Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 67 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:09:00 -
[511] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Only one talking about income here is you bud. I produce my own ships that I use in PVP from LP and Mission Loot as my mineral supply. Self Sufficient operation. I will now have to devote about 40% more time to PVE because of this change. I don't sell my ****, I keep it for me, I am greedy. It doesn't cost me anything but time, but now I have to invest more time into PVE, so I can enjoy PVP. OK, so what you are saying is you reprocess all of your loot? So you are oblivious to the fact that many items you can sell for a value higher than the reprocess value, then buy minerals with that isk which leaves you with more minerals than you would have had through reprocessing. That sounds like your problem. Mario Putzo wrote:And I am not the only one who lives like this. Pretty much everyone I associate in low and null sec is pissed off about this change to Reprocessing because it disrupts our capacity to remain an effective PVP force. So get better at being self sufficient. Learn new ways to keep yourself in ships. Mario Putzo wrote:Not everyone scukles on the Teet of the Goons for SRP fed by passive moon goo income. Sorry bud, but some of us actually have to PVE to play the game. It sucks let me tell you. Yup, it's not like I'm an industrialist and a trader at all is it? I just pop over to the goons and say "isk please" and march away all cheery. The fact is, I make a lot of isk, and I do a lot of refining, manufacturing and trading, and when they hit with a nerf, I just adapt my play to figure out's what's best for me. I mean ****, I was in drone space when they nuked the ever living hell out of the drone loot, leaving us with a massive mineral void. I adapted to the situation. It sounds like if you did the same, there would be no issues.
1) Not allowed in HS 2) Have no issue with keeping ships, I just like having a variety of options that take some time to get together, 3) Never claimed you weren't just said that being in a Coalition that lives on Moon Goo lets you forget the rest of the game.
the change as is is stupid, and redundant. There is no issue in the game a 30-45% (skill dependant) nerf fixes. None at all. I can see reducing it from 100% (because yes it is stupid you can reprocess everything) but as much as they are saying they will is flat out ******** and is going to kill off a huge chunk of lowsec.
Then again, CCP has never cared much for lowsec. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20183
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:11:00 -
[512] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Only a moron would skill into it instead of investing that time into ice/ore refining. You know that this isn't a class-based game right? That picking one path does not preclude you from picking another as wellGǪ?
Quote:Wheras any idiot stupid enough to waste even a second skilling into reprocessing instead, will be faced with a market empty of reprocessable goods due to players no longer bringing in their loot, due to the universal reduction in their effective mineral value as a factor of the reduced efficiency in reprocessing them. Why would people choose to earn less instead of more?
Quote:No incentive for it GǪaside from earning more instead of less. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
10330
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:14:00 -
[513] - Quote
I mean if I played this game without PvP loss reimbursement from my alliance I'd pursue activities that yield good ISK like FW, l4 blitzing, incursions or wormhole PvE and turn that ISK into ships through the magic of the Jita market but clearly I've got it all wrong and I would be better off looting wrecks in missions and turning trash modules into ships Twitter: @EVEAndski
TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest.-á |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
408
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:17:00 -
[514] - Quote
Tippia wrote:You know that this isn't a class-based game right? That picking one path does not preclude you from picking another as wellGǪ? Yes. :) But picking Reprocessing is like picking your nose with the same finger you just picked your arse with. Feel free to do so, Tippia. Go ahead. Pick away.
Tippia wrote:Why would people choose to earn less instead of more? Yes :) Thats why people won't choose to earn less with Reprocessing when they can earn more with Refining! Thanks for proving my point!
Tippia wrote:GǪaside from earning more instead of less. Yes, you earn more as a Refiner than a Reprocessor! Again, thanks for proving my point! |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:19:00 -
[515] - Quote
Andski wrote:I mean if I played this game without PvP loss reimbursement from my alliance I'd pursue activities that yield good ISK like some combination of FW, l4 blitzing, incursions, scams, freighter ganking and wormhole PvE and turn that ISK into ships through the magic of the Jita market but clearly I've got it all wrong and I would be better off looting wrecks in missions and turning trash modules into ships
Why bother doing any of that when you can just loot the ships you kill and let other pilots pay for the production of new ones? I think you take PVE to seriously. It is very very ****. Of course id love to see you make the run from Jita to Aridia in a Mach with a criminal tag. Fraps it will ya!
Edit: A criminal tag is what you get when you actually PVP and not spend time waiting on timers and jabber pings to go to the next blob. |
Lucas Kell
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2687
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:22:00 -
[516] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:1) Not allowed in HS 2) Have no issue with keeping ships, I just like having a variety of options that take some time to get together, 3) Never claimed you weren't just said that being in a Coalition that lives on Moon Goo lets you forget the rest of the game.
the change as is is stupid, and redundant. There is no issue in the game a 30-45% (skill dependant) nerf fixes. None at all. I can see reducing it from 100% (because yes it is stupid you can reprocess everything) but as much as they are saying they will is flat out ******** and is going to kill off a huge chunk of lowsec.
Then again, CCP has never cared much for lowsec. 1) Use alts. 2) Congrats. Still use alts. 3) Not even remotely. I have active characters in almost all areas of space (WH ops have been down while CFC have been at war as it's too time heavy).
The idea for the change is for it to be a big enough hit to stop gun mining from being as feasible as it is, allow room for change on item costs, prevent item based compression and easy industry copouts. Any chunk of lowsec that is hit so hard by it, I'm sorry to say is doing it wrong. It's not even remotely efficient to rely purely on reprocessed loot even in it's current state. The Indecisive Noob - A new EVE Fan Blog for news and stuff. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20183
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:24:00 -
[517] - Quote
Then don't make ignorant claims about how you have to do one instead of the other.
Answer the question: why would people choose to earn less instead of more?
Quote:Yes, you earn more as a Refiner than a Reprocessor! GǪand you earn even more as both. So why would people choose to earn less instead of more? By what means do you come to the conclusion that there is no incentive to earn more?
Your points can't be proven because they have no connection with reality, so drop the strawman fallacies. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:26:00 -
[518] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:1) Not allowed in HS 2) Have no issue with keeping ships, I just like having a variety of options that take some time to get together, 3) Never claimed you weren't just said that being in a Coalition that lives on Moon Goo lets you forget the rest of the game.
the change as is is stupid, and redundant. There is no issue in the game a 30-45% (skill dependant) nerf fixes. None at all. I can see reducing it from 100% (because yes it is stupid you can reprocess everything) but as much as they are saying they will is flat out ******** and is going to kill off a huge chunk of lowsec.
Then again, CCP has never cared much for lowsec. 1) Use alts. 2) Congrats. Still use alts. 3) Not even remotely. I have active characters in almost all areas of space (WH ops have been down while CFC have been at war as it's too time heavy). The idea for the change is for it to be a big enough hit to stop gun mining from being as feasible as it is, allow room for change on item costs, prevent item based compression and easy industry copouts. Any chunk of lowsec that is hit so hard by it, I'm sorry to say is doing it wrong. It's not even remotely efficient to rely purely on reprocessed loot even in it's current state.
Ah but gun mining isn't that feasible as a marketable income (you have said so yourself). Production based reprocessing yes. But materials from loot have a very inconsequential effect on the market. I don't think being able to build something see it isn't selling reprocessing and building something else is good, but I also don't think making something from loot is bad. 45% is to heavy and 0% is to light. If only there were numbers between the two extremes.
Also I love the "just use more characters" cop out.
I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. |
Batelle
Tymast Industries 150th
2327
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:28:00 -
[519] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote: Only one talking about income here is you bud. I produce my own ships that I use in PVP from LP and Mission Loot as my mineral supply. Self Sufficient operation. I will now have to devote about 40% more time to PVE because of this change. I don't sell my ****, I keep it for me, I am greedy. It doesn't cost me anything but time, but now I have to invest more time into PVE, so I can enjoy PVP.
You HAVE to spend 40% more time doing PVE because refining loot is the ONLY way you can acquire pvp ships? Be serious here.
Significantly lowering module refines is a necessary step to quash mineral compression via module manufacturing. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20183
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:29:00 -
[520] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. You don't. You can always hire someone. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
497
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:34:00 -
[521] - Quote
It is worthpointing out that the market price for low meta items is usually what they are worth for reprocessing because there is no good reason to fit low meta items unless nothing else is available.
The exception is the base item (1MN Afterburner I etc) especially in systems near schools because new players do not know any better.
Otherwise the low meta market price is what recylclers are prepared to pay for them. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:35:00 -
[522] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. You don't. You can always hire someone.
youdon'tsay.jpg |
Lucas Kell
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2687
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:36:00 -
[523] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Ah but gun mining isn't that feasible as a marketable income (you have said so yourself). Production based reprocessing yes. But materials from loot have a very inconsequential effect on the market. I don't think being able to build something see it isn't selling reprocessing and building something else is good, but I also don't think making something from loot is bad. 45% is to heavy and 0% is to light. If only there were numbers between the two extremes. If they use too low a number, it won't give them enough scope for material reshuffles during rebalance. Some ships already have nearly half their cost as extra materials due to this.
Mario Putzo wrote:Also I love the "just use more characters" cop out.
I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. You don't, but if you choose to live in low sec and make it impossible to go to high sec, then you are going to be restricted to what low sec has to offer. Do you build 100% of what you use? T2s and all? I find it hard to believe that you have absolutely no ability to trade into and out of high sec.
But really your situation is your choice. I could try to live in a wormhole with no POS and with no probe launcher. It clearly would be a bad situation to be in but that's a choice I could make.
The Indecisive Noob - A new EVE Fan Blog for news and stuff. |
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
408
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:36:00 -
[524] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Then don't make ignorant claims about how you have to do one instead of the other. You dont have to! You can be an idiot and do the less profitable one instead if you prefer! Hows that for ignorant!
Tippia wrote:Answer the question: why would people choose to earn less instead of more? They wouldn't! Hence, they will choose Refinement over Reprocessing!
Tippia wrote:GǪand you earn even more as both. So why would people choose to earn less instead of more? By what means do you come to the conclusion that there is no incentive to earn more? By the wonderful magic of SP and skilling requiring actual time! Maybe you haven't heard the news? And why waste resources on aquiring Reprocessable goods at a low efficiency, when you can invest those same resources into aquiring Refinable goods at high efficiency! Maybe it is unclear to you that if you invest a certain amount ISK into ore and refine it at a higher efficiency than an equivalent amount of ISK invested into reprocessables at a lower efficiency, you will earn more on the Refinement! What glorious wizardry!
Tippia wrote:Your points can't be proven because they have no connection with reality, so drop the strawman fallacies. My dear Tippia, you have almost managed to convince me you are actually a woman! |
Lucas Kell
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2687
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:37:00 -
[525] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:It is worthpointing out that the market price for low meta items is usually what they are worth for reprocessing because there is no good reason to fit low meta items unless nothing else is available.
The exception is the base item (1MN Afterburner I etc) especially in systems near schools because new players do not know any better.
Otherwise the low meta market price is what recylclers are prepared to pay for them. At the moment for meta 1 and 2 and some of meta 3, yes. But they are due to balance out meta items and make them more useful.
The Indecisive Noob - A new EVE Fan Blog for news and stuff. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:38:00 -
[526] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Tippia wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. You don't. You can always hire someone. youdon'tsay.jpg GǪso none of your problems are actual problems. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
853
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:40:00 -
[527] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:
the change as is is stupid, and redundant. There is no issue in the game a 30-45% (skill dependant) nerf fixes. None at all. I can see reducing it from 100% (because yes it is stupid you can reprocess everything) but as much as they are saying they will is flat out ******** and is going to kill off a huge chunk of lowsec.
Then again, CCP has never cared much for lowsec.
They've just given miners a comprehensive reason for owning a blockade runner and either temporarily or permanently running a pos (which is simplified in lowsec because no standings).
They've reduced highsec supply of middle tier minerals (from missionlootmelt), and they've made it straightforward to mine 1 ore, compress it to railgun standard and export it, 400m isk at a time with a viator, something that was chronically difficult before because of the need to have the requisite mineral baskets to export efficiently that probably aren't able to be mined in your vicinity. Now they can literally dump from mackinaw into compressor without even risking the docking ring, or even necessarily having a station.
IMO lowsec is far more healthier if a range of playertypes live there, and whether the miners that sell ore on your hub or the miners that sell ore on someone you don't likes hub dies a lot more, may in fact matter to you in the future. Especially if you are building your own ships.
I would expect that the squeeze on middle tier minerals that will naturally occur through reduced mission melt ought to raise the prices of jaspet and the 2 H's.
If you can hire a -good- miner, then you should need to do no more than occasionally buy minerals from them, and maybe defend a reinforced pos once in a while - one that there is no real problem pulling up and moving frequently anyway, so it shouldn't happen that much (I presume you are the main reinforcer of poses in your locality anyway, ie it was always devils children reinforcing **** when I lived in solitude). They should be happy because midtier lowsec mins should be reasonably valuable after the patch.
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
408
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:44:00 -
[528] - Quote
Aaah the delicious duplicitous irony of null sec proponents now vociferously claiming that Reprocessing absolutely has to be severely nerfed, because even though they where the ones exploiting its efficiency to the nines with untold amounts of 425s conveniently reprocessed for their pleasure at near 100% efficiency (rather than mining their own belts), now, they no longer need to!
So now, ofc, its ok for Reprocessing to die, and for nobody else to have any use of it, because they no longer need it for exploiting!
Glorious! 7o |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:44:00 -
[529] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:You dont have to! So don't make claims to that effect.
Quote:They wouldn't! Hence, they will choose Refinement over Reprocessing! No, that's still choosing to earn less. Why would people do that? You haven't answered the question.
Quote:And why waste resources on aquiring Reprocessable goods at a low efficiency, when you can invest those same resources into aquiring Refinable goods at high efficiency! You're not wasting any resources, nor are the goods low-efficiency. Unless your usage of them as mineral sources compete with some other functionality, you'll get the same bang for the buck GÇö possibly more if you can leverage people's inability to do maths (which is what reprocessing has always been about).
If you can get 100 units of trit for 400 ISK, or 100 units of trit for 400 ISK, which one is more efficient? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:48:00 -
[530] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:Ah but gun mining isn't that feasible as a marketable income (you have said so yourself). Production based reprocessing yes. But materials from loot have a very inconsequential effect on the market. I don't think being able to build something see it isn't selling reprocessing and building something else is good, but I also don't think making something from loot is bad. 45% is to heavy and 0% is to light. If only there were numbers between the two extremes. If they use too low a number, it won't give them enough scope for material reshuffles during rebalance. Some ships already have nearly half their cost as extra materials due to this. Mario Putzo wrote:Also I love the "just use more characters" cop out.
I currently don't need any more characters than I have, and I shouldn't need more than 1 to be able to enjoy the game. You don't, but if you choose to live in low sec and make it impossible to go to high sec, then you are going to be restricted to what low sec has to offer. Do you build 100% of what you use? T2s and all? I find it hard to believe that you have absolutely no ability to trade into and out of high sec. But really your situation is your choice. I could try to live in a wormhole with no POS and with no probe launcher. It clearly would be a bad situation to be in but that's a choice I could make.
The thing about ship prices is CCP didn't need to change them to require extra minerals. That change was as arbitrary as a 45% reduction to reprocessing yield. For what is supposed to be a player driven economy CCP certainly has been mucking about in it quite a lot of late.
Perhaps thats because of the fallout of their poor implementation of several previous muckups. Such as the removal of drone ore. Definitely didn't have the desired increase to Nullsec mining, apart from bots in the former Solar Empire granted I am sure there are still plenty of bots in null sec hoovering up space dust.
Fact is ultimately this is a piggy back change for the sake of a change.
If CCP REALLY wanted to fix the issue with mineral volumes they would skip rebalancing subcap ships and figure out what they want to do with Capitals, Supers and Titans. The game heavily gravitated to Mineral heavy ships, and now they wonder why there is an issue with people trying to farm as much Trit as they can. B-R didn't help the issue with minerals much either.
If CCP REALLY wanted to fix the issue they would nerf passive income source in Nullsec (namely PI and Moongoo) and force those players to have to PVE more to stay solvent. Instead of being able to hide under the skirt of what is it now double SRP in the CFC?
If CCP REALLY wanted to fix the issue they would reseed more veldspar to appear in nullsec alleviating the bottle neck that is transporting it from HS to NS.
Instead they opted to go with an arbitrary change, that ultimately band aids the current issue. Once again at the cost of LS and HS missioners. (and NPC Nullsec as well). All to appease the ever growing thirst of Capital and Super Capital production that NS already holds the monopoly on.
If they wanted to change things they would fix the problem, instead of applying another arbitrary bandaid (see Ship Cost increase) and kicking the can down the road until the next time they need to deal with it. Assuming they actually want to fix the actual problem.
But good luck getting what 80% of the CSM? To agree to nerfing their passive incomes and forcing their pilots that elected them to actually play the game outside of Jabber Pings for Timer fights. |
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
408
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:52:00 -
[531] - Quote
Tippia wrote:So don't make claims to that effect. I didn't say it was not possible to do so. I said it was stupid to do so. Reading comprehension please!
Tippia wrote:No, that's still choosing to earn less. Why would people do that? You haven't answered the question. Why would people choose to earn less by investing time and ISK into Reprocessing, when they can instead invest time and ISK into Refining for better yields in a more robust market?
Tippia wrote:You're not wasting any resources, nor are the goods low-efficiency. Unless your usage of them as mineral sources compete with some other functionality, you'll get the same bang for the buck GÇö possibly more if you can leverage people's inability to do maths (which is what reprocessing has always been about). False :) You are operating under the old efficiency sets. This is no longer the case after the change, where reprocessing becomes less efficient than refining. You are assuming them to be equal. They are not.
Tippia wrote:If you can get 100 units of trit for 400 ISK, or 100 units of trit for 400 ISK, which one is more efficient? Why, my dear bug-eyed Tippia, They are both as efficient! I'm glad I could answer this question for you since it seems you yourself could not.
Now tell me, what is more efficient. get 50 units of trit from Reprocessing 400 ISK of materials, or get 100 units of trit from Refining 400 ISK of materials? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:53:00 -
[532] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:The thing about ship prices is CCP didn't need to change them to require extra minerals. They pretty much did. With the tiers removed, the price differences had to go as well since they were part of that ill-advised tiering structure. Massively reducing the value of Gàö of the ships already in the game was not a viable way to go, whereas having a ramp-up mechanism to bridge the gap to a higher base value was actually feasible. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 03:58:00 -
[533] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:I didn't say it was not possible to do so. I said it was stupid to do so. How is it stupid to earn more?
Quote:Why would people choose to earn less by investing time and ISK into Reprocessing, when they can instead invest time and ISK into Refining for better yields in a more robust market? Why can't you answer the question: why would people choose to earn less by doing what your'e suggesting?
Quote:False :) You are operating under the old efficiency sets. Nope. You see, this is not a matter of GÇ£efficiency setsGÇ¥ but about the pricing of mineral sources.
Quote:They are both as efficient! So why do you claim that one is low-efficient?
Quote:Now tell me, what is more efficient. get 50 units of trit from Reprocessing 400 ISK of materials, or get 100 units of trit from Refining 400 ISK of materials? Why would you buy it for 400 ISK when it's worth 200? Why do you choose to earn less? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3292
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:02:00 -
[534] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:It will kill the reprocessing profession.
And for no real reason at all.
It will kill the really halfassed people doing reprocessing based on exploiting a design flaw, yeah.
Everyone who actually does it for real, with skills worth a damn, will be fine. Oh, and they won't have to cart around compression blueprints anymore. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:03:00 -
[535] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:The thing about ship prices is CCP didn't need to change them to require extra minerals. They pretty much did. With the tiers removed, the price differences had to go as well since they were part of that ill-advised tiering structure. Massively reducing the value of Gàö of the ships already in the game was not a viable way to go, whereas having a ramp-up mechanism to bridge the gap to a higher base value was actually feasible.
They didn't need to touch the pricing at all. They wouldn't have massively reduced the prices of anything. They changed the stats of the ships, they didn't need to touch the cost of the ships. This was the very definition of an arbitrary change. It was completely unrequired. They could have done all the changes they made without impacting cost.
You do know how a self correcting economy works right? No of course you don't otherwise you wouldn't be under some false pretense that they HAD TO change the cost of anything. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:05:00 -
[536] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:They didn't need to touch the pricing at all. Since the pricing difference was one of the core element of the tier structure, and the tier structure had to go, they really did have to do thatGǪ
It's about as far away from arbitrary as it gets: it was, in fact, the entire point. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
390
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:06:00 -
[537] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:They didn't need to touch the pricing at all. Since the pricing difference was one of the core element of the tier structure, and the tier structure had to go, they really did have to do thatGǪ It's about as far away from arbitrary as it gets: it was, in fact, the entire point.
heh what ever you say lady. Go read up on self correcting economies then come back and tell us what they HAD TO do. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3293
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:10:00 -
[538] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Tippia wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:They didn't need to touch the pricing at all. Since the pricing difference was one of the core element of the tier structure, and the tier structure had to go, they really did have to do thatGǪ It's about as far away from arbitrary as it gets: it was, in fact, the entire point. heh what ever you say lady. Go read up on self correcting economies then come back and tell us what they HAD TO do.
Self correcting economy or not, there is a massive imbalance in this video game that is discouraging player built manufacturing infrastructure. To fix that, NPC controlled infrastructure must be pared down to a reasonable level.
This is a good start to that. Not the end, oh no. But a good start. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Salvos Rhoska
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
408
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:11:00 -
[539] - Quote
Tippia wrote:How is it stupid to earn more? It is stupid to earn less, which is what you are proposing.
Tippia wrote:Why can't you answer the question: why would people choose to earn less by doing what your'e suggesting? They earn more by doing what I suggested, than by what you suggested.
Tippia wrote:Nope. You see, this is not a matter of GÇ£efficiency setsGÇ¥ but about the pricing of mineral sources. And the yield efficiency of the mineral source that is all non-ice/ore reprocessable items just took a nose dive due to the efficiency reduction. Thanks for proving my point yet again!
Tippia wrote:So why do you claim that one is low-efficient? I didn't? Are you claiming that 100 trit from 400 ISK is less efficient than 100 trit from 400 ISK? That was your question, if you recall.
Tippia wrote:Why would you buy it for 400 ISK when it's worth 200? I wouldn't. Would you? Are you that stupid? Because that is exactly what you are doing if you invest into Reprocessibles instead of Refinables.
Why do you choose to earn less, Tippia? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20184
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 04:13:00 -
[540] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:heh what ever you say lady. Go read up on self correcting economies then come back and tell us what they HAD TO do. Just one problem: we do not have the necessary means to alter the manufacturing process. So no, they pretty much had to, and again, this arbitrary differentiation was exactly what they wanted to remove since it had ultimately failed to do any good. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 67 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |