| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
   |
Posted - 2010.03.28 11:16:00 -
[211]
 Originally by: xOmGx
CCP gonna kill mining.
do NOT neft inshurance it's fine, go do somesing what's metters and fix lag, imnpowe speed and give OLD capital jump effect!!!
Insurance is not fine. It's horribly broken and massively exploited.
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.03.28 11:24:00 -
[212]
Originally by: xOmGx
CCP gonna kill mining.
do NOT neft inshurance it's fine, go do somesing what's metters and fix lag, imnpowe speed and give OLD capital jump effect!!!
just encourage more pew, remove insurance in high sec for concord. Should adjsut it either that or boost mining yields
Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.03.28 17:36:00 -
[213]
You realise that boosting mining yields is what has gotten us in to this position in the first place?
Making mining easier and ore more common does NOT boost mining income. It severely reduces it. The only way for miners to make more ISK is for mining to become more difficult and dangerous, and for minerals to be less easily available.
Now as for encouraging pewpew... I'm all for that, but if people wont fight with free ships then what more can we do? The fact is that there are too many people who only want to increase their wealth and and are emotionally opposed to risking losing a ship of even trivial value to another player. They only want to do stuff they can definitely "win", even if that is mining veldspar in empire.
|
Nareg Maxence
Gallente
JotunHeim Hird
|
Posted - 2010.03.28 19:12:00 -
[214]
Edited by: Nareg Maxence on 28/03/2010 19:13:00
1. No loot drops, except for stuff in cargo bays.
2. You need a salvager to loot modules from ships along with regular salvage.
3. Modules can drop in four ways after salvaging. It can either not drop (destroyed) or it can be Intact, Malfunctioning or Wrecked (like sleeper loot).
3.1. Intact modules are just as what it says. Working modules like we have now.
3.2. Malfunctioning modules will not work and can't be repaired. If reprocessed, they convert to 2/3 of the materials an intact module would convert into. They can however be reverse engineered to produce a bpc. See 4.
3.3. Wrecked modules like malfunctioning won't work and can't be repaired. They produce 1/3 materials when reprocessed, but can be reverse engineered instead.
4. Malfunctioning and wrecked modules can be reverse engineered to produce a bpc for the working module. This however destroys the item and there is only a chance it will work. You can reverse engineer a collection of the same type of modules to improve the chance of a bpc.
In summary, module drops are nerfed by only being accessable via a salvager and the amount of raw materials fed into manufacturing are reduced in two additional ways. Firstly from reduced reprocessing value of malfunctioning and wrecked modules, secondly from completely destroying the module when it is reverse engineered.
Note about drone loot. I assume minerals that drones drop are kept in their cargo bay, thus it will still be accessible as before.
|
Thrasymachus TheSophist
|
Posted - 2010.03.28 21:57:00 -
[215]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
to save you the effort of the daily bump, it will be out early next week.
It is now early next week. Blog please? 
|
Cyclops43
|
Posted - 2010.03.28 22:17:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Thrasymachus TheSophist
It is now early next week. Blog please?
Actually, in many Euro countries (don't know about Iceland), the week starts on Monday 
...but I second the motion...
|
Kharamete
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 05:47:00 -
[217]
Edited by: Kharamete on 29/03/2010 05:48:09
The week does indeed start on Monday in the Nordic countries, of which Iceland is one.
However, it is now Monday in the Nordic countries, so it is the beginning of the week...
---
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 05:59:00 -
[218]
"Early next week" doesn't mean "at the beginning of next week".
It doesn't even mean "in the first half of next week", since if there was an implied comma: "it will be released early, next week"; you'd have to realise that the blog was going to be released next week, which is earlier than originally intendedà
[Aussie players: join channels ANZAC or AUSSIES] |
Dopekitten
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 06:13:00 -
[219]
Insurance isn't the problem.
The problem is that there is a disproportionate amount of miners/industrialists to people losing ships. There isn't enough demand for ships--so they're falling to the insurance price floor. The economy is thus working as intended.
However, this obviously isn't what most people want. Frankly there is a really easy way to do this--just make low-sec a LOT more profitable than high sec. And I don't mean marginally more profitable like 0.0 vs high sec. I mean where even if you lose a mission ship/exploration ship/mining ship a week it doesn't matter because the money you make out weighs your losses. Obviously some people won't buy into this (like hardcore carebears doing L4's in afk domis) but most people will do it.
I would even daresay that it should be made more profitable 0.0, (at least 0.0 that has player sovereignity, the reason being that doing missions in your alliance's 0.0 system is basically almost as safe as high sec. Keep 0.0 with some exclusive minerals and items so that if the market stablizes, you can still make money by selling those resources).
You could do this in a couple ways.
Create a new form of missions that's only available in low-sec, for example a "Blackmarket Agent," which would have no LP rewards, instead the mission ISK rewards would be increased to compensate. These missions would be a combination of courier and kill missions where you are forced to go into multiple systems and kill at multiple deadspace sites, then turn in specific items in another system. You're rewarded as well as running L5's, or even better. Obviously it requires balancing so you can't fit a certain ship so that these can be farmed super easily because the point of these are to force players to not only come into low-sec but also move around, encouraging pvp. They can be left at L4 difficulty so players can fit their ships for partial pvp as well as doing the mission. I.e. fit a warp scram/prop mod, but also an active tank.
Add a component that's required for all ships/modules (not in large quantities though), that's only dropped by NPCs in low sec. So this mean NPCs in anoms, belts, etc... Make this component take only a little cargo space because fighting ships will be the ones getting them. Plus we want to encourage more pvp fighting and less ganking. (i.e a hauler)
Add a component (similar to the idea above), that's only in low sec, but doesn't require killing. For example, make all low sec sec systems populated with asteroid belts that contain normal ores, but also something new, for example "radioactive ores" which (if you want lore/whatever here, are used to create the capacitor rechargers in the ship, and provide the energy for the ion thrusters). Make these extractable by any ship, as long as you have the skill, "Radioactive Ore Extraction" or whatever. You need that and an Radioisotope Extractor. The thing is, this can be fit to any slot on the ship (with the exception of rig/subsystem slots), and how much it extracts is based the slot. If it's a low slot, it extracts x amount, in a mid slot, 2x, and in a high slot, 3x. That way you could either bring a pure extractor ship into low sec, but you'll probably get ganked, or you could bring a pvp ship with a couple extractors, so that you can extract the isotopes and then also fight anybody that comes at you. This is why there is no slot restriction. The extractors can also have their own cargohold of like 1000m3 base, and then that's increased by the extractor skill (so pvp ships don't have to make billions of trips while extracting).
And I'm sure that other people could think of others.
Ultimately the idea here is to encourage more pvp so that there are more people buying ships, and thus ore, and thus raising ore prices/ship prices and fixing the insurance problem. I think that low-sec is the best way to do it as FW and 0.0 are pretty much blobfests, and lowsec is really the only viable place for solo work.
|
Kharamete
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 06:44:00 -
[220]
I honestly can't understand this hot desire to get mining barges and exhumers into lowsec. Why not ask CCP to remove jump drive capability that would force the lowsec fleets to move through lowsec instead? Imagine the capital fleets using stargates to get from one region to another. Talk about getting ships blown up...
---
|
|
|
Cyclops43
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 07:07:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Mara Rinn
"Early next week" doesn't mean "at the beginning of next week".
It doesn't even mean "in the first half of next week", since if there was an implied comma: "it will be released early, next week"; you'd have to realise that the blog was going to be released next week, which is earlier than originally intendedà
Stop foiling our chance to whinge with your logic...
'Early next week' means Monday morning at 00:01, and by the laws of the internet we have the right to complain if it isn't there 
Basically it's just our way of showing our interest in this issue!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 07:28:00 -
[222]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Malcanis
You know what would improve this thread a whole lot?
A link to Chronitis' dev blog!
to save you the effort of the daily bump, it will be out early next week.
It's pretty early!
(Stupid clock change  )
|
Kharamete
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 09:10:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Mara Rinn
"Early next week" doesn't mean "at the beginning of next week".
It doesn't even mean "in the first half of next week", since if there was an implied comma: "it will be released early, next week"; you'd have to realise that the blog was going to be released next week, which is earlier than originally intendedà
That's sematics getting in the way of our Kremlinology. "Early next week" is "early next week" since I'm a simple guy in these matters, and I only rely on tea leaves in this discussion. Comma positions, implied or otherwise, would confuse it all. 
---
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 10:17:00 -
[224]
with ccp early which week its like at the moment they dont want any mroe feedback, so all this alpha testing rapid development has been a waste of time as nothing is doing, insurance changes are fine btw
I think even planet graphics have had a mild buff as well
Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 18:04:00 -
[225]
The day after tommorow is a middle of the week so you should hurry :>
|
Seth Ruin
Minmatar
Ominous Corp
Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.03.29 18:37:00 -
[226]
So I have this crazy ****ing theory that CCP completed the tests they needed mass feedback from with regards to the Sisi implementation of PI, have continued to develop it more in-house, and are waiting to patch the public test server until they reach another milestone that requires mass testing (as in, more than their current in-house QA, which is probably sufficient for most testing).
But that's not realistic, is it?
|
Imweasel09
|
Posted - 2010.03.30 15:08:00 -
[227]
hooray, the blog is up.
|
Zartrader
|
Posted - 2010.03.30 15:20:00 -
[228]
Edited by: Zartrader on 30/03/2010 15:26:20
I have not read it yet but in case it's not mentioned Meta 0 drops are being nerfed too. There is a blog for that.
|
Akita T
Caldari
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.30 19:25:00 -
[229]
Well, they either heard all the bickering and adapted, or they were already planning to do it all just didn't say a word.
Just glad I was wrong about insurance changes being the ONLY change they might make, and seems like they ended up thinking about most of the things that could go wrong and tackled them all as a single whole.
Looks like this might just work... how well, we'll have to wait for the cold hard numbers, and then give it time.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting
_
|
ISellThingz
|
Posted - 2010.03.30 22:00:00 -
[230]
Mining just got shafted imo. Now there's nothing stopping the prices from going down.
|
|
|
Zartrader
|
Posted - 2010.03.30 22:34:00 -
[231]
Edited by: Zartrader on 30/03/2010 22:36:49
Originally by: ISellThingz
Mining just got shafted imo. Now there's nothing stopping the prices from going down.
Have you read the blog? It all depends on how much excess minerals there is now and the actual changes they do but if they have their numbers right miners may well get a boost. The fear was they would simply nerf insurance and that's that. But thankfully they went a lot further and addressed several areas at once.
If you think miners got shafted please state why. The current false price was never acceptable in a game where players should set the price. Protectionism is for politicians not games.
|
Blood Recuse
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 00:39:00 -
[232]
Here is the problem, and part of the reason why miners will still take a hit.
I can't remember the exact numbers but it would be appreciated from CCP to fill in those blanks.
T1 loot from missioning does not constitute a large portion of the minerals going into the system. Eliminating them is a step in the right direction but does not solve the problem. I would not put this at a value higher then 20 % of the minerals after taking the reprocessed items for transportation.
Drone Loot, this rebalance has been needed for a coons age. If you look at the number of people in the drone region and it will be self evident. If it is profitable people will do it. I would not contirbute more then 20 % of the minerals on the market to this.
that still leaves 60 % to the miners. I would assume that miners are going to gain 10 % of control of the market since they are re-balancing the drone loot. this will likely change the minerals to 70% miners and 30 % drones. They only removed 20 % of the pie and are redistributing it.
They have not changed the manner in which the exchange of minerals to isk is done. There is no mechanic in the game other then insurence that converts the raw resource into isk. With that in mind there is nothing that is going to maintain the prices of minerals untill it becomes unprofitable that miners are going to stop mining. There is no contingency to maintain the over abundant customer base that chooses to mine. If you take away the profitability of mining there is no reason for those miners to maintain there 3 or more accounts.
With the change to the IER(insurence exchange rate) release valve of excess minerals. There could be some interesting changes as the IER value will be dynamic to the price of the minerals going in. There is nothing that garrentee's the price of them going in other then the williness of people to mine for less isk/H. With the over supply of minerals that there is today the price will fall untill it either meets the new low defined by people willingness to work for less since the price is now Dynamic there is nothing to stop it falling.
This is not the end of the world by anymeans but it is taking away the release valve for minerals or moving it from battleships to battlecruisers and cruisers...
Either way it doesn't fix the core issue of the excess in minerals on the market.
|
Zartrader
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 03:43:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Zartrader on 31/03/2010 03:47:02
'Only 20%' is a massive change. Also it ignores market size and mineral distribution (less dumping) which will also affect it.
Anyway it does address the issue although being sufficient is another matter. Only CCP will know that. Minerals will crash anyway, any fix to Insurance would cause that. Only CCP know if the reduced flow of minerals into EVE as a result of the drone and drop changes will eventually increase prices to a level which correctly relates to activity (at the moment it does not which is a major issue of course) Once this activity is correctly established further adjustments can be made or, if they have done it right, prices will be at an acceptable level. The intent is to stop Insurance affecting prices so much the market becomes a joke and efficiently a highly subsidised economy.
I would much prefer they had introduced a new mineral sink or ISK tap though. As it stands now Mission runners have got a massive buff as deflation will occur. I think a lot of the problems is the lack of diversity in EVE.
|
ISellThingz
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 10:26:00 -
[234]
Edited by: ISellThingz on 31/03/2010 10:35:40
Originally by: Zartrader
Have you read the blog? It all depends on how much excess minerals there is now and the actual changes they do but if they have their numbers right miners may well get a boost. The fear was they would simply nerf insurance and that's that. But thankfully they went a lot further and addressed several areas at once.
If you think miners got shafted please state why. The current false price was never acceptable in a game where players should set the price. Protectionism is for politicians not games.
You seem to be blind to the amount of insurance fraud that is happening, which was consuming a hell of a lot minerals. I have no data as to how big of a % of the minerals was actually used just for that but I'm pretty sure it was a nice cut.
Now that insurance will no longer convert minerals into ISK there's nothing to do with those minerals which would otherwise be stockpiling on the market, so now they will be stockpiling on the market.
So the mineral prices go down (the changes have no effect on the amount of minerals that we have acquired so far, which I'm sure would sustain the EVE economy for months to come if everyone stopped mining) and the manufacturers produce less as the demand on ships is nowhere near what was being simply blown up for insurance, or they don't produce less, and learn the hard way as ship prices go down.
|
Zartrader
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 12:03:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Zartrader on 31/03/2010 12:05:55
Originally by: ISellThingz
Edited by: ISellThingz on 31/03/2010 10:35:40
Originally by: Zartrader
Have you read the blog? It all depends on how much excess minerals there is now and the actual changes they do but if they have their numbers right miners may well get a boost. The fear was they would simply nerf insurance and that's that. But thankfully they went a lot further and addressed several areas at once.
If you think miners got shafted please state why. The current false price was never acceptable in a game where players should set the price. Protectionism is for politicians not games.
You seem to be blind to the amount of insurance fraud that is happening, which was consuming a hell of a lot minerals. I have no data as to how big of a % of the minerals was actually used just for that but I'm pretty sure it was a nice cut.
Now that insurance will no longer convert minerals into ISK there's nothing to do with those minerals which would otherwise be stockpiling on the market, so now they will be stockpiling on the market.
So the mineral prices go down (the changes have no effect on the amount of minerals that we have acquired so far, which I'm sure would sustain the EVE economy for months to come if everyone stopped mining) and the manufacturers produce less as the demand on ships is nowhere near what was being simply blown up for insurance, or they don't produce less, and learn the hard way as ship prices go down.
I know all that, it's been known for weeks and I've been posting about it for just as long. Many of us have (in general too, not just here) But we do not know the figures and CCP should. CCP originality had Insurance only going down=massive deflation, miners screwed. Now they have made further adjustments which changes the picture entirely. Deflation will still occur but if CCP have done it right the ore price will start to rise after the initial crash. Until we know the effects, and we can only guess now, what CCP have done can work. Whether it works to the extent required is another matter. This depends on current stock levels and macro miners increasing. CCP have this information so for now I have to assume they have worked to them. If not then they will have to do more.
Miners were concerned CCP would simply reduce Insurance. Thankfully they have gone a lot further than that. Far enough that no accurate assumptions can be made without further data, which we do not have.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |