|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 08:42:00 -
[1]
Originally by: EliteSlave So what about t2 production?
what about Moon mining shortages?
Being worked on internally still. Lots of data has been gathered, numbers crunched and solutions being tinkered with.
It is definitely one of our higher priorities but any supply/demand changes are always being considered against the backdrop of the bigger picture of null sec itself.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 08:48:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Gnulpie Hmm, yes - increasing drop rates is one solution to fight some shortage and drop prices.
But if drop rates increase and so the supply increase a lot, how are you going to keep the prices up?
If you don't keep the prices high then going into the wormholes will be unprofitable and people will stop doing so. Or do you just hope that demand will increase also somehow and balance out the much higher supply rates and so the prices will be stable?
But is 1.3 all only about wormhole loot/salvage drop changes and some (minor) t3 production changes? Or can we expect also some other stuff?
It's a possible scenario, but at least in that one, the suppliers will switch to alternative more profitable activities until the supply reduces to profitable levels. It is expected that lower prices will increase the demand substantially and use up the excess materials such as sleeper salvage for example.
It is something we will continue to monitor and tweak alongside broadening wormhole space to be about more than tech 3 material supply so the player activities are not 100% tied to the Tech 3 market.
There are other changes in 1.3, but this blog was only covering the changes to tech 3 itself.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 09:12:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Shadowsword Those are some nice steps on the right direction. Time will tell if it's enough or not...
But one thing bother me: You still can't choose which subsystem you want to reverse engineer.
That mean the usefull subsystems will remain expensive due to rarity, and sucky subsystems will be REed at a loss due to supply far exceeding demand. This is a big design mistake here...
It is true this does increase the reverse engineering costs as you cannot seek the most profitable subsystem without a chance of generating the other three as well. In part, this was designed this way to guard against FOTM combinations a little and ensure variety of subsystem availability but yes, it is not the full control of the output invention has.
We are looking into our options here still and have a few available such as a greater range of relics or an output selection like invention has in the future.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 17:20:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Wannabehero
Originally by: galphi It was mentioned that reverse engineering will produce the good modules just as well as the bad ones. I would put to you that there should be no bad modules for t3: Something like the propulsion module that gives a bonus to warp drive cap use doesn't strike me as being terribly useful on a ship where having Energy Management level 5 is practically mandatory. Makes sure all 5 subsystems for a t3 group are decent and this problem is solved :)
Seriously, THIS
Why would you ever intend for there to be BAD modules vs. good?
Maybe if your warp drive cap bonus subsystem also added a sweet load of slots, +1 warpcore strength, and 25% less signature than normal (or MWD signature penalty reduction), then we would be talking.
there is opportunity and room for further balancing however it was more a point towards subsystems which create unique rather than competitive roles will be more in demand such as warp bubble immunity is one which is obviously well sought after.
It is true that there is some less appealing subsystems in there function wise which we can look at again. We have done it in the past with for example converting the legion subsystem to a khanid based system with missiles so open to other subsystem changes in the future. |
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.09 17:26:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Falkrich Swifthand
How about an exploration site which shows up close to (unclaimed) moons, containing an NPC pirate POS and silos full of moon minerals? The POS wouldn't be a full POS, no reinforced mode etc, just a big destroyable object which unlocks the silos when you blow it. Add gun turrets and some pirate ships for extra fun.
EDIT: Obviously tuned so that you couldn't get more moon minerals out of doing exploration than actually owning a moon.
One of the solutions is an alternative source from moons. Alchemy was a stepping stone in that direction by allowing less efficient alternative sources and we are looking at sources outside of moon minerals as well. As originally mentioned in my first reply, there is heavy consideration towards scarcity and value as conflict drivers as well but we are not happy with it being a single passive point source so any changes will look to maintain null sec value whilst distributing the possible sources more.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.10 11:14:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Braaage Chronotis we still don't know if any of the reverse engineering skills affects the outcome of the RE job. We haven't been told they do, we haven't been told they don't.
How about spilling the beans and if they don't change the outcome how about making them change it?
ofc they do
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2009.06.11 07:50:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Clansworth
Originally by: Jiks "Curious, but how do you equate a POS presence with hampering T3 availability?"
Firstly - rumours a POS in the system negatively affects the sig spawn rate. Would be good to know once and for all if thats right or not TBH.
Secondly - many or possibly even most of the POS I've seen exploring since release have had no T3 related gear. They have simply been placed in Sleeper space because its a safer place to build, well anything from carriers to T2 ammo from what I've seen. Visitors entering said systems to run the actual content have met with heavy dictors and other nastiness ^^
Of course POS set up to refine gas, minerals, build sub-systems etc are there too, its the other ones I'm talking about. From various random rants I've seen on GD I'm not the only one who has doubts this is "as intended." I'm biased of course though as I like exploring, roaming through Sleeper space and general blowing stuff up out there...
Jiks
I guess this isn't my experience. I live in W-Space, and we do not currently run gas processes, however, we DO clear out every site that spawns, stockpiling or selling the gasses/salvage/loot/ore/whatever.
There is a larger discussion on the wormholes both between w-space systems and to k-space in terms of both presence and mass and time variables.
As was mentioned in the past, the presence of starbases has nothing to do with the resource replenishment as its the presence of yourselves depleting the resources which causes them to dry up and running efficient operations. The systems were never designed to favour permanent settlement but we are looking at diversifying wormhole space to about more than just Tech III and a small amount of isk income from sleeper tags and will look into allowing more w-w space connections so you can go deeper in and find your way to bat country perhaps.
|
|
|
|
|