Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Spurty
Caldari Amok. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 01:35:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Hegbard I have a question. Why are people raging about strategic cruisers being expensive, while stealth bombers, electronic attack frigates and black ops remain useless and barely anyone makes long wall of text whines about the bad prices and risk vs. reward for them?
haha the man has a point!!
Originally by: Butter Dog
I think you'll find that 10 seconds > 1 month
|
Sir Elliot
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 02:22:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Sir Elliot on 23/03/2009 02:25:12 There are two simple solutions, as anyone who knows economics recognizes.
1) Provide a pure economic incentive to w-space usage (be it any of the w-space activities). This is done by creating an environment where w-space economic activity is rewarded more than lvl 4 mission running (which seems to be a standard base line). Risk, perceived or real, plays a role in this. 2) Provide some non-economic incentive that players will value as equal or above the baseline (e.g., an experience).
Currently wormholes are new, and so the experience of going there is valued above the baseline. That will eventually change. Experience has shown us that a large number of players view the perceived risk associated with low sec as quite high, and I suspect that a similar level of perceived risk will eventually strike w-space (due to the risk of being stuck, etc).
Psychological studies have, interestingly, shown that humans value the reduction of risk from say 20% to 0% far greater than they value the reduction of risk from say 40% to 20%. Even though the level of risk reduction is the same, one is valued more than the other. This is a phenomenon that has been widely seen in Eve. And with good reason. Internet spaceships are risky business. You die, you lose your ship and cargo (and often your dignity . ) You may have to travel many jumps to get back to a place where you can refit (and then travel back, if you dare). If you're podded you can lose more (though sometimes that makes for a faster return trip...). That's part of Eve's appeal for many, but we must also recognize this reality when we discuss these matters. In WoW you turn ghosty and have to run a little bit. In WoW you can lose weeks, months, of work if things go sour.
The only way to fix the matter (if it is indeed broken, which it appears to be from CCP's stated intent), is to either raise the economic incentive or provide some non-economic incentive. It would take a tremendous economic incentive increase to get those who are adverse to the risk to overcoming those risks (since they value not being ganked or pounded by NPCs rather highly). The alternative is to create a non-economic incentive.
I am of the opinion that a non-economic experience incentive is the way to go. Perhaps empire space wormholes could always remain available on overviews once you're inside wormhole land. Perhaps the process of colonizing empire space w-space could be made easier. Perhaps some other approach could be taken. I would recommend dramatically multiplying the number of empire-space accessible w-space, and allow corps to claim some level of corp sovereignty, including securing permanent wormholes to empire-space and restricting access to outsiders. It would allow many to achieve their internet spaceship dream of having their own slice of the universe, but would probably still not pass the economic baseline of lvl 4 missions.
This would provide the market with large amounts of affordable resources reducing t3 costs, provide an experience incentive that reduces risk enough for 'carebears', and would maintain the status quo in the other important areas of low-sec and null-sec.
|
Joss Sparq
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 02:25:00 -
[63]
I once enjoyed reading threads started by Bellum Eternus, especially the expansive first post of them. I would sit in front of my PC, rolling my eyes at what I saw and feeling very righteous in my (mostly) private opinion that the OP was absolutely full of (possibly steaming) manure.
Especially when it came to Blasters.
Sadly, times have changed and I shudder as I acknowledge that Bellum does seem to make a very good point.
Now, I'm going to weep at the way of the world and possibly pay attention to my lecture.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 02:25:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Sir Elliot I am of the opinion that a non-economic experience incentive is the way to go. Perhaps empire space wormholes could always remain available on overviews once you're inside wormhole land. Perhaps the process of colonizing empire space w-space could be made easier. Perhaps some other approach could be taken. I would recommend dramatically multiplying the number of empire-space accessible w-space, and allow corps to claim some level of corp sovereignty, including securing permanent wormholes to empire-space and restricting access to outsiders. It would allow many to achieve their internet spaceship dream of having their own slice of the universe, but would probably still not pass the economic baseline of lvl 4 missions.
So fixing it by beating it to death with the ugly stick? -
DesuSigs |
Sir Elliot
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 02:30:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Sir Elliot on 23/03/2009 02:32:08 Crumple,
As a side note, eliminating the time-sink scanning mini-game would probably help matters. Right now we have a time sink that involves a mini game of moving 4 objects within a certain target in the proper fashion. I could go to newgrounds.com if I wanted that.
Make ACCESSING the content easier, but UTILIZING the content harder. Making finding and getting to the sites easy, but put in hard skill requirements to do more than pew pew. The current method of finding combat site in WH space is great. Apply that method to other sites, but have the basic probe search be based on your skills. Either you can find the site or you can't, and you find out what you need to know in a few seconds, and then you don't waste time with the mini-game.
This would address, though not completely, the matter of needing to get more materials to market. Then folks can get back to the twofold business of 1) Actually playing eve and 2) Maxing out a non-combat alt to utilize a non-combat game mechanic, as is already done for most other major functions anyways.
|
Relleh
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 03:06:00 -
[66]
Oh stfu and go away. Give it time and see where it goes before you go jumping into the stupid wagon. Remember, you the builder are the one to set this price. Regardless of the amount of time it took you to try and go building these things from the basic components. If you don't find it profitable for your wallet go away. I go to wormholes because it is enjoyable, it looks nice, the npc are a challenge and there is the threat of combat. I bring out 1800m3 of junk everytime, haven't made an isk since goin in but I enjoy it.
Sounds like you need something else more entertaining lvl 4? also linkage please of where they said they want it cheaper then t2? |
MajorMin0r
Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 03:30:00 -
[67]
Short version at bottom!
Tech 3 ships are definitely novelty ships but by just looking at the bonuses they provide they are worth the isk for certain situations. Small gangs that need ships to fill multiple roles will enjoy the fact that these ships can do that. Take for example the proteus, can have a 36km point, great tank and you either make it a drone boat or a sniper hac. That pretty much mashes together either a lachesis and a deimos or a lachesis and an ishtar. Loki has an increased webber range so it can fulfill the roll of a huginn (cant remember the increment increase but as i recall its definitely not as far as the huginns webber range). I have not looked into what the caldari and amarr ones do (i know amarr has neuting bonus). So really these ships are designed to multi-role ships (ccp said they wanted to mix and match the best of t2 and t1 and they hit it right on the mark). I believe all the ships also have some sort of remote shield or armor repping bonus which encourages small rr gangs a lot. basically great ships if your in a 5 man gang
As far as the isk to time and risk vs reward you keep on ranting about your forgetting a few things
-this was just released and things usually take a while to come into effect such as the economy and how players adapt. you actually expect this to work right off the bat? why do you think its called wd 40? because wd 1 - 39 didnt work.
-Tech 3 should be more expensive then t2 but it usually takes awhile for the market to settle so its still anyone's guess as to how this works out in the end. at least this time ppl in high sec have access unlike t2
-according to your logic l4 missions in high sec are the end all be all (wont get into this anymore than that as it is off topic) yet ppl go pvp, try to grab sov and etc. because its fun and they DONT want to do level fours because they are boring and they dont care if there wallet says 0 isk or 40 bil, they want to ENJOY the game
most likely what will take place here is that players that want t3 ships will have to go and do the grunt work themselves, which isnt a bad thing because it may add a new dynamic to the game where pvp pilots can support themselves for there own custom ships. Yes you can go on and on about its not worth the risk reward blah blah you can say that about like 90% of the stuff in eve yet people still do those things.
To apply a basic principle of economics you keep consuming something until it yield no more utility to you. To apply this to t3 ships, if flying t1 provides no utility and t2 provides little to no utility and t3 provides a large amount utility then people will take the time and energy to get them because the other two options do not provide the same amount of satisfaction no matter how much is consumed and you will have ppl who adhere to this logic.
Short version: If your you not gonna fly it because it doesnt provide you extra satisfaction then why is it a problem? its not t2 is cheap either. What did you think ccp was going to give you something cheap and good aka can i haz porsche for 100 dollar?
|
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 03:35:00 -
[68]
Tech 3 doesn't have to be reasonably priced, or even safe. It should however be different.
90% of the differences in Tech 3 come at the production chain or fittings screen. In combat, they're pretty much the same old. Same bonuses, same attributes, same slots, same modules, same capabilities.
They took an entire tech level and focused it on versatility and affordability, forgetting that was the point of tech 1, and tech 2 went down that road as well. To confuse things worse, they did it for cruiser class ships which have the least gaps in gameplay.
I have money, time, skillpoints to burn and experience to back it all up and yet I've got zero interest. The idea of flying a new race's ships is >>> tech 3.
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 03:44:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Sir Elliot Edited by: Sir Elliot on 23/03/2009 02:32:08 Crumple,
As a side note, eliminating the time-sink scanning mini-game would probably help matters. Right now we have a time sink that involves a mini game of moving 4 objects within a certain target in the proper fashion. I could go to newgrounds.com if I wanted that.
Make ACCESSING the content easier, but UTILIZING the content harder. Making finding and getting to the sites easy, but put in hard skill requirements to do more than pew pew. The current method of finding combat site in WH space is great. Apply that method to other sites, but have the basic probe search be based on your skills. Either you can find the site or you can't, and you find out what you need to know in a few seconds, and then you don't waste time with the mini-game.
This would address, though not completely, the matter of needing to get more materials to market. Then folks can get back to the twofold business of 1) Actually playing eve and 2) Maxing out a non-combat alt to utilize a non-combat game mechanic, as is already done for most other major functions anyways.
If I am reading this right you want to remove the part of probing that makes it more than a brief chore so you can 'get back to playing EVE'. Unless I mistook you, that's a 2-hit combo of suggesting breaking awesome new additions to the game. -
DesuSigs |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 04:44:00 -
[70]
I am going to play the we will see card.
currently it looks a bit though.
|
|
Sir Elliot
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 05:05:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Sir Elliot on 23/03/2009 05:07:18
Quote: If I am reading this right you want to remove the part of probing that makes it more than a brief chore so you can 'get back to playing EVE'.
You are reading me correctly. Chores drive people away from the content. But the economic matter at hand will only be resolved when more people access the content.
Quote: Unless I mistook you, that's a 2-hit combo of suggesting breaking awesome new additions to the game.
I don't view the new chore system as an awesome addition to the game. As for the other new stuff in wormholes, having people do chores to get to it will reduce the number of people who don't bother and instead return to the lvl 4 baseline. But more people are needed if resources will be brought to market, reducing t3 prices.
As for the modifications to wormhole space, all I am pointing out is that steps could be taken to preserve the status quo for null and low sec, and preserve the status quo on non-empire wormholes, while also making empire level wormholes more accessible without disrupting our meta-economy (that is, not providing an activity that exceeds baseline). This would have the additional advantage of allowing more players to access more content, would bring more resources to the market (a good thing in regards to t3 prices, per the devs stated goal on t3 tech), and all of this could be done under the lvl 4 isk/h baseline.
The fact is simple: because the consequences of dying in eve have the potential to be so severe, many players are going to place a significant negative economic value on risk of getting blown up. There is a reason that a huge number of eve players never cross into .4 space: Here be dragons.
If the devs want prices of t3 to drop, it means getting those players that refuse to ever enter .4 into wormholes. The only realistic way that will happen is if a severely reduced risk option is available that provides an experience that will be valued above the baseline in opportunity cost. Empire carebears know that wormholes will result in gankage, and that they can end up not only losing their ship (which they value well above the ISK cost of the ship), but it can also mean being stuck in w-space not able to actually play EvE, or losing their pod. There simply isn't an economic incentive that's going to motivate those folks, so an experiential one is necessary.
Right now wormholes are right there with low-sec: here be dragons. Remind me, How many empire carebears moved to low-sec for the better mission agents?
|
Shadowsword
Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 08:47:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Sir Elliot If the devs want prices of t3 to drop, it means getting those players that refuse to ever enter.
You're right about the rest of your post, but wrng about that quote.
You don't need it to be farmed by everyone just to increase the volume to something that would sustain the industry, you just need to increase the output for those who do it... ------------------------------------------
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 08:52:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc I think the main problem is that unlike tech 2, which introduced warping cloaked, interdictors, HIC's, stealth bombers and black ops, tech 3 ships don't actually do anything new tactically. Although the added complexity in the fittings mini game is nice, it was less needed than additions tot tactics and game play in pvp. The CCP ignored this, and instead made faction ships but at 25x the cost in manpower.
/thread
They've released 3 of 5 subsystems... That would be the 3 combat specific subsystems, cause they're easy to implement and balance.
You really think the remaining two subsystems to be implemented (per race, per subsystem slot) will be the same old, same old? See the GD forum thread asking for suggestions...
|
Gariuys
Evil Strangers Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 08:54:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: The Snowman early days...early days.
This actually.
Right now people are still gearing up for production, no baseline prices have been established. This entire thread is based on conjecture and nothing more.
Yep, we had the exact same thing happening when tech2 first hit the market, so hardly suprising really... will take months for anyone to get a real feel for how it works out, and if how it works out doesn't fall within CCPs original idea, they'll adjust it.
|
Gilgamesh1980
The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:03:00 -
[75]
well in terms of price/cost, it's not that bad.
TGA's industrial wing will be having the first Legion hulls and three subsystems come off the belt early this week.
total cost for this was mainly just in the new POS but other than that, most stuff was picked up on the way
Federic 'Gilgamesh1980' Chopin
Supreme Commander and Diplomat of the Black Rabbits and Gurlstas associates |
Reven Cordelle
Caldari Lemuria Prospecting
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:09:00 -
[76]
T3 is the new T2, T2 is the new T1.
Remember T2 when that was first introduced? Exactly the same amount of "OMGWTF PRICES" banter.
90% of the people going into W-Space right now do nothing but get lost or blown up. Until we get some wise chaps going into W-Space, we won't get cheap(er) T3.
Its going to be months before we see a price that is sub-billion for T3 Hulls anyway.
But yes, I agree that the fact T3 is made entirely out of Tritanium and Unobtainium makes the entire prospect of strategic cruisers nothing but fancy pimped-out rides for rich players that have ISK to waste. Nearly 2bn for one Proteus Hull, absolutely daft.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:24:00 -
[77]
Blahblahblah (no i didnt read the thread).
Ya know why T3 ships are expensive/rare atm? Check skill requirements to build em. Most "lol empire inventors" have skills at lvl4. T3 ships need both cruiser construction5 (20-25 days) and racial starship engineering lv5 (20-25 days) just to produce HULL. Modules also need quite a few high skills: jury rigging 5 (10-15 days), and lots of support skills at lv4 (2-4 days per one).
Assuming that only 5% of empire t2/inventor producers were maxed (yeh most did have one skill lv5 but other lv4 and so on) this means that ya need minimum of one month for people to catch up and actually start doing anything. For most of em look at 2-3 months of skilling (including reverse engineering skills etc).
Ofc this is only one of causes. Others include lack of radar/magneto sites (yeh they are there but not as abundand as they should be), boring gas harvesting (so called ISK/hour, check prices for c-540) etc.
But on other hand: CCP we told you so. Because i still think t3 ships wont come under 500m pricetag (with all mods). They need quite a lot of work (reactions, pos for reverse engineering, pos for production, running around wspace etc) and i personally dont see it being cheap.
|
Hyperforce99
Gallente Infinite Covenant United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:26:00 -
[78]
i feel like I have to respond with this to the OP:
"No one will need more than 637 kb of memory for a personal computer" Quote: "Bill Gates"
Nuff said --------------------------------------------- Somewhere beyond happyness and sadness, I need to calculate what creates my own madness o/ |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:33:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Tippia on 23/03/2009 09:39:53
Originally by: Reven Cordelle T3 is the new T2, T2 is the new T1.
Remember T2 when that was first introduced? Exactly the same amount of "OMGWTF PRICES" banter.
90% of the people going into W-Space right now do nothing but get lost or blown up. Until we get some wise chaps going into W-Space, we won't get cheap(er) T3.
The difference is that T2 (and certainly T1) are mostly AFK processes. You mine some minerals (afk) and/or plunk down an (afk) moon miner POS and run some (afk) refining/bp research/construction processes. In the meantime, you go off and have fun elsewhere (in an alt, if you are dead set on asteroid-mining rather than combat mining).
No such thing with T3. Large portions of the process is non-parallelisable since you can't afk-mine the gasses or afk-produce the blueprints and certainly not afk-farm the sleeper salvage. This means that the whole process must pay for itself, time-wise. When you produce T1 or T2, those hours needed for gathering, refining and building can be spent on other money-making schemes at the same time, and you don't need to worry about how much that time "costs" you. With T3, the gathering process itself must generate as much income as those schemes before the value-adding production process is even considered.
In essennce, ignoring the non-afk:ness of T3 production is very much like the tired old "stuff I mine is free" fallacy, except that the people who have the resources to get into T3 have long since understood the faults in that mode of thinking. So unless they see that the time spent gathering the resources pays back more than those other parallel-to-production activities, they're just going to ignore it. This fact will materialise itself either as prices far higher than what one might expect (they're adding an L4 ISK/h baseline to cost) or as a complete lack of goods (if no-one is willing to pay those prices). ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:44:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Sir Elliot stuff
Wormholes are a great addition to the game as they are, better to untie T3 production from them than to compromise them. You're essentially asking for the purview of carebears to be extended in order to mitigate what may or may not turn out to be a poorly thought out part of the game. Since wormholes themselves are seen by many as the best recent addition to the core of what EVE is as they are right now, turning even some of them over to the carebears because of the way T3 might turn out would be quite disappointing.
Really, tying the production of a whole new class of ships which are intended to become relatively common into new NPC content which is intended to be more difficult than anything that came before was kind of a lulzy decision.
Also, the probing system isn't a chore. Mashing a "generate" button on a random number generator over and over again is a chore. As it is now, aside from the "attack of the gravimetrics" the probing system is pretty nice as it involves the player actually using it. Making it easier would turn it into something just quick and obligatory, with no real room for interaction with it it would become a chore and might as well be removed. -
DesuSigs |
|
Jesum
Amarr Black Rainbow Knights Unity Thru Aggression.
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 09:59:00 -
[81]
For people like me, who continually fly around in gangs smaller than 5 - these ships will be made worth using.
____________ [-..-] Jesum♥ |
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 10:04:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Hegbard I have a question. Why are people raging about strategic cruisers being expensive, while stealth bombers, electronic attack frigates and black ops remain useless and barely anyone makes long wall of text whines about the bad prices and risk vs. reward for them?
They are not so new, they are all niche ships and they dont come attached with 2500 starsystems.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 10:04:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Jesum For people like me, who continually fly around in gangs smaller than 5 - these ships will be made worth using.
At least you know who will be primary.
|
Gun Gal
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 10:05:00 -
[84]
and once again, carebears find anything too hard and want to make it easier.
and yes, i read all your rabid postings, comes down in the end to yet another pathetic attempt to make things WoW- easy.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 11:49:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Gun Gal and once again, carebears find anything too hard and want to make it easier.
and yes, i read all your rabid postings, comes down in the end to yet another pathetic attempt to make things WoW- easy.
To whom exactly are you referring?
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 12:10:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 23/03/2009 09:39:53
Originally by: Reven Cordelle T3 is the new T2, T2 is the new T1.
Remember T2 when that was first introduced? Exactly the same amount of "OMGWTF PRICES" banter.
90% of the people going into W-Space right now do nothing but get lost or blown up. Until we get some wise chaps going into W-Space, we won't get cheap(er) T3.
The difference is that T2 (and certainly T1) are mostly AFK processes. You mine some minerals (afk) and/or plunk down an (afk) moon miner POS and run some (afk) refining/bp research/construction processes. In the meantime, you go off and have fun elsewhere (in an alt, if you are dead set on asteroid-mining rather than combat mining).
No such thing with T3. Large portions of the process is non-parallelisable since you can't afk-mine the gasses or afk-produce the blueprints and certainly not afk-farm the sleeper salvage. This means that the whole process must pay for itself, time-wise. When you produce T1 or T2, those hours needed for gathering, refining and building can be spent on other money-making schemes at the same time, and you don't need to worry about how much that time "costs" you. With T3, the gathering process itself must generate as much income as those schemes before the value-adding production process is even considered.
In essennce, ignoring the non-afk:ness of T3 production is very much like the tired old "stuff I mine is free" fallacy, except that the people who have the resources to get into T3 have long since understood the faults in that mode of thinking. So unless they see that the time spent gathering the resources pays back more than those other parallel-to-production activities, they're just going to ignore it. This fact will materialise itself either as prices far higher than what one might expect (they're adding an L4 ISK/h baseline to cost) or as a complete lack of goods (if no-one is willing to pay those prices).
Well said.
What people don't get is that even after a large number of players become extremely efficient at 'mining' the materials for T3 production, it's still a very hands-on process unlike mining or other traditional T1/T2 production processes. Players will want to get paid for their time, particularly the ones that are capable of making a success of w-space, as you already noted.
I don't see how T3 is going to ever be cheap enough to use in combat given the cost to produce them unless some major changes are implemented. And on top of that, even if T3 ships end up being 200-300m each, those prices will never keep pace with their lack of performance.
And if the ships aren't worth the ISK, then the entire point of T3 is an abortion.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Sillas Cov
Caldari 22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 16:12:00 -
[87]
'And on top of that, even if T3 ships end up being 200-300m each, those prices will never keep pace with their lack of performance.'
Bellum
Um how the frack do you come up with a statement like this?? Have you flown T3 ships in varied combat situations??
Obviously not.
I agree with the general theme of this thread, in that T3 will remain a time intensive and REAL life skill intensive production task.
Most all of the tasks of T3 production resource gathering involve a GROUP of dedicated and skill pilots, and Eve is a very seductive mistress and will allways pull pilots from one activity to another a moment there is undue down time.
Players will gravitate towards being busy as a soloist in the game and thus the frequency of worm hole T3 extraction missions will be easily compromised when the team is not availible.
Ive seen this already with my worm hole activities, where I want to go and gather sleeper loot and my corp mates are not online or doing other things.
Thus TIME required for production is the variable here that is the most important factor to T3 prices. Factors such as the usefulness of the ship, and its popularity are yet to be explored by the Eve community, but as I stated before T3 will not become an option until it IS and option within a pilots hangar. Catch 22 here.
Sustained Demand of T3 ships will not take off until they are widely available and that's not going to happened until the intense time sink, that is the production side of this, is addressed.
Hence there is a strong argument to increase the drop rate, so that when production corps and their members actually do go into action, they can come back with enough parts to build a significant amount of ships for the market.
Given my limited experience I dont see how T3 production can be sustainable by a corp unless the members a completely driven to spent very significant amounts of time doing this.
And how exactly does that translate into large numbers of cheap T3 ships on the market place??
Sillas
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 17:05:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Sillas Cov
Have you flown T3 ships in varied combat situations??
Yes.
I've flown all four types, with a very wide variety of configurations, under a very wide variety of combat situations.
So yes, I am very well qualified to make such a statement.
Secondly, even though most of the time pure EFT numbers are to be avoided, it is still perfectly reasonable to make some projections based on current known ship designs and performance, and what T3 offers.
So again, the statements are completely relevant.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
gfldex
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 17:48:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Everything in Eve has a time cost. In a manner of speaking, L4 missions artificially set an ISK/hour baseline. Doing anything else that provides less ISK/hour is inefficient and doing anything that has greater risk involved should offer enough of an increased incentive to make it worth that risk.
You imply that the value of ISK is fixed. You might want to think about that a bit more. --
|
Sillas Cov
Caldari 22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
|
Posted - 2009.03.23 18:04:00 -
[90]
Bellum
Dude the test server is not a fair replication the dynamic of Eve combat on the live server. Granted you obviously can gain significant experience from flying in a ship on SiSi, but really how far can you take that knowledge?
I can tell you that the small gang run and gun combat of Factional warfare is only found out in the plexs and not on Sisi. Here destroyers are actually very useful ships... who da thought that before Fac war??
Does it not take hundreds of pilot hours for a ship to be understood as having a role within the Eve ship menu?
And given the variability of the T3 designs does this not make predictive statements concerning utility and there for popularity rather short sighted at this point?
Sillas
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |