EVE Search - How bad would this screw up the market?

All Channels

Market Discussions

How bad would this screw up the market?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Last Wolf Rage For Order	Posted - 2010.03.15 04:10:00 - [1] So I have an Idea, but since I don't have EVE-O Economics trained (or even the perquisites) I thought I'd ask what you guys think. Remove Tech 1 drops from rats. Reprocessing META Modules = Rig parts instead of minerals Tech 1 and tech II mods would still be the same as now. This does a few things: Makes rigs cheap like they are supposed to be. Increases tech 1 ship prices (lets face it they are too cheap when you actually make a profit by insuring it and then blow it up) In-directly boosts low sec and null sec mining by removing the only way to get high-ends from high-sec. anti-flame suit on Oh no you don't! Incoming witty reply, ETA: 300 seconds!
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.03.15 04:32:00 - [2] Well, for starters, it's obvious the salvage market will crash hard, so rigs will end up much cheaper, so the incentives to PvP in larger/better fit ships will increase, so the mineral demand will increase, while the mineral supply will decrease, so ship prices _might_ just naturally stabilize above insurance breakeven level (not completely sure, but still noticeably better than what we have now). Mission-runners will not really care all that much anyway about the salvage drops being less valuable, since they compensate income-wise via the looting. However, poor ninja salvagers will have to start to risk more in order to get any decent revenue, but that's ok with most people. So... it's actually not a bad idea at all. Too bad that CCP will never go for it. Why ? Because it might actually work, and they don't do things that make sense when the economy is concerned. _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Jish Ness	Posted - 2010.03.15 06:05:00 - [3] Why the hell not. Bumping to get your post more attention. :)
Umega	Posted - 2010.03.15 06:25:00 - [4] Remove T1 mods from rats huh.. that is like forced economic engineering in a bad way. Besides raising the costs of T1 basic mods, that would also increase the costs to the consumers of the T2 products. Industry would be able to dictate the price and monopolize the market on T1/T2 mods.. cutting out the middle man of the everyday player that rats/explores/mission etc. Why.. Cause you need the basic T1 mod to produce the T2 varient unless the 'recipe' is changed. Not only can it create monopolization in the hands of smart indies.. it cuts down on suicide ganking, and the lose of mods and materials as a whole across every single level. And that flat out effects every single player rather they realize it or not. I'll adapt to whatever changes CCP implements and milk'em jus' fine. I don't mind the meta mods to rig parts notion.. but I have to say, I don't like removing T1 drops from rats. It really takes away from some of the sandbox aspect of the game and creates a more 'forced' atmosphere imo. Forced applications = every other MMO other there.. and thats why I play EVE and not something else.
destinationunreachable Hello Kitty Fanclub	Posted - 2010.03.15 06:55:00 - [5] removing the T1 drop is definitely the way to go to reduce the mineral supply on the market. reprocessing meta modules into salvage sounds interesting, it would obiously make "real" salvaging worthless and crash the salvage market real hard, except the demand is raised as well via another usage of salvage (meta BPCs or such). Which doesn't sound like a good idea: Raising one market by crashing another one, hmmm... The T2 market is very little affected as the T1 usage for T2 production is a small amount of the actual price (for ships it can be as little as 5%). But either way, especially due to the new insurance system, the mineral market needs some support. More demand and/or less supply.
Cyaxares II	Posted - 2010.03.15 06:59:00 - [6] Originally by: Umega Remove T1 mods from rats huh.. that is like forced economic engineering in a bad way. ahem... rats dropping modules is forced economic engineering - letting the market do its natural work is imho not. And why your fear of monopolies emerging? have you actually looked at the price for t1 module blueprints? they are dirt cheap and the barrier for entry to T1 production is extremely low (like < 1 week of skill training and no significant startup capital required). Rats dropping T1 mods is like every other MMO out there, player-driven industry & market add much to the sandbox feeling of EVE.
Umega	Posted - 2010.03.15 07:16:00 - [7] Originally by: Cyaxares II Originally by: Umega Remove T1 mods from rats huh.. that is like forced economic engineering in a bad way. ahem... rats dropping modules is forced economic engineering - letting the market do its natural work is imho not. And why your fear of monopolies emerging? have you actually looked at the price for t1 module blueprints? they are dirt cheap and the barrier for entry to T1 production is extremely low (like < 1 week of skill training and no significant startup capital required). Rats dropping T1 mods is like every other MMO out there, player-driven industry & market add much to the sandbox feeling of EVE. Right.. changing the rat drops from T1 mostly to more meta based isn't going to force the market to behave a certain way? If you want to think so, go for it. You don't understand how much of an impact an additional item on Industry is going to play out. When slots to produce already filled up to capacity 23/7.. where is the space going to come for the addition of needing to produce mass T1 mods to fill the needs for the T2 market? But yeah.. lets ignore that aspect and toss it up to a mute point.. besides the fact it would create less supply across the board besides those that have powers to mass produces via their own devices. And yes.. more power to them I suppose, if you're one of them. Everyone else takes it in the ass and thus the cries for a change begin once again. Thats the problem with a 'monopoly'. Whether it is market, ship, race, whatever that has its foot to throat of everyone else.. the people stand up and cry nerf or buff me or bottomline.. change. Change to promote change.. yeah, brilliant.
Cyaxares II	Posted - 2010.03.15 07:31:00 - [8] Originally by: Umega Right.. changing the rat drops from T1 mostly to more meta based isn't going to force the market to behave a certain way? If you want to think so, go for it. (a) this thread is about changing from T1 to salvage (b) I have yet to meet anyone who would argue for more meta items, just remove T1 drops and leave meta drops as is - so if at all we're talking about a relative increase in supply of meta items Originally by: Umega When slots to produce already filled up to capacity 23/7.. wrong assumption - there are plenty of free production slots in empire as the moment (hint just move 2+ jumps away from the local hub) Originally by: Umega where is the space going to come for the addition of needing to produce mass T1 mods to fill the needs for the T2 market? A small POS should be less than 250m ISK, add 200m ISK for buying a corp with suitable standings and you are still at less than 500m ISK. the only valid point supporting your argument that comes to mind is "where are the alts doing the production jobs going to come from?", but you don't even try to raise that point. Originally by: Umega besides the fact it would create less supply across the board besides those that have powers to mass produces via their own devices. ah ... yes, that's kind of the point of the proposal. Reduce mineral supply to make mining more worthwhile, reduce supply of T1 modules to make T1 production worthwhile. Originally by: Umega And yes.. more power to them I suppose, if you're one of them. Everyone else takes it in the ass and thus the cries for a change begin once again. I am not, but as stated above the barrier to entry for T1 production is extremely low, so everyone else could easily do it for themselves if they think industrialists are trying to oligopolize the market.
Lecherito	Posted - 2010.03.15 08:33:00 - [9] Originally by: Umega Remove T1 mods from rats huh.. that is like forced economic engineering in a bad way. Besides raising the costs of T1 basic mods, that would also increase the costs to the consumers of the T2 products. Industry would be able to dictate the price and monopolize the market on T1/T2 mods.. cutting out the middle man of the everyday player that rats/explores/mission etc. Why.. Cause you need the basic T1 mod to produce the T2 varient unless the 'recipe' is changed. Not only can it create monopolization in the hands of smart indies.. it cuts down on suicide ganking, and the lose of mods and materials as a whole across every single level. And that flat out effects every single player rather they realize it or not. I'll adapt to whatever changes CCP implements and milk'em jus' fine. I don't mind the meta mods to rig parts notion.. but I have to say, I don't like removing T1 drops from rats. It really takes away from some of the sandbox aspect of the game and creates a more 'forced' atmosphere imo. Forced applications = every other MMO other there.. and thats why I play EVE and not something else. Um, what? -L
Hyveres Caldari	Posted - 2010.03.15 09:46:00 - [10] Well my personal point of view is that basic T1 should be removed from rat loottables. About changing named module to reprocess to salvage.. I'm just not sure but they do have an inferior mineral conversion rate compared to basic T1 modules so it might not be needed. "Subtlety is a thing for philosophy, not combat. If you're going to kill someone, you might as well kill them a whole lot." - Vulcan Raven, The Last Days Of Foxhound
Ran Khanon Amarr Vengeance Innovations	Posted - 2010.03.15 10:14:00 - [11] Interesting. As a mission runner I wouldn't mind a nerf for overall game balance myself. Alternatives: ò Vastly nerfing the mount of minerals gained from reprocessing mission loot. ò Reprocessing being a more time and skill intensive affair: reprocessing as of now is perhaps too convenient. You can do it practically everywhere and with high standings. Why not restrict reprocessing (at least some kind of) items, to posses and/or players having invested considerable time and isk into getting the right skills and equipment? (aka, miners / industrial players). This could make for another profession / business focus facilitated by reprocessing contracts. Support Lana's new bounty system.
Jacob Holland Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries	Posted - 2010.03.15 10:21:00 - [12] Removing T1 loot and replacing it with Meta I think must be done. Not only does it reduce the quantity of minerals entering the market from sources other than pilots in space deliberately producing them (rather than producing them as a sideline to bounties) but it also reduces the volume of a mission's worth of loot (due to the mineral compression changes which significantly boosted the size of large T1 modules). The only exception I would make would be ammunition, but there aren't meta versions with which to replace that so... The idea of making Meta reprocess to Salvage is an interesting one and one of the better ones I've heard. Missions, complexes and 0.0 ratting are already the primary sources of salvage and so if the loot becomes an additional source then it's not competing with an existing market. Ninja salvagers lose out through loss of relative scarcity but the volume they are able to work may well go up... The only concern I might offer is for T2 production. Dependent on the quantities of salvage involved it may make using meta items in invention more costly, which may in turn reduce the supply of T2. On the whole I like the idea. -- Originally by: cordy Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
small chimp	Posted - 2010.03.15 11:28:00 - [13] The consequences would much more unforeseen and complex than your puny and limited viewpoints suggest?
Weaver Goldentongue Minmatar Iron Dragon Industries	Posted - 2010.03.15 12:18:00 - [14] Originally by: Umega Right.. changing the rat drops from T1 mostly to more meta based isn't going to force the market to behave a certain way? If you want to think so, go for it. I believe the original suggestion was to remove the T1 drops, not increase the named items. Of course it will change the market behaviour, no-one said anything to the contrary Originally by: Umega You don't understand how much of an impact an additional item on Industry is going to play out. When slots to produce already filled up to capacity 23/7.. where is the space going to come for the addition of needing to produce mass T1 mods to fill the needs for the T2 market? But yeah.. lets ignore that aspect and toss it up to a mute point.. besides the fact it would create less supply across the board besides those that have powers to mass produces via their own devices. And yes.. more power to them I suppose, if you're one of them. Everyone else takes it in the ass and thus the cries for a change begin once again. Actually it's you that doesn't understand it. If you step outside the regional hubs, there is huge capacity for manufacturing within HiSec systems that just sits idle, day after day. This kind of change would actually encourage more people to populate those more distant systems, which is no bad thing IMO. It might even encourage people to venture more into LoSec to take advantage of the capacity there, which again is no bad thing. So your point is indeed moot (and not mute I hasten to add). You are of course right that there will be a drop in supply, but as already stated, the barriers to entry within the market are minimal, which makes establishing a monopoly virtually impossible. Indies with their own POS can manufacture quicker but not cheaper, and with the additional overheads of the POS to contend with their margins are tighter than the small time manufacturer using public facilities. So far I've seen no downsides to this suggestion and plenty of positives.
Weaver Goldentongue Minmatar Iron Dragon Industries	Posted - 2010.03.15 12:33:00 - [15] Originally by: Jacob Holland The only concern I might offer is for T2 production. Dependent on the quantities of salvage involved it may make using meta items in invention more costly, which may in turn reduce the supply of T2. This is true, although the Meta level 4 items in many cases are already too expensive to use in the Invention process i.e. you'll make more ISK selling the meta 4 item than the value they'll bring to invention. Meta level 1-3 items don't generally increase the invention probabilities very much, so I'm not sure the impact on invention will be that great. Being able to reprocess for salvage may push those prices even higher of course, but that's a different matter.
Maneck StreetPreacher Gallente haudquaquam munificus	Posted - 2010.03.15 12:44:00 - [16] This is actually a great idea. I'm new to Eve. When I started missioning, my jaw dropped. The amount of T1 loot that comes off of rats is ridiculous. There's so much of it, and it's so easily obtained (it's pure gravy on top of mission rewards and bounty and salvage), it made me say "damn, good thing I didn't go the industry route. I couldn't compete with this." And of course, when I investigated what I could do with it, I found out there's so much of it that there's no market. It almost all ends up reprocessed, which damages the already struggling mining market. I don't have much to say about the salvaging metas idea. Probably a good one if combined with some industrial skills requirement.
Ran Khanon Amarr Vengeance Innovations	Posted - 2010.03.15 13:39:00 - [17] Edited by: Ran Khanon on 15/03/2010 13:39:49 Originally by: Maneck StreetPreacher And of course, when I investigated what I could do with it, I found out there's so much of it that there's no market. Don't agree there. It depends whether you want to haul to a trading hub or not. I think I sell 60% of my lvl 4 mission loot directly (of which one third in my mission system, and two thirds at a nearby tradehub), 25% through sell orders and only 15% reprocessing. I've never touched the stack of minerals I've made this way so far. Not sure if what I do is exceptional, but from level 4's there is a lot of loot which you can sell off quickly for a good price in my experience. Support Lana's new bounty system.
SencneS Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks	Posted - 2010.03.15 13:45:00 - [18] Well hello alt of CCP Dev :) If you are planning to drop T1 vanilla from Rat droppings then go for it. In combination of that plus your proposed insurance rate decreases, we'd see a crash in mineral prices while the massive over stocked minerals sit on the market, then a very sharp incline as the amount of minerals being supplied to the market drops significantly. Less people mining, no injections of minerals from mission runners.. However in reality there would be just a sharp incline in price, why? People on this very forum would go spend tens of billions of ISK gobbling up all the currently cheap minerals (All by Pyerite that would crash then very quickly go up). It would then slowly level out as the people with now tens of billions of units of trit leak out at a high price, this would keep the miners mining as now it's considerably more profitable to mine. Salvage, yeah it would drop like a stone, so cheaper rigs, better PVP ships on the field sure.. More expensive Invention, at least for mods, maybe so much more expensive it crashes the Datacore market. Either that or it jacks up the T2 prices, the T2 BPOs become profitable, even then now junky ones (Likely scenario as people are stubborn). Invention becomes from expensive because no matter which way you go it's more expensive, either by not using meta-4 items in invention so now you need to invent more, or use the meta-4 items which are now more expensive because they turn into salvage so people buy them, reprocess and make rigs or sell salvage. While I think removal of Vanilla T1 rat droppings would positively impact the market, making Meta 1-4 items reprocess into salvage would negatively impact T2 market. While T2 BPO holders would consider that a positive change, T2 ships and items are already on a bubble, the more expensive they become the less people use them. We see this right now so making T2 more expensive would be less sales and eventually if Invention becomes too expensive, it would be the T2 BPO holders market again. Amarr for Life
W3370Pi4 Blast Maker Incorporated	Posted - 2010.03.15 15:01:00 - [19] all changes screw up the market anyway on the short time but if its a benefit for the long term why not
Xtreem Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.03.15 15:33:00 - [20] I agree with the op, was thinking the same myself, remove that mineral supply as the lower insurance will further reduce miners, so they need to even it up a bit.
Shivarie	Posted - 2010.03.15 15:52:00 - [21] Originally by: SencneS Well hello alt of CCP Dev :) Salvage, yeah it would drop like a stone, so cheaper rigs, better PVP ships on the field sure.. Invention becomes from expensive because no matter which way you go it's more expensive, either by not using meta-4 items in invention so now you need to invent more, or use the meta-4 items which are now more expensive because they turn into salvage so people buy them, reprocess and make rigs or sell salvage. yes to mineral crash, but it would stabilize after a while and be ok, Why would invention costs go up? because of the t1 module cost rising? or another reason? datacore market crash? from which part of the t1 loot removal or the meta to salvage part? as the salvage market crashes, (from the reprocessed loots to salvage) all the meta 3-4 (which there would be more of? or is this an overall nerf to loot drop?) would be on the market (as they are more valuable as items then as salvage) why would you repo a module when its worth more as mod then as salvage?
SencneS Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks	Posted - 2010.03.15 16:33:00 - [22] Originally by: Shivarie Why would invention costs go up? because of the t1 module cost rising? or another reason? datacore market crash? from which part of the t1 loot removal or the meta to salvage part? as the salvage market crashes, (from the reprocessed loots to salvage) all the meta 3-4 (which there would be more of? or is this an overall nerf to loot drop?) would be on the market (as they are more valuable as items then as salvage) why would you repo a module when its worth more as mod then as salvage? It all depends on how much salvage they got from the reprocess. If they got a lot, the price would naturally go up as people reprocess the mode for salvage. It would actually introduce a floor and a ceiling to the mod. The floor would be how much the mod is worth in salvage which has gone though a reduction in price as all the cheaper Meta4 mods have been reprocessed. The ceiling would be the same ceiling it has now, the point in which inventing with that mod becomes too expensive to turn a profit. The problem is even though rigs would be cheaper they would be high volume item. The mod price was naturally end up about the price of which reprocessing it into salvage is worth. That could be more then the point in which it's profitable to invent with. High volume could mean high price, it all depends on how much salvage they get for the mod. If they get a stack loads of components the salvage is still cheap but the mods is worth so much more because it has oodles of salvage in it. Here is what happens to the invention side. Now that meta4 mods are more expensive to invent with people stop using them. No they are back to plain old 48-50% success rate. As invention now has a lower success rate it naturally becomes more expensive, so the margin between cost and profit of finished goods narrows. Remember Most T2 mods are priced at profit for invention, not profit for BPO. Much to the delight of the BPO holders, invention is actually keeping the market high for them. However, don't mistake the fact that the BPO holder wouldn't sell at 1% below cost even if it was making them a fortune. Why compete for an extra 5% with hundreds when you can make every sale and 1% below invention finished goods cost. Given that it could be 20-25% over BPO Build cost now. Now that invention margins are razor thin, people stop inventing, BPO holders are laughing all the way to the bank making 20-25% with zero competition. Down crash the Datacore market. The significant lack of demand for non-ship related datacores sky drives. However no matter how cheap the Datacores get, it's still only a 50% success rate on something which you're competition builds for 20% less then you. No matter how cheap datacores got it would not boost Invention. The Mod price itself is limited market, I purchase something like 500-600 meta 4 mods a month for the soul reason of invention. If Invention is lost because of razor thin margins, I and anyone else like me wouldn't buy that many mods. So the next price they would be at is their value in salvage. Which like I've said a couple of times now, it all depends on how much salvage the mode produced. Amarr for Life
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.03.15 16:49:00 - [23] Edited by: Ghoest on 15/03/2010 16:49:44 It would just lead to a lot of high sec players quitting. The salvage market is already a pale shadow of what it once was. So anything you move into that market is essentially the same as having it removed from the game. Most of these people babbling on and on in this thread know nothing about the actual salaveg market. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Umega	Posted - 2010.03.15 17:20:00 - [24] Removing T1 from rats isn't a solution. It would become a problem long term I don't think everyone is quite catching. It would be a change to fix one problem that some are up in arms about, but would just create problems all its own I see as being more troublesome. But reguardless, I can personally adjust to such. What I don't really like about it, is it cuts of a piece of the EVE 'web'. You have a player base that helps influence the market and miners.. the ratters, explorers, mission runners, reprossing. Whether it is positive or not, it is still is a variable to the whole 'sandbox' equation. Cutting them out of the loop is a forced applied approach and creates a more limited experince on the influence of professions have on each other. Make it one sided.. miners can manipulate, T1-T2 will be manipulated.. in the end, everyone becoming a consumer to these ends without another variable to influence what/how they do it.. is going to feel like a victim. And the cries will start once again, and a player base that is the largest will be the ones screaming change. Why not just simply change the recipe of T1 like meta. Otherwise, removing T1 from every aspect other than production is going to result in them becoming NPC sold station items when CCP tries to fix what removing them from rats creates. Don't believe me, I don't mind. I just really wanted to voice my opinion on this in hopes anyone important reading it gets the full view of ideas from all spectrums. Something needs to change with reprossessing.. But I don't think it is as simple as 'remove T1 from rats'. It really isn't.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2010.03.15 22:14:00 - [25] Originally by: Cyaxares II [ I am not, but as stated above the barrier to entry for T1 production is extremely low, so everyone else could easily do it for themselves if they think industrialists are trying to oligopolize the market. The barrier for entry to do inefficient T1 production is extremely low. The barrier to do efficient T1 production (PE 5 and a researched BPO) if fairly high, seeing how ME public slots are full for weeks or months even in low sec and NPC 0.0. A high sec POS require standing, a low sec one a fairly strong corporation to defend it, so you are removing from new players the option to be a budding industrialists.
Weaver Goldentongue Minmatar Iron Dragon Industries	Posted - 2010.03.16 07:37:00 - [26] Originally by: SencneS Now that invention margins are razor thin, people stop inventing, BPO holders are laughing all the way to the bank making 20-25% with zero competition. Down crash the Datacore market. The significant lack of demand for non-ship related datacores sky drives. However no matter how cheap the Datacores get, it's still only a 50% success rate on something which you're competition builds for 20% less then you. No matter how cheap datacores got it would not boost Invention. This is only half the story though. Players will still want those T2 modules, particularly as the named items will become even more expensive, and there is no way the BPO holders will be able to supply the markets alone. The demand for T2 items coupled with lack of supply will undoubtedly push prices back up, making invention once again profitable, particularly if there is a drop in datacore prices. Words like "crash" and "sky dive" are misleading too. This rebalancing of T2 prices would be a gradual thing, as people slowly work through their stocks of T2 BPCs. Some people would get out early and wait for the market to stabilise, while others with bigger stocks will continue producing through that period, alongside the BPO holders.
Carniflex StarHunt Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.03.16 12:22:00 - [27] In 0.0 removal of tech 1 loot from rats would have HUGE impact as main source of low ends in 0.0 is refining large T1 guns dropped by rats. Hauler spawns are nice but I would say the amount of minerals they drop is low compared to clearing out few sanctums in organized way. Uber hauler spawns are only in relatively low true sec while Sanctums are everywhere where you drop some isk for upgrades. After the initial shock it would increase low end demand in hi sec and lower availability of factory slots near trade hubs when 0.0 residents would start buying and compressing low ends for transportation into 0.0.
Tehg Rhind	Posted - 2010.03.16 22:24:00 - [28] The biggest problem I see with this is that it would hurt me directly. Jerk. But in all honesty the scrap reproc market is totally broken right now, and does need a fix as it's completely easy mode trading. And with regards to how many minerals are generated by it that is fairly easy to estimate: scrap items are clearly identifiable when daily average is on top of or very close to daily low 99 days out of 100. With these items daily volume and reproc min quant are known. Anyways I honestly would like to see reproc market fixed, as I think it's waaaaayyyyyy too easy to make money in it compared to mining, and it's borderline metagame at this point. That said I don't know if switching everything to salvage is a good fix. Rig prices and the salvage business in general are at good places right now (opinion), and I think there's a place for mineral reproc at some level.
Red Raider Caldari Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's	Posted - 2010.03.16 22:56:00 - [29] I just think the loot tables need to be slimmed down. In some mission every single rat drops loot and in almost every case that is anywhere from 2-6 items. Serious attention needs to be given to reducing the loot drop quantity by reducing the meta 1 stuff the most, meta 2 a little less, etc... Right now it's just insane how much loot I can pull from a mid difficulty lvl 4 and most of that is repro loot so the effects on the economy are simply not good. The last thing I want to see is salvage nerfed worse though. It's already gone down a lot since the rig size change and it has resulted in a lot less salvage ninja's in my experience.
Caldari 5 Amarr The Element Syndicate Hand That Feeds	Posted - 2010.03.16 23:44:00 - [30] I kinda of like your ideas, however I would probably change it this way: Remove Meta 0 drops from all missions except Level 1/Tutorial missions Reconfigure the Reprocessing of Meta 1 to 4 to a combination of Minerals and other items(kinda like the building of Prototype Cloaks, not just minerals) but leave the approx value of the items the same. Meta 0 and 5+ reprocessing left unchanged

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.