Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
WarlockX
Amarr Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.19 19:05:00 -
[1]
If we make mission drop meta2,meta3,meta4 pieces instead of actual meta items and each meta build takes Meta2 = T1 item + Meta2 pieces (from mission drops) Meta3 = T1 item + Meta3 pieces (from mission drops) Meta4 = T1 item + Meta4 pieces (from mission drops)
This accomplishes two things, one meta items will always be worth more then t1 items because they require a t1 item to build. Also this will make t1 items consumed to create meta items further driving the t1 market. ----------------------------------------------- Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
FarosWarrior
Amarr Sonnema
|
Posted - 2010.01.19 20:23:00 -
[2]
where do you get the blueprints?
tbh the only thing this does is giving industrialists and missionrunners more stuff to do cheers, Faros
"As long as we're jammed we might as well throw those 1400mm's at them" Charlie Fodder, Clear Skies |
WarlockX
Amarr Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.19 21:53:00 -
[3]
Blueprints have to be seeded. Same as any other blueprint. ----------------------------------------------- Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.01.19 22:01:00 -
[4]
Edited by: XXSketchxx on 19/01/2010 22:02:18 I like it. Boost to industry.
Make bpcs LP items (and vary them by factions and specific corporations).
Also make T1 items only able to be reprocessed up to 75%, maybe 85% with scrapmetal 5 and 50% services. _____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
WarlockX
Amarr Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 01:27:00 -
[5]
Originally by: XXSketchxx Edited by: XXSketchxx on 19/01/2010 22:02:18 I like it. Boost to industry.
Make bpcs LP items (and vary them by factions and specific corporations).
Also make T1 items only able to be reprocessed up to 75%, maybe 85% with scrapmetal 5 and 50% services.
Good idea about meta blueprints being LP items. That could really make some LP stores very different. ----------------------------------------------- Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
Saiken Le
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 15:33:00 -
[6]
I like this idea. /signed |
Botrias Pirabus
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 15:43:00 -
[7]
I support this, not only for the boost to the industrialists, but for the boost to newer players.
Say a newer player wants to put beams on his Punisher. The second best, the Medium Modulated Laser (I believe that's the Meta 4 small beam, if memory serves) he will pay more than for a t2 small beam. Significantly more. With the ability to build them, industrialists can set the price for them, likely bringing them down to a spot between Medium Modal Laser 1, and it's t2 buddy.
If anybody wonders why this part matters at all, there are, believe it or not, some characters tooling around who don't have their turret skills at 5 yet. So they max out on the Meta 4 guns, and in fact, look for them. Further, many of them are unaware that those are droploot rather than manufactured. I know when I started, I was under the impression that other than deadspace special modules, everything was player-made.
Let's turn that mistaken impression correct, eh?
|
Tig
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 16:33:00 -
[8]
Something of this nature might work, some problems that will need to be dealt with first.
More factory build slots in empire is a must. I do not want to see the current problem that exists in ME research and copy become the standard with building items. 25-40 days wait to put a item in for material research is insane.
I would not like to see meta 1 and 2 items removed from the drop list. 2 reasons, 1) The people that use them are often new players that can not use T2 yet or because they are slightly better or easier to fit than items that can be produced. 2) Those drops are low cost and would not be manufactured by industry because of limited desirability of the item. You would basically deprive a new player or players with a limited income to be able to fit a ship slightly better than manufactured items.
Instead of a meta 1-4 parts dropping I would like a generic meta part drop. The number of parts for building meta 4 higher than meta 3. Meta 3 BPC's could be either market or LP store seeded. Meta 4 need to be rarer than meta 3. In most cases meta 4 is or all most equal to T2 with easier fitting requirements and much easier skill requirements. Meta 4 if seeded in market or LP store will become the new standard. If meta 4 is not rare you will put another part of the industry out of business the T2 builders.
|
RootEmerger
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 17:19:00 -
[9]
/signed
|
Tig
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 17:21:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Botrias Pirabus I support this, not only for the boost to the industrialists, but for the boost to newer players.
Say a newer player wants to put beams on his Punisher. The second best, the Medium Modulated Laser (I believe that's the Meta 4 small beam, if memory serves) he will pay more than for a t2 small beam. Significantly more. With the ability to build them, industrialists can set the price for them, likely bringing them down to a spot between Medium Modal Laser 1, and it's t2 buddy.
Botrias consider your example the so called second best. Medium Modulated Laser(M4) vs Medium Beam 2(T2) Fitting requirements, (m4)CPU 16 PG 13, (T2)CPU 21 PG 14. cap cost (m4)5.776 vs (t2)7.22 Damage modifier, ROF, optimal, fall off, tracking all the same, you will get more dps from t2 because of spec damage and the fact that you will have more skills to use T2. The other benefit is being able to use T2 ammo. Time to train new character no training if character is amarr,(M4) no training time needed not amarr 10m 25s, to use (t2) if you do evemon suggested learning just under 6 days, you save a few hours if you are amarr Now lets take this to the next step fitting a medium beam on cruiser. 5h to train to slap a heavy beam on, over 21 days more to train to T2. Those times are no implants and doing the suggested learning training and to be decent at beam of any type it will take more training in gunnery support skills not required but you needed a idea of the time difference.
The reason people train for T2 gunnery is better damage and they cost much less than meta 4, I have no trouble boosting industry but not at the expense of another part of the industry the T2 producers. I have no issue for him to putting a meta 1-2 beam laser for much less than a T2 because a skills or fitting issue but lets not make meta 4 the standard and kill T2.
|
|
Max Essen
Gallente Bison Industrial Inc
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 17:40:00 -
[11]
First off, i am a miner, mission runner and builder. Right now, almost all T1 item BPOs are not worth the paper they are printed on. I would suggest just removing all T1 Meta 0 drop from missions, 'rats etc ...
This will open up the T1 industry IMO ... i would leave the meta 1+ drops alone as they are okay. . ====== Yup, that's all I got. |
WarlockX
Amarr Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 18:59:00 -
[12]
if the drop rates of the m4 pieces are the same as the current m4 drop rate then the price/rarity should remain the same. ----------------------------------------------- Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
Tig
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 02:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: WarlockX if the drop rates of the m4 pieces are the same as the current m4 drop rate then the price/rarity should remain the same.
Good thought Warlockx but as a long time mission runner I can tell you there are a number of items of questionable use that are meta 4, the "meta 4" parts from those drops would be used for the more popular items and if the bpc's for those items were not restricted meta 4 becomes the new standard. If meta 4 becomes the new standard you succeed in ruining the T2 mods market. Give it some thought do you want to trade one type of manufacture for another?
Need a list of questionable use meta 4, look at all the less popular meta 4 weapons of all types to start and if you took some time in the ship equipment area of the market you would find a long list of items that are not really used in game. You have the same type of thing now in T2 production, any T2 mod that can be invented can be manufactured but not all T2 mods are invented because there is no profit in some of them.
|
Bach Jauer
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 15:04:00 -
[14]
As long as the loot doesn't drop from missions anymore then yes this is a good idea. I support it. |
Stratio
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 15:36:00 -
[15]
I like WarlockX's idea. _____________________
For Tribe and Honour! |
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 19:22:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Max Essen I would suggest just removing all T1 Meta 0 drop from missions, 'rats etc ... This will open up the T1 industry IMO ... i would leave the meta 1+ drops alone as they are okay.
You'll have to do more than that. The drop rate of meta-1 and -2 modules needs to be cut back drastically. As it is, even with the giant glut of meta-0 modules, you can still buy meta-1 and meta-2 modules for even lower prices. The meta-3 and meta-4 market, for the most part, seems to be fine, but until the -1 and -2 drop rates are fixed there's simply no reason at all to buy meta-0.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 19:45:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Andrea Griffin
Originally by: Max Essen I would suggest just removing all T1 Meta 0 drop from missions, 'rats etc ... This will open up the T1 industry IMO ... i would leave the meta 1+ drops alone as they are okay.
You'll have to do more than that. The drop rate of meta-1 and -2 modules needs to be cut back drastically. As it is, even with the giant glut of meta-0 modules, you can still buy meta-1 and meta-2 modules for even lower prices. The meta-3 and meta-4 market, for the most part, seems to be fine, but until the -1 and -2 drop rates are fixed there's simply no reason at all to buy meta-0.
That alone won't change tings much. The reason meta 0 and low meta items are so cheap, is because people buy them mostly just to recycle them or use them for suicide purposes. Their cost varies mostly with the value of the minerals they are made from. The area of time where you use meta 0 and low meta is just too short. I used them for the first week and replaced as much as I could with mission loot during that time. After that any low meta items have been a rare exception in my ships. With no demand it doesn't matter if the supply gets reduced.
What needs to also happen is to give people reasons to fit meta 0. Being able to manufacture them is an advantage, but with the current logistics it isn't that big of an advantage and more importantly it isn't a reason to fit one if you can avoid it. The advantage needs to be an advantage in usage compared to low meta items. Just something that doesn't make it the clear bottom module in terms of functionality.
|
Sideron
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 21:38:00 -
[18]
Maybe something like this:
Missions drop only Meta 0 T1. Meta 1-4 Blueprints need to be invented like Meta 5 T2 BPCs but with far lesser requirements on Datacores and stuff. There will only be Meta 1-4 BPCs available, no BPOs. The Meta 0 Items will be needed to build other Meta Level Modules just like Meta 5.
This opens a market for Mission Loot as well as player build Meta 0 Modules. Less Loot will be reprocessed, more work for the miners to fill the gap in Mineral market. |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 01:43:00 -
[19]
Meta 1 and 2 are so cheap because they tend to reprocess into minerals worth less than the equivalent meta 0 item. Meta 3 and 4 are valuable because they are that much better than the meta 0 item that they're worth having, and their fittings requirements are lower than T2.
I'd suggest removing meta 0 items altogether, and replacing higher meta items with BPCs. No, it doesn't make sense that an NPC would drop blueprints instead of items. But neither does it make sense that an NPC will drop ECM or warp scramblers that they never used.
[Aussie players: join channels ANZAC or AUSSIES] |
XXSketchxx
Gallente Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 01:54:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Mara Rinn Meta 1 and 2 are so cheap because they tend to reprocess into minerals worth less than the equivalent meta 0 item. Meta 3 and 4 are valuable because they are that much better than the meta 0 item that they're worth having, and their fittings requirements are lower than T2.
I'd suggest removing meta 0 items altogether, and replacing higher meta items with BPCs. No, it doesn't make sense that an NPC would drop blueprints instead of items. But neither does it make sense that an NPC will drop ECM or warp scramblers that they never used.
Balancing around roleplay is never a good idea
I like the idea of NPCs dropping "meta" material or whatever that can then be used to create meta items. Higher level meta items will simply use more meta material. Meta items would still need a T1 base item for manufacturing. Bpcs -> LP store. Keep meta 0 drops but lower their drop rates significantly and make them only re processable up to 65% or so.
Basically what you will get is:
-T1 items still out there and possibly a profit to be had (either demanded by meta producers or T1 users) -less T1 items reprocessed due to lack of 100% reprocess -meta market is enhanced: if there is a demand for the low level meta stuff, people will build it; if not, people will build the higher level meta stuff and who knows? might bring costs down on y-t8 mwds and arbalest launchers -meta items will no longer drop in the sense that they do now and thus a large mineral supply, that comes from crappy meta items being reprocessed, will be eradicated
_____________________________________________
-Sketch, Certified Pharmacist
Need a Boost?
|
|
DrDooma
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 04:32:00 -
[21]
/signed |
Reggie Stoneloader
JAFA Trade and Manufacturing Cooperative
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 05:10:00 -
[22]
Instead of blueprints (it would take 4 times the current T1 blueprints to cover everything), could it be a process, maybe done at a POS? Get a module apgrade array, stick a Guristas datacore in it with some salvage and some T1 launchers and hit "Malkuthify". A few hours later you've got a tidy pile of Malkuth launchers. Work out a feasible scale of material and operational costs, and we could be seeing player-built named T1 equipment at reasonable rates being produced.
Either way, I'm definitely in favor of being able to build the named T1 variants of modules. Faction gear's available with regularity from LP stores now, and officer or deadspace gear is the treasure that it deserves to be, but it's silly that the only way to get a "Scout" autocannon is to farm it from mobs. Obviously, some mid-meta items will be undesirable, but we'll likely see the "good" stuff, by which I mean the meta 4 variant and the variant with the lowest CPU requirement, produced at a good clip, and everyone wins, since the meta module market will be supporting miners and T1 manufacturers, rather than competing with them. |
Ivanaro
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 06:00:00 -
[23]
/signed |
Carniflex
StarHunt Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 06:49:00 -
[24]
Why not make it so that Meta 1 = T1 + Meta 1 'tag' Meta 2 = Meta 1 + Meta 2 'tag' etc
So each next level takes previous one as input. And Meta tags should be ofc universal or semiuniversal where with 'universal' I mean that meta 1 'tag' should be possible to use on any T1 item to 'upgrade' it to meta 1 level or failing that 'semiuniversal' where meta tags are grouped by general item group - ie it can be used on any hi slot mod to upgrade it to next meta level or second type of tag on any medium slot item etc.
That way where next 'level' takes previous as input you avoid issue where meta 2 and 3 stuff is just crap (yes I do use those in some of my setups as they do offer some advantages, price among one of those).
This idea has been floating around for a little while btw - it was one of those that was proposed in that '40% minerals comes from loot' thread a while ago.
Overall I (and my alts ofc) are neutral on this issue as when you kill the rats fast enough looting as dedicated activity stops being attractive anyway. |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 08:54:00 -
[25]
Originally by: FarosWarrior where do you get the blueprints?
The meta components can act as the blueprints.
Then you change T1 construction to need T1 components, replace all T1 loot with random components instead of full modules, maybe add broken components (acting as BPs) that need fixing up with salvage parts and maybe even move all the loot to salvaging and you have increased the width and depth of industry by some bit and made mineral output from mission more accurately to control. |
Stratio
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 09:16:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Mara Rinn ... But neither does it make sense that an NPC will drop ECM or warp scramblers that they never used.
From an RP point of view, remember that these NPCs are pirates, so what they drop may have been in their cargo. |
GIGAR
Caldari Domini Umbrus DEFI4NT
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 10:42:00 -
[27]
I tried to find some argument against it, but I couldn't. It would be sweet, give more reason to grab loot from wrecks, and reduce the mineral impact of rat module drops. Awesome idea!!! |
Fenren
Minmatar Bure Astro Photography
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 11:10:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Carniflex Why not make it so that Meta 1 = T1 + Meta 1 'tag' Meta 2 = Meta 1 + Meta 2 'tag' etc
So each next level takes previous one as input. And Meta tags should be ofc universal or semiuniversal where with 'universal' I mean that meta 1 'tag' should be possible to use on any T1 item to 'upgrade' it to meta 1 level or failing that 'semiuniversal' where meta tags are grouped by general item group - ie it can be used on any hi slot mod to upgrade it to next meta level or second type of tag on any medium slot item etc.
you cant make it that simple... noone will upgrade a small autocannon if it costs the same to upgrade a large one...
that can be avoided by making them require different amounts of these universal meta upgrade parts, similar to how rigs and modules require different amount of salvage and minerals... |
Meredith Midnight
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 18:48:00 -
[29]
I like this idea, but never estimate how much loot misson runners gather. If you make the meta pieces generic, then getting meta 4 stuff will be trivially easy, and will obsolete the t2 market. (For those that don't know, most meta 4 is arguably better than t2, especially for people without perfect cap/fitting skills)
I rather missioners be able to find 'salvaged mega modulated pulse energy beam' pieces, so that they must find all the required pieces to make one item. This will ensure that the meta 4 rarity is still rare enough to keep their prices inflated.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 19:47:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 22/01/2010 19:50:56
Originally by: WarlockX If we make mission drop meta2,meta3,meta4 pieces instead of actual meta items and each meta build takes Meta2 = T1 item + Meta2 pieces (from mission drops) Meta3 = T1 item + Meta3 pieces (from mission drops) Meta4 = T1 item + Meta4 pieces (from mission drops)
This accomplishes two things, one meta items will always be worth more then t1 items because they require a t1 item to build. Also this will make t1 items consumed to create meta items further driving the t1 market.
a) You have forgot meta 1 items. The T1 modules that can be produced are meta 0.
Originally by: WarlockX Blueprints have to be seeded. Same as any other blueprint.
b) And here you have killed your proposal. Adding x4 the current BPO will have a serious impact on the game and on all industrialist.
Have you a faint idea of what will mean having 1 BPO for each meta variant of the modules to use the meta drops?
What will mean having on market all the meta X components and the named modules?
We will have 2x the number of current named modules (1 metavariant for each one) and 5x the current number of module BPO (+4 meta variants for each BPO).
Same thing for our hangars.
No, thanks.
Originally by: Botrias Pirabus I support this, not only for the boost to the industrialists, but for the boost to newer players.
So having a lot of new BPO to research without new research slots will help industrialist?
Originally by: Botrias Pirabus
Say a newer player wants to put beams on his Punisher. The second best, the Medium Modulated Laser (I believe that's the Meta 4 small beam, if memory serves) he will pay more than for a t2 small beam. Significantly more. With the ability to build them, industrialists can set the price for them, likely bringing them down to a spot between Medium Modal Laser 1, and it's t2 buddy.
Unless the drop rate change, there will be no reduction price, more probably an increase as even less mission runners and ratters will loot the wrecks.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |