Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
AmarrPriceStamp Lazair
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 18:50:00 -
[1]
After some thought, I have been thinking that Mission Runner needed to be nerf at least 90% of the loots to revitalize the economy (also increase the mission reward and bounty reward.) Most of the economy are based on mission runners' loots. If the mission runner loots were removed, the mineral price would rise up, most players could complete in T1 market with manufacturing (no longer obsolete?), miners get better price for their ores, and Nullsec will become more lucrative.
How come mission running haven't been nerfed? |
Lord Kampf
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 19:19:00 -
[2]
Sure, miners will make more isk for their minerals, but that means they have to pay more for anything they want to buy. I don't really see your point. |
AmarrPriceStamp Lazair
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 19:24:00 -
[3]
Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 25/08/2011 19:24:56
Originally by: Lord Kampf Sure, miners will make more isk for their minerals, but that means they have to pay more for anything they want to buy. I don't really see your point.
My points are, if the mission running was nerfed it would be:
1. Mission Runner can only gain through ISK only. (Like the Incursion) 2. This would give the trader more opportunity to get the isk out of Mission Runner's pocket. 3. Miners can get more of their mineral worth. 4. T1 Manufacturing can be revived through this.
What is happening now?
1. Most of the loots in mission are sold on EVE economy and most of the T1 products are mission loots. 2. Miners cannot get their mineral worth. 3. T1 Manufacturing is obsolete with the current system since the mission loots mess up the products worth. |
Krixtal Icefluxor
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 19:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 25/08/2011 19:24:56 What is happening now?
1. Most of the loots in mission are sold on EVE economy and most of the T1 products are mission loots.
Most of the loots in mission are RECYCLED FOR MINERALS. How long have you been doing this ?????
Only higher end 100,000 + ISK Modules and above wind up on the Market.
And even if these 'adjustments' were made, those common T1 items still will not bring in enough profit to make the time involved worthwhile.
Timewise, almost all T1 can only earn negative ISK. Those that do well are lucked into and kept secret. Or are only used for daily market shenanigans.
Learn how this game works and you will enjoy it much better. If T2 Manufacturing is not enough to keep you busy, you are doing something wrong. **************************
"God is nothing but the power of the Universe, as a whole, to organize itself." - Lee Smolin Three Roads to Quantum Gravity |
Kalipoli
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 21:00:00 -
[5]
Mission runners are my bread and butter.
Someone asked a while ago and this question comes up quite often but, "how are people able to sell products at so much less than even mineral value?"
Answer, mission runners are willing to sell their product to the lowest bidder and no-one else is bidding because they have to much of that item or its not worth their time to sell.
for me its a for sure isk maker, if i sell the t1 mission item in Jita to get rid of it quick im making 3500% or more in profit, if i refine it im making more or slightly less but still in the 1000's of percentile profit. even if i sit on the product for a year it is profitable for me to have it as i invested so little in it that there is no way i don't profit no matter even if the market crashes and that product is worth nothing. Mission runners for me are a win win situation.
The T1 market is healthy, people who manufacture have to manufacture in bulk to pull a profit which is a good thing because mission runners loot does not produce enough of the item i may need, say 100000 antimatter ammo of some sort, yes mission runners could accrue that much but a manufacturer will have it available and when i need it.
I also have a theory that mission runner loot does not run the eve economy but that most of the product moved throughout eve is done by traders selling to other traders.
a bunch of random thoughts, but i disagree that mission running loot should be Nerf'd, it provides me with to much opportunity.
|
Mr Kidd
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 21:33:00 -
[6]
Look man, continually nerfing missions isn't going to do anything for you. Mission loot has already been nerfed, quite substantially, enough so that I completely changed how I earned isk. And what did it solve? Nothing. What did it improve? Nothing.
|
AmarrPriceStamp Lazair
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 21:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Originally by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 25/08/2011 19:24:56 What is happening now?
1. Most of the loots in mission are sold on EVE economy and most of the T1 products are mission loots.
Most of the loots in mission are RECYCLED FOR MINERALS. How long have you been doing this ?????
Only higher end 100,000 + ISK Modules and above wind up on the Market.
And even if these 'adjustments' were made, those common T1 items still will not bring in enough profit to make the time involved worthwhile.
Timewise, almost all T1 can only earn negative ISK. Those that do well are lucked into and kept secret. Or are only used for daily market shenanigans.
Learn how this game works and you will enjoy it much better. If T2 Manufacturing is not enough to keep you busy, you are doing something wrong.
Most of the loot recycled? Are you serious? Where would all the Meta 4 be if it is "mostly" recycled? Mmm? By your definition of "most" is probably 10% of the market or less.
T2 Manufacturing is all great and dandy, but having T1 Manufacturing die by letting Mission Runners destroy it?
P.S.
I don't do manufacturing, so I didn't do anything wrong here. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 21:51:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Akita T on 25/08/2011 21:53:22
What the OP is most likely TRYING to say is that there's too much supply of high-meta items, period. It doesn't really matter if they're coming from mission loot or belt-ratting loot, what he cares about is the fact that the total available supply makes the price of meta1-4 items be so attractive compared to meta0 ("T1") items that very few people bother with meta0 items.
His proposal was to even more drastically reduce loot drops (loot drops were heavily nerfed not very long ago already, by the way) to the point where even the price of meta1 items would be noticeably above T1 items (instead of the other way around, as it stands now, with a lot of meta1 items usually barely above melting value, which is almost always lower than meta0 melting value).
That "loot nerf" I was talking about happened in early 2010 (don't remember exact date, maybe March, or a bit later, not sure, too lazy to search) alongside the changes to insurance payout values. It mainly reduced meta0 loot drops, radically lowering the total supply of minerals coming in from loot drops. It was one of the main reasons mineral prices didn't crash into oblivion with the insurance payout drops, but slowly recovered to much earlier levels. The other main reason was the inclusion of minerals into the POS structure manufacture quotas. A somewhat in between reason was the adjustment to drone alloy drop rates and composition, which also happened at about the same time. A less important but nevertheless relevant reason was the continued (and actually accelerated) proliferation of capital ship construction, with massive wars happening because of changes in moon mineral values, driving demand for minerals up for a long time.
However, the OP is wrong about something - even if you completely remove mission loot, the T1 module markets are unlikely to become very profitable for manufacturers. T1 manufacture time (other than ammo) is fairly short, and the barrier to entry is minimal, so competition will always be cut-throat, with negligible profits to be had over mineral costs. Not just that, but the bulk of minerals coming from mission loot was already cut off, so removing whatever is left is unlikely to noticeably increase mineral prices.
_
Akita T USEFUL EVE LINKS collection |
AmarrPriceStamp Lazair
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 21:55:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 25/08/2011 21:53:22
What the OP is most likely TRYING to say is that there's too much supply of high-meta items, period. It doesn't really matter if they're coming from mission loot or belt-ratting loot, what he cares about is the fact that the total available supply makes the price of meta1-4 items be so attractive compared to meta0 ("T1") items that very few people bother with meta0 items.
His proposal was to even more drastically reduce loot drops (loot drops were heavily nerfed not very long ago already, by the way) to the point where even the price of meta1 items would be noticeably above T1 items (instead of the other way around, as it stands now, with a lot of meta1 items usually barely above melting value, which is almost always lower than meta0 melting value).
That "loot nerf" I was talking about happened in early 2010 (don't remember exact date, maybe March, or a bit later, not sure, too lazy to search) alongside the changes to insurance payout values. It mainly reduced meta0 loot drops, radically lowering the total supply of minerals coming in from loot drops. It was one of the main reasons mineral prices didn't crash into oblivion with the insurance payout drops, but slowly recovered to much earlier levels. The other main reason was the inclusion of minerals into the POS structure manufacture quotas. A somewhat in between reason was the adjustment to drone alloy drop rates and composition, which also happened at about the same time. A less important but nevertheless relevant reason was the continued (and actually accelerated) proliferation of capital ship construction, with massive wars happening because of changes in moon mineral values, driving demand for minerals up for a long time.
However, the OP is wrong about something - even if you completely remove mission loot, the T1 module markets are unlikely to become very profitable for manufacturers. T1 manufacture time (other than ammo) is fairly short, and the barrier to entry is minimal, so competition will always be cut-throat, with negligible profits to be had over mineral costs. Not just that, but the bulk of minerals coming from mission loot was already cut off, so removing whatever is left is unlikely to noticeably increase mineral prices.
Kk, thank you for your reply. It does make some sense. I was thinking of Mission Runners as mercenary in "Real Life" sense. They would just go in, finish the job, get paid in isk, and be a buyer than being a seller. |
CataCourier
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 23:01:00 -
[10]
Edited by: CataCourier on 25/08/2011 23:03:31 Wasn't sure if I should post this in a new thread or not, but here it is (maybe a dev would be kind enough to enlighten us):
What was the purpose/reason behind items to be able to be refined at 100%? Why would it not be feasible to reduce the refine rate of items to 75% max(or some arbitrary amount less than 100%)?
-In a literal sense, how is it possible to alter an item in the manufacturing process (making structural/chemical changes to the raw materials) resulting into a finished product- and then being able to reverse those processes with zero waste? -In a logistics sense, it really doesn't seem (air quotes) "fair" to enable people to compress gigantic quantities of minerals, move them deep into 0.0 in one trip, and refine them back into minerals without any "cost" in the refine process? If CCP is trying to encourage more use of logistics runs and making a more challenging/rewarding/realistic 0.0 space, it seems like encouraging/forcing more logistic trips for huge quantities of goods would be a start. -In a mineral sense, this would have some positive impact on the mineral market, because people would be refining unused t1/named/dronegoo into fewer minerals. -In an ISK earning sense, mission runners that are looting would earn less isk from refines (boo hoo).
Constructive thoughts?
|
|
zeberath
|
Posted - 2011.08.25 23:57:00 -
[11]
I haven't played since last year, and this month bought the 60 days offer subscription.
Mission running was my only source of income, like everyone who isn't adapted to the core of the game.. almost play solo and don't have 2 accounts for minning and hauling.
I just noticed the salvage is not worth time, the T1 loot isn't it either.
So i decided to go only blitzing for rewards + LP.
I am sure if everyone do this the supplies will be stable again. They are just making less isk/hour by salvaging and lotting all the loot.
The problem: Yesterday i was in my heron scanning mission runners and surprise, most of them have 2 accounts too ,like miners, so they don't waste a lot of time looting/salvaging, and they just overflow the market with supplies.
In my opinion having 2 accounts shouldn't be allowed, but is just my opinion so don't flame.I am sure you guys have 2 or more too, with all your money you just pay plex with ease.
forgive if my grammar failed in some way.
|
DrayPrescot
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 02:23:00 -
[12]
Edited by: DrayPrescot on 26/08/2011 02:28:25 I heavily traded with meta 3+4 items until Februar this year. The profit was insane but dwindled down when what i call the "Noctis effect" came in full swing. Yep, that's it, the Noctis is the killer of the salvage and meta market. Why it's killing the salvage market is obvious but with salvaging looting comes by naturally. The drop tables were just fine, before and after the nerf as many mission runners didn't bother to loot, the Noctis changed that completly.
All the changes CCP made to balance the economy by adjusting the loot table and stopping meta 0 from dropping are fully countered by that one ship. In my opinion the Noctis is the worst thing that happened to the economy by a long shot. CCP better never introduced it to the game.
Back then i monitored my meta items very closely and soon it was obvious that nearly 99% of all meta 3 items are going down to just the mineral worth. Hell even a lot of meta 4 items are barely over the mineral worth, prime example for that are the BS guns of any race with the exception of 1400mm arties. I moved out of the market with a heavy heart as the profit was great and not interfered by some dumb T2 producers.
Edit: To be exact the meta 4 BS gun market wasn't killed solely by the Noctis, the loot table changes did their fair share too.
|
Krixtal Icefluxor
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 03:34:00 -
[13]
Originally by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 25/08/2011 21:44:37
Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Most of the loots in mission are RECYCLED FOR MINERALS. How long have you been doing this ?????
Only higher end 100,000 + ISK Modules and above wind up on the Market.
Most of the loot recycled? Are you serious? Where would all the Meta 2-4 be if it is "mostly" recycled? Mmm? By your definition of "most" is probably 10% of the market or less.
You do not know how to read.
I quite clearly stated that loot above 100,000+ is sold which is THE META ITEMS.
Stay out of this thread or listen to it for advice only (you started it) as you obviously do not know a thing about any of this.
I call TROLL in fact.
**************************
"God is nothing but the power of the Universe, as a whole, to organize itself." - Lee Smolin Three Roads to Quantum Gravity |
Jenny Aakiwa
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 06:49:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Jenny Aakiwa on 26/08/2011 06:49:21 Well I think it better off to let it remain unnerfed.
|
AmarrPriceStamp Lazair
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 07:02:00 -
[15]
Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 26/08/2011 07:08:32
Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Originally by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair Edited by: AmarrPriceStamp Lazair on 25/08/2011 21:44:37
Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Most of the loots in mission are RECYCLED FOR MINERALS. How long have you been doing this ?????
Only higher end 100,000 + ISK Modules and above wind up on the Market.
Most of the loot recycled? Are you serious? Where would all the Meta 2-4 be if it is "mostly" recycled? Mmm? By your definition of "most" is probably 10% of the market or less.
You do not know how to read.
I quite clearly stated that loot above 100,000+ is sold which is THE META ITEMS.
Stay out of this thread or listen to it for advice only (you started it) as you obviously do not know a thing about any of this.
I call TROLL in fact.
You failed to comprehend what I just said.
Let me clarify with cap lock on since you can't get a single thing in your nutshell:
ANY ITEMS DOESN'T MATTER THE PRICE ARE BEING SOLD ON THE MARKET AND CAN BE LESS THAN 100,000 ISK! AND THIS ALSO CAN HAVE LARGE IMPACT ON THE MARKET AS WELL SINCE ITEMS CAN BE SOLD IN LARGE QUANTITY!
You're the troll here. |
Wyke Mossari
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 07:33:00 -
[16]
It is quite easy to determine which high meta items are recycled, it is those where the sell price is about the mineral price and there are still large buy orders below mineral value.
The loot tables need some adjustment/balancing, but not the nerf-bat. The problems I see are two fold, the ratio of high meta items to low and the the fairly narrow extent of module types that dropped as loot. There quite a few item types were even the low meta item are highly priced, BCS, APC, PDS and nearly everything with 'Basic' in their name for example.
|
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 07:40:00 -
[17]
Originally by: DrayPrescot Edited by: DrayPrescot on 26/08/2011 02:28:25 I heavily traded with meta 3+4 items until Februar this year. The profit was insane but dwindled down when what i call the "Noctis effect" came in full swing. Yep, that's it, the Noctis is the killer of the salvage and meta market. Why it's killing the salvage market is obvious but with salvaging looting comes by naturally. The drop tables were just fine, before and after the nerf as many mission runners didn't bother to loot, the Noctis changed that completly.
All the changes CCP made to balance the economy by adjusting the loot table and stopping meta 0 from dropping are fully countered by that one ship. In my opinion the Noctis is the worst thing that happened to the economy by a long shot. CCP better never introduced it to the game.
By bad for the economy you appear to mean bad for margins of middle men.
Remember mission runners who are looting arenĘt collecting bounties so are injecting less ISK into the economy. As many feel there is too much ISK being introduced the Noctis could be seen as a very good thing for the economy.
You could even make the argument that CCP should boost loot drops by including small sacks of cash in them to encourage more people to loot.
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 09:07:00 -
[18]
solution = drop meta item BPC's with 1-2 copies instead of meta items.
PROS minerals get used to make item less recycling because BPC's give u nothing from recycle mission loot will still be relatively the same, meta 4 bpc will obviously be better then a meta 2 bpc t1 manufacturing will be in full swing. nullsec can jumpfreighter in a ton of BPC's and build meta modules in nullsec
Cons BPC will need a market section on the market.
Eve online next expansion details |
Jaxx McCoy
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 09:33:00 -
[19]
Time spent looting and salvaging is time that cannot be spent killing rats and completing missions true, but the Noctis was a big ISK sink in alot of other ways too.
Every Noctis had to be produced, and all the original blueprints had to be bought off the market from NPCs.
Every capsuleer who wanted to fly a Noctis had to purchase a brand new skillbook that was introduced specifically for that ship.
I think its inception was a good thing for the economy, despite lowering the value of salvage considerably (and meta loot somewhat by extension).
|
DrayPrescot
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 22:02:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Jackie Fisher
Originally by: DrayPrescot Edited by: DrayPrescot on 26/08/2011 02:28:25 I heavily traded with meta 3+4 items until Februar this year. The profit was insane but dwindled down when what i call the "Noctis effect" came in full swing. Yep, that's it, the Noctis is the killer of the salvage and meta market. Why it's killing the salvage market is obvious but with salvaging looting comes by naturally. The drop tables were just fine, before and after the nerf as many mission runners didn't bother to loot, the Noctis changed that completly.
All the changes CCP made to balance the economy by adjusting the loot table and stopping meta 0 from dropping are fully countered by that one ship. In my opinion the Noctis is the worst thing that happened to the economy by a long shot. CCP better never introduced it to the game.
By bad for the economy you appear to mean bad for margins of middle men.
Remember mission runners who are looting arenĘt collecting bounties so are injecting less ISK into the economy. As many feel there is too much ISK being introduced the Noctis could be seen as a very good thing for the economy.
You could even make the argument that CCP should boost loot drops by including small sacks of cash in them to encourage more people to loot.
The non existing margin was my reason to move out of this market but it's not my point. There is an inherent problem if items are barely worth the reprocessed minerals. CCP did a lot to stop minerals from loosing it's worth by adjusting/nerfing the loot tables etc. but the Noctis countered that effort. As we don't have any hard numbers i won't speculate how large the Noctis effect is but from the QEN we know a majority of people are runnning missions and the sheer number will have an effect.
Originally by: Jaxx McCoy Time spent looting and salvaging is time that cannot be spent killing rats and completing missions true, but the Noctis was a big ISK sink in alot of other ways too.
Every Noctis had to be produced, and all the original blueprints had to be bought off the market from NPCs.
Every capsuleer who wanted to fly a Noctis had to purchase a brand new skillbook that was introduced specifically for that ship.
I think its inception was a good thing for the economy, despite lowering the value of salvage considerably (and meta loot somewhat by extension).
I really doubt that the production of the Noctis and the additional expenses like skillboks etc are compensating the effect on the market. The Noctis is a one time investment with a more or less infinite lifespan.
|
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 22:30:00 -
[21]
Should stop dropping meta 0-4 and instead drop "broken thingX". Broken thing can be repaired for minerals. This will at the same time, decrease mineral supply and create demand for minerals. Mission runners can still get ISK for these "broken" items. Allow them to be stackable.
For those that trade on mission runner loot, you can trade in these broken items.
Sandbox Protection League
|
Shayla Sh'inlux
Eve Space Exploration Guild
|
Posted - 2011.08.26 22:38:00 -
[22]
IMO they should just remove meta drops from missions altogether and make meta BPC's drop from Magnometric sites so they're not completely worthless anymore. Make lowsec drop meta 3-4 BPC's so people actually have a reason to explore in lowsec (which is by all standards a lot more dangerous than doing it in some obscure corner of 0.0)
It would drive meta prices up (which is good, after all they're often (almost) as good as tech II but infinately easier to use) It would give manufacturers more to do. Tack on some reasonably accesible Industry or Science skills to actually build them mods. It would create more need for minerals. That can't possibly be bad given the abysmal state of mining isk/hour.
|
Cunane Jeran
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 00:21:00 -
[23]
As a slight tangent but still on topic, how about the removal of meta 3 and 4 drops from agent missions? let the meta 1-2 drop from there and high sec belts, while meta 3-4 could drop from exploration sites in highsec and lowsec belt rats.
It'd shake up the meta economy considerably, increasing the value of meta 0, 1 and 2 as a more affordable option instead of the pennies we pay for the majority of meta 3-4 currently. Also with less meta 3-4 in the system maybe less 1-2 would be refined into minerals.
Just a thought.
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 01:09:00 -
[24]
because meta 4 items would be way too high in price... magnetic sites should drop meta 4 bpcs with some good runs, but still drop in missions, mission loot has been nerfed enough the supply would be about the same this way but mineral prices would increase which is just fine.
making people go to "insert sec here" to get "insert item here" is pointless yes lowsec need buffs but nerfing mission loot isnt it, it wouldnt do anything except **** mission runners off.
i say change loot from item to bpcs magnetic sites drop random BPCs for meta 4 items (nullsec and lowsec obviously would still be better) market now has BPC section
start there and see what happens, predict mineral prices will shoot up as well as meta items, making miners happy, BPC's would probably be about same price as the item is currently manufactures can make meta items and probably make some good isk nullsec can farm for bpcs and buy bpcs in mass to use meta 4 items easily Eve online next expansion details |
Kara Books
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 01:37:00 -
[25]
On the contrary, by destroying anything that a bot can do, WILL improve the economy, in fact, improving drops by 90% and smashing ORE prices to the point where bots cant PLEX their 20 or whatever accounts WILL yield desired results.
|
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 09:08:00 -
[26]
or ban all of russia, sort legit players later. i would lol at least. Eve online next expansion details |
Anya Ohaya
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 11:00:00 -
[27]
Low-sec manufacturing of meta 4 items would help.
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 11:32:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Akita T What the OP is most likely TRYING to say is that there's too much supply of high-meta items, period.
Which is debatable, since many meta 4 item prices are substantially higher then their T2 counterparts (even when those have fat margins). |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 18:18:00 -
[29]
1. Remove market and industry, skills, manufacture slots 2. Remove PVE agents and asteroid belts 3. Remove PVP aspects: 99% resist across the board, 10 billion hitpoints all ships, all systems 1.0 with CONCORD presence and no wardec capability 4. ??? 5. PROFIT! Instant fix for eve
Turning the server off would be faster actually.
|
KaarBaak
Minmatar Seatec Astronomy
|
Posted - 2011.08.27 18:34:00 -
[30]
Another "solution" in search of a problem.
Take the profits from one group (mission-runners) and shift it to another (T1manufacturers/OP)?
Please explain what needs fixing and why.
He who breaks the law shall be punished back to the House of Pain. -- Sayer of the Law |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |