
Also I’m not a miner.
That’s very true. This again: if we buff mining income, there would be more pirates and miners would die more, meaning there would be less miners.
Really? Many miners are in NPC corps or their own corps (not much reason to have fleets anyways, at least not security/content reasons).
I’m saying that because there aren’t enough pirates, the content that arises from the fighting for resources doesn’t appear.
That is quite true, but these points have to be looked at together: more mining income/more yield=more profit for pirates/more pirates=miners have to hire mercs(which reduces the profitability, as well as making it bothersome(effort))=content
I’m talking about all areas of space. (and I say mercs as in a hired defense mechanism, maybe they rep people or something.
Awoxing hadn’t been removed (and many mining corps have friendly fire, too). I meant like freelance mining fleets (which give more choice for miners).
I mean, 5 people should be able to kill 20 with a good fleet comp, intel, and very good strategy.
And that should change. An increase in mining income means wrecks yield more and more people become gankers.
And that is the only people you trust? How do you join a new group then? NPSI kinds of trust is the kind I’m saying, (more choices)
If you had to pay 10 mil for stake for a new character, it will prevent you from making that new character just to join a mining fleet and awox once.
Yes, but it’s not supposed to be uncounterable, and scamming fleets/merc fleets nowadays ARE.
Yep, but more minerals get DESTROYED by pirates as well because there are more pirates (also ships are getting more expensive, and that’s not too good for people just getting into cruisers)
All ships can fit a cloak. So it’s not very useful to make “cloaky” a type of ships that encompass all ships with high slots. I meant covert cloaky (because those have better security).
For both of you:
What was the price of minerals before they nerfed the rorqual? After they nerfed the rorqual?
How much less supply of minerals were there?
You could easily see that those aren’t proportional.
The market is inefficient in eve. Even if the only supply of minerals come from miners, the price of minerals are locked also by the inertia of insurances, the people who’s only activity is to mine (and do, and know how to do, nothing else), and other factors.
With your lines of thought, since the price changes in proportion to the supply of minerals, and mining nerfs change nothing to the demand of ore, that miner isk/h doesn’t change AT ALL even if CCP nerfed mining so that people mine 1 piece of ore per hour. This isn’t true.
I’m not saying to increase ore’s value per unit, I’m saying to increase ore’s yield per piece of ore, to utilize that market inefficiency and increase miners’ isk per hour (while also informing them to do something else, reducing amount of supply and increasing miner isk/h with market forces.
All other things considered equal, increased yield means increased supply. How can that reduce supply?
The only way increased mining yield can result in a reduced mineral supply is if you simultaneously reduce the amount of minerals refined per ore, at a higher ratio than the increased yield. Is that what you want?
Better yields = supply goes up and price goes down.
I like my minerals cheap and have the resources and knowledge to leverage such a change to the detriment of the people that @Aphrodite_Sexy thinks it would help.
