Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Merias Tylar al-Akhwa
Order of Contention
31
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 15:51:54 -
[31] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:giving a yield of 386mil/hr. That seems kinda reasonable to me. You find 386mil/hr for shooting at rocks, reasonable?
I find 386mil/hr reasonable given the context of the at-risk and in-field asset cost of a Rorqual, yes. |
Salvos Rhoska
2079
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:02:20 -
[32] - Quote
Merias Tylar al-Akhwa wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:giving a yield of 386mil/hr. That seems kinda reasonable to me. You find 386mil/hr for shooting at rocks, reasonable? I find 386mil/hr reasonable given the context of the at-risk and in-field asset cost of a Rorqual, yes.
The destruction of a Rorq, interms of material sink from the market, is insignificant compared to how much material that Rorq can introduce to the market.
The more Rorqs there are, the cheaper minerals will be, and the cheaper more Rorqs will be. But none of that changes the yield Rorqs can achieve.
386mil/hr is madness for a passive activity in EVE. And it wont be that for long, because Rorqs are going to oversupply the mineral market.
This is a guaranteed systemic spiral into inflation.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5438
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:03:02 -
[33] - Quote
Merias Tylar al-Akhwa wrote:I find 386mil/hr reasonable given the context of the at-risk and in-field asset cost of a Rorqual, yes.
EVE is a game where risk is balanced against reward. If I am risking a ridiculously expensive ship I should be making a heap of a lot of ISK in reward. I have to agree. This isn't really any different than ratting with Super Carriers as the investment is comparable. To make serious money through Incursions or L4 missioning you also need to invest billions of ISK in various ships and implants - but the payout is obviously less.
Rorquals have moved from the safety and confines of POS and out into the wilderness. Isn't that what everyone wanted?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Cade Windstalker
759
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:17:04 -
[34] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Damned if you buff... damned if you nerf.
"Any decision or change you make will **** off some portion of your playerbase, including the decision to change nothing." |
Salvos Rhoska
2079
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:20:25 -
[35] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:I thought the end-goal was to make null-sec more self sufficient and less reliant on high-sec? It's too early to tell, but I believe this is a step in the right direction.
Neither HS or NS is reliant on the other. Both HS and NS can be self-sufficient, nominally.
The current situation, is NS exploits HS markets by dumping/leveraging their surplus from sector benefits sourced locally , and returning to NS with competitively priced cheap assets from HS to NS.
The problem with Rorqs, is their stats in addition to the inherent lucrativeness of NS. They mine so hard they will invariably threaten the economic homeostasis of all of EVE.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Cade Windstalker
761
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:33:51 -
[36] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:I thought the end-goal was to make null-sec more self sufficient and less reliant on high-sec? It's too early to tell, but I believe this is a step in the right direction. Neither HS or NS is reliant on the other. Both HS and NS can be self-sufficient, nominally. The current situation, is NS exploits HS markets by dumping/leveraging their surplus from sector benefits sourced locally , and returning to NS with competitively priced cheap assets from HS to NS. The problem with Rorqs, is their stats in addition to the inherent lucrativeness of NS. They mine so hard they will invariably threaten the economic homeostasis of all of EVE. Inflation is inevitable. TLDR: Rorqs are grossly over-performing.
Your conclusions are flawed here, as are your inputs. First off, we don't have enough data to know for sure what the Rorqual will do to the markets long-term.
Second, Eve has never been in economic homeostasis, ever. The economy has grown, shrunk, and changed for *years*.
Also it's basically never been the case that HS and Null operated independently of each other. There are some materials that are only found in Null and some that can only be mined in large quantities in Null. Also Null has basically always imported a lot of things from High Sec, and in fact it's only been in the last few years that CCP have taken steps to incentivize more industrial activity in Null outside of things which can only be produced there.
You're also completely ignoring the rather high cost of transporting large volumes of minerals from Null to High Sec. Jump Freighters are expensive, as is fuel, and minerals actually aren't all that value-dense compared to finished goods. That's why if you look at the market you can buy minerals in Null *much* more cheaply than in Jita right now, and the orders are spread out all over.
Lastly you and anyone else in this thread don't really have enough data to say for sure that the Rorqual is over performing right now, especially after CCP recently nerfed the Harvester drones. |
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5438
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:34:11 -
[37] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Neither HS or NS is reliant on the other. Both HS and NS can be self-sufficient, nominally. If HS, or NS was suddenly removed from the game, either remaining sector could still survive.
The current situation, is NS exploits HS markets by dumping/leveraging their surplus from sector benefits sourced locally , and returning to NS with competitively priced cheap assets from HS to NS.
The problem with Rorqs, is their stats in addition to the inherent lucrativeness of NS. They mine so hard they will invariably threaten the economic homeostasis of all of EVE. Inflation is inevitable.
TLDR: Rorqs are grossly over-performing. I think you're overthinking this.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Salvos Rhoska
2079
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:50:42 -
[38] - Quote
Watch and see it happen.
Once local NS markets are saturated for their own needs, surplus minerals and products generated in NS advantaged systems will begin flooding to HS, to the result of inflation.
This is especially problematic for players that source their income from re-sale of non-mineral PVE sourced items, because they cant increase their yield to compete with the buffed yield of Rorqs that provide the fundamental materials required for all of EVEs production chains.
The nature of the relationship between NS and HS, is that NS has greater yields, but HS has the competitive markets.
The problem with the Rorq, is that CCP buffed it so hard, that whereas Rorqs where previously a largely inconsequential element in EVE (which was crap), they are now suddenly the best at resource harvesting, in the systems with the best yields and (arguably) best security.
As long as Rorq stats are as insane as they currently are, it really doesnt matter what the rate of their destruction is (which likely will remain low).
It is inevitable, that Rorqs are going to lead to inflation. They now mine so hard in the most lucrative of space, that there is no way around that conclusion.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Bjorn Tyrson
EVE University Ivy League
156
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 16:52:59 -
[39] - Quote
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:you have to put a 3b ship in belt and siege it, well it better be better than a 300m barge. So what's the point of the barge again?
High-sec mining, J-space mining, low-sec ninja-mining. newer miners who can't afford to put a 3b ship in space, "casual" miners who might dabble in it when bored but don't want to invest 3b and all the skills required for something they do casually at most.
whats the point in using a destroyer when you can use a T3D? why use a cruiser when you can use a T3? why use a battleship instead of a capital?
different tools for different jobs.
also I havent checked the numbers recently (since I am one of those casual miners who does it just to alleviate boredom not for profit) but doesn't a hulk with roqual boosts pull in almost as much as the rorq? even if its only half the yield, for the same price as putting out 2 rorqs you could put out a rorq and 10 hulks. and i'd be willing to bet the isk/hr would be much higher for it. |
Salvos Rhoska
2079
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 17:02:00 -
[40] - Quote
Bjorn Tyrson wrote: for the same price as putting out 2 rorqs you could put out a rorq and 10 hulks. and i'd be willing to bet the isk/hr would be much higher for it.
That would also involve PLEXing, training and multitasking 11 accounts, as opposed to 2.
Im sure you will agree it is cheaper and more pragmatic to fly/train/PLEX 2 Rorqs, rather than 1 Rorq + 10 hulks.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3434
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 17:08:31 -
[41] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote: Inflation is inevitable (which is particularly bad for players that source their income from other PvE).
Do you know what inflation means? It means, goods have rising prices in money without the goods being changed/improved. Where do you see rising prices in your scenario? The only thing what's happening is, that minerals get cheaper, building stuff gets cheaper, industrialists make more profit and ISK becomes more valuable. The opposite of inflation, it's called deflation.
But in fact it's more balanced because while low end minerals became cheaper some materials also got significantly more expensive, balancing the final material sheet of higher end products.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Bjorn Tyrson
EVE University Ivy League
157
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 17:09:06 -
[42] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Bjorn Tyrson wrote: for the same price as putting out 2 rorqs you could put out a rorq and 10 hulks. and i'd be willing to bet the isk/hr would be much higher for it. That would also involve PLEXing and multitasking 11 accounts, as opposed to 2. Im sure you will agree it is cheaper and more pragmatic to fly/PLEX 2 Rorqs, rather than 1 Rorq + 10 hulks.
if you are multi-boxing sure. but you are also putting 6b in assets out in space to do it. if you have the money then fine, but not everyone does. for a solo pilot yeah it might be the best method currently, you are also putting much more isk on the line though. and if you have a fleet of pilots you can get comparable or even better yields, while putting less isk at risk.
the question was "whats the point of barges" and so I was putting that forward as an example of one of many roles in which barges could be better. different tools for different jobs. |
Salvos Rhoska
2079
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 17:24:52 -
[43] - Quote
If you put 2 Rorqs in space at 6bil with 2 PLEX, it is less than putting 1 Rorq + 10 Hulks at 11 PLEX.
2 Rorq accounts are also easier to manage, than 11 accounts.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
2543
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 17:27:32 -
[44] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Chainsaw Plankton wrote:giving a yield of 386mil/hr. That seems kinda reasonable to me. You find 386mil/hr for shooting at rocks, reasonable? Really? As I said above, the real problem here is when this enormous mineral generation in the most lucrative sectors of space saturates its own local market demands and begins to flood into HS markets. 386mil/hr is an insane rate, specific to a certain sector and certain hull. Invariably, this WILL collapse the mineral market, and by extension, all other markets that involve minerals. Inflation is inevitable. Rorq yield, compounded by the lucrative space in which they operate, is going to flood the market. There is nowhere near enough material destruction in NS, or anywhere else, to offset this rate of mineral generation from Rorqs in NS. I'm not saying it does or does not need balancing, but to have a 3bil ship with 8bil in drones to make 386m/hr seems not too far out of the ball park compared to other activities like super ratting, carrier ratting, incursions, or burner missions. It also doesn't account for the rarity of finding different ores or transporting the ore.
It will for sure put downward pressure on the mineral markets, however that is a somewhat self correcting cycle as ore values normalize and mining income goes down which may cause miners to mine less.
Inflation is an increase in prices, this is deflation, and most of eve has been in some sort of deflation for as long as I've been playing. The biggest thing to shake up prices that I can think of was ship tiericide as suddenly most ships cost more to build. And then there have been some moon mining changes over time. Check out the price indices, http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Jan_2017/9d_economy.indices.png The CPI last hit 100 right around 2007 when I started playing and is currently somewhere in the 50s. The devblog has a 3 year graph too, which shows a ~10% drop over the last 3 years.
Things like bounty prizes and incursion payouts are isk faucets and can lead to inflation, however it seems we produce far too much to have any chance at creating inflation.
Lastly we have had years to min/max pretty much everything, asset/hr income is probably the highest it has ever been. As many players have better incomes and there has been a ton of RL economic shenanigans things like PLEX prices have gone up. Also as the playerbase matures I think we have more in assets so the desire to buy plex for rl cash goes down. Buying a plex is a great boost for a newer player to give them a ton of isk for cheap pvp ships, but for me buying plex to pay for caps/supers just seems silly. The Main things that seem to have increasing prices are the unique items, like t2 bpos, AT ships, which are both for the main part collector's items.
@ChainsawPlankto
|
Bjorn Tyrson
EVE University Ivy League
157
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 18:59:53 -
[45] - Quote
Again. Wasn't talking about for solo pilot multi boxing in null sec. Yes in that particular circumstance rorqual is king. But for fleet ops, j-space etc... pretty much anything outside of solo mining in null, barges can be the better choice. Again I was addressing the question of "what is the point of the mining barge" by presenting examples where a barge is the better choice. Not saying in any way that a barge is ALWAYS the better choice. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
18356
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 19:19:39 -
[46] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Aiwha wrote:Its exactly like carrier ratting vs. battleship ratting. Rorqs are fine.(for mining, jump hics are pretty bullshit) yeah the ~750 mill/hr is totally balanced
750m/hr?
Show your working.
"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."
Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
18356
|
Posted - 2017.02.10 19:24:48 -
[47] - Quote
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:If you have a big enough Alliance living in a small enough area and fast responding fleets you can risk high amounts of ISK and still be relatively safe. Like the Goons mining with a lot of Roquals that are together worth over a hundred Billions. Spread you Alliance over to much space and you will lose stuff, be to slow when your ships get tackled and you will lose stuff, donGÇÖt bring the numbers and you will lose stuff. Simple as that. Roquals are just a nice tool to make a good use of territory superiority. If you didnGÇÖt secure your space like that you are better of mining in anything less expensive.
And in fact quite a lot of rorquals have died in delve. I know that facts are generally considered pretty optional in this type of discussion, but zkill is right there: anyone can query it.
"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."
Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
|
Gregorius Goldstein
Ze One Man Show
1905
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 00:52:54 -
[48] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: And in fact quite a lot of rorquals have died in delve. I know that facts are generally considered pretty optional in this type of discussion, but zkill is right there: anyone can query it.
Sure there is still some risk involved, even in Delve. That was the "relatively" part. My point was more that semi-save Roqual use does not come without effort. You can/should only use them under certain circumstances and of course you are never totally save. |
Linkette
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 10:19:58 -
[49] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Before changes:Wah Wah, CCP there will never be any reason to use a Rorqual out of a POS. After changes:Wah wah, CCP there is no reason to use anything but a Rorqual. CCP -->.
That tends to be the result when rather than balancing things with careful precision, you just completely change things to be many times more powerful.
CCP should remove the PANIC feature, or if they don't want to remove it they could alter how it works so that it's not so overpowered. Now that people are used to mining in Rorqs they will likely continue to do so. Should help to balance it a little. |
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji.
1971
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 13:58:16 -
[50] - Quote
Linkette wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Before changes:Wah Wah, CCP there will never be any reason to use a Rorqual out of a POS. After changes:Wah wah, CCP there is no reason to use anything but a Rorqual. CCP -->. That tends to be the result when rather than balancing things with careful precision, you just completely change things to be many times more powerful. CCP should remove the PANIC feature, or if they don't want to remove it they could alter how it works so that it's not so overpowered. Now that people are used to mining in Rorqs they will likely continue to do so. Should help to balance it a little.
The balance is that Rorquals can be killed now instead of sitting behind a POS shield boosting. The killboards regularly show Rorqual kills. You're just complaining because now you need more than two people to kill one. What do you expect - it's a capital ship. Bring support. |
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5447
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 16:27:15 -
[51] - Quote
Before: This sucks that we can never shoot these Rorquals. BUFF! After: This sucks that Rorquals are now too hard to kill and make too much ISK. Nerf them! Future: Damnit, they completely nerfed the Rorqual. Now they're too easy to kill and don't make enough ISK to justify the cost. This sucks. Buff the Rorqual again!!
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Salvos Rhoska
2080
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 16:30:42 -
[52] - Quote
Imo, the Rorqs defense stats are fine.
But the yield stats are too high.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5447
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 16:36:47 -
[53] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Imo, the Rorqs defense stats are fine. But the yield stats are too high. Not that you're right - but who cares? There are far more important ships to be rebalancing at this point. They can revisit the Rorqual in 3-6 months...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Salvos Rhoska
2080
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 18:24:56 -
[54] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:There are far more important ships to be rebalancing at this point. They can revisit the Rorqual in 3-6 months...
Resource harvesting ships underlie the entire economy of EVE. This is different than a combat ship being "OP". Rorqs are specific to space that already is lucrative, and in many instances, very safe.
3-6 months from now may be too late.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
5451
|
Posted - 2017.02.11 20:34:30 -
[55] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Resource harvesting ships underlie the entire economy of EVE. You're going to have do demonstrate where your proof of this is.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
593
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 04:23:21 -
[56] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:This is a guaranteed systemic spiral into inflation. Wouldn't an oversupply lead to deflation? Prices going down for minerals, and all the things that minerals are used to build? And income going down for new miners to the point they give up on the game before they get hooked?
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46856
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 05:04:44 -
[57] - Quote
Shiloh Templeton wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:This is a guaranteed systemic spiral into inflation. Wouldn't an oversupply lead to deflation? Prices going down for minerals, and all the things that minerals are used to build? And income going down for new miners to the point they give up on the game before they get hooked? Yes.
Tritanium: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/34 Pyerite: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/35 Isogen: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/37 Nocxium: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/38 Zydrine: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/39
Megacyte: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/40 Mexallon: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/market/link/10000002/36
Aside from the last two, all the others are deflationary, even more so since the rorqual/orca rebalance. |
Atomic Virulent
Dark Matter Industrial
180
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 05:58:41 -
[58] - Quote
More Rorquals = more materials = cheaper ships = more likely to be willing to lose ships = finally the game doesnt suck... |
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46858
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:01:21 -
[59] - Quote
Atomic Virulent wrote:= more likely to be willing to lose ships The game doesn't suck (YMMV), but I'm yet to see the cost of ships be the deciding factor in whether people undock for pvp. |
Salvos Rhoska
2081
|
Posted - 2017.02.12 06:03:18 -
[60] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Resource harvesting ships underlie the entire economy of EVE. You're going to have do demonstrate where your proof of this is.
Ok. So gun-mining also contributes materials. And isk faucets/sinks regulate available isk.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |