Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 21:12:00 -
[91] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:tiericide with weapons would be interesting....
and being the dev responsible for them is not a job I would even wish upon my mother-in-law.
would be interesting so meta 4 guns get close to damage and fitting requirements of the t2 part were as meta 1 get the lowest fitting req and lowest damage :P |
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
7
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 21:32:00 -
[92] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:tiericide with weapons would be interesting....
and being the dev responsible for them is not a job I would even wish upon my mother-in-law. would be interesting so meta 4 guns get close to damage and fitting requirements of the t2 part were as meta 1 get the lowest fitting req and lowest damage :P
Just to push this further and because the majority of meta modules exist solely for their min content, would there be too much harm in giving all meta 0 current stats of their highest T1 meta level, compensating players in some way, then removing most / all t1 meta?
I would imagine other things would need to be adjusted to compensate, such as the amount of mission drops to make up for the extra mins from reprocessing and what have you. But the way I see it: * T1 load costs go down for their level of effectiveness, also makes early pvp more accessible * new players dont get confused with items like "Limited Invulnerability Field" being better than standard invulns * Manufacturing of T1 modules become profitable * Mission runners and ratters would only need to take a very mild nerf, if any * Loadouts that require meta 4 items to fit properly would still be possible. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
141
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:23:00 -
[93] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:Just to push this further and because the majority of meta modules exist solely for their min content, would there be too much harm in giving all meta 0 current stats of their highest T1 meta level, compensating players in some way, then removing most / all t1 meta?
I would imagine other things would need to be adjusted to compensate, such as the amount of mission drops to make up for the extra mins from reprocessing and what have you. But the way I see it: * T1 load costs go down for their level of effectiveness, also makes early pvp more accessible * new players dont get confused with items like "Limited Invulnerability Field" being better than standard invulns * Manufacturing of T1 modules become profitable * Mission runners and ratters would only need to take a very mild nerf, if any * Loadouts that require meta 4 items to fit properly would still be possible.
Another option would be to bump down meta 1 and 2 items to meta 0 and 1 and make T1 items meta 2. That would put them squarely in the middle of the meta pack with a named->named->T1->named->named->T2 progression for some (weapons) module types. This would help promote the usage of T1 modules over some named modules while still preserving the superiority of others over their T1 counterparts. |
Zircon Dasher
281
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:37:00 -
[94] - Quote
Discussing weapon tiericide is probably a bit premature atm. Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Sigras
Conglomo
430
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 23:54:00 -
[95] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Now you're talking about "other professions" that are "suppressed" because of "rats dropping too many things". What other professions are suppressed, then? I'm interested to hear the list of professions that would suddenly be free to grow if rats dropped nothing but ISK and these weird "upgrade pieces" that a lot of players would be too lazy to bother with. saying that nobody would bother with them is probably the most moronic thing ive heard today. Mission runners already loot every wreck for every piece of equipment they can get, and in fact most of them come back and salvage the missions too spending additional effort to get things out of the wrecks . . . now i wonder . . . why do they do this?
Im just under the assumption that they are selling those items to other players who manufacture them into things, or if they want to be vertically integrated, the manufacture the items themselves. So what you're saying is that mission runners would stop collecting items from wrecks to sell? especially if these items had other uses beyond just repairing.
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Mining: I think the big thing suppressing mining is the fact that it is soul-crushingly boring and really only suitable for people who are AFK, alt-tabbed, trying to manage 10 accounts at once or not actually human - that is to say, a bot. If mining were.. you know.. interesting, then I'm almost completely certain that many more people would do it. There'd be people and more competition and it would look like an actual community. well you think wrong . . . I know several people who mine because they like it; they think it's fun. I dont really understand them because to me that isnt fun, but he actually made a game out of how many asteroid belts he could clean out in a play session. The problem was, they cant ever make enough isk to keep their accounts plexed because mining's isk/hour is terrible.
im not saying this idea is perfect, or even very good, but it definitely deserves some consideration more than *WAH WAH WAH DONT NERF MY MISSIONS!!!!111oneoneone*
in fact this could even be a bonus to mission runners and PvPers, these items could be smaller than the modules they represent because they cant be used for mineral compression. This could actually be a mission running buff. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1411
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 02:00:00 -
[96] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Now you're talking about "other professions" that are "suppressed" because of "rats dropping too many things". What other professions are suppressed, then? I'm interested to hear the list of professions that would suddenly be free to grow if rats dropped nothing but ISK and these weird "upgrade pieces" that a lot of players would be too lazy to bother with. saying that nobody would bother with them is probably the most moronic thing ive heard today. Mission runners already loot every wreck for every piece of equipment they can get, and in fact most of them come back and salvage the missions too spending additional effort to get things out of the wrecks . . . now i wonder . . . why do they do this? Im just under the assumption that they are selling those items to other players who manufacture them into things, or if they want to be vertically integrated, the manufacture the items themselves. So what you're saying is that mission runners would stop collecting items from wrecks to sell? especially if these items had other uses beyond just repairing. Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Mining: I think the big thing suppressing mining is the fact that it is soul-crushingly boring and really only suitable for people who are AFK, alt-tabbed, trying to manage 10 accounts at once or not actually human - that is to say, a bot. If mining were.. you know.. interesting, then I'm almost completely certain that many more people would do it. There'd be people and more competition and it would look like an actual community. well you think wrong . . . I know several people who mine because they like it; they think it's fun. I dont really understand them because to me that isnt fun, but he actually made a game out of how many asteroid belts he could clean out in a play session. The problem was, they cant ever make enough isk to keep their accounts plexed because mining's isk/hour is terrible. im not saying this idea is perfect, or even very good, but it definitely deserves some consideration more than *WAH WAH WAH DONT NERF MY MISSIONS!!!!111oneoneone* in fact this could even be a bonus to mission runners and PvPers, these items could be smaller than the modules they represent because they cant be used for mineral compression. This could actually be a mission running buff.
Psst. Tier 1-3 items are mostly useless, and sold to people for pennies to be melted down. If they're replaced with upgrade parts, no-one will buy them outside of a handful of niche situations. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 03:18:00 -
[97] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:I would be happy for rats to drop BPCs for the meta 1-4 items instead of the items themselves, with those BPCs being bonused for Invention, with each meta level giving a small increase in success chance or ME quality.
That would turn rat loot into a mineral sink rather than a fountain, and would allow the less desirable & low-meta loot to have some economic value. It would also be a nice little invention buff. It's nice to have a bit of CSM support. The examples i gave in my original post were just quick examples. I don't really care how it happens, i just care about it being fixed.
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote: If i remember my mining/indu alt correctly refining and refinery effeciency is also needed to turn loot into minerals so that it is profitable or atleast break even. Industry is a skill which is rly useful for production and that only deals with mining indirectly afterall u could buy your mins. Specific Refining skills need a bit of time but i think u need them only at 1 or 2 (have to check long time since i trained my miner). Leadership skills for the orca are basic pvp skills if u field the ogb so stop crying. Rorqual i never tried.
The skills i mentioned were very specific to mining. You need all of the refining skills to use mining crystals. For tech I you need level 3 specific ore refine, for tech II you need level 4. You need the industry skill at level 5 as a prerequisite skill for many of the mining skills. The Leader ship skills to use the mining boost are Leadership V, Mining Foreman V, and Mining Director I to use the tech 1 module. For the Tech II you need Mining Director V which is a 5x skill, you also need this and Cybernetics at level 5 to use the Mining Foreman Mindlink. These Leadership skills are not basic pvp skills. Please don't post your guesses as a counter point. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Danika Princip wrote:You know, a good chunk of the materials I use for production actually come from reprocessed rat crap, since I just cannot be bothered to mine most of the time. Why do you want me to be unable to generate my own materials less efficiently than I could if I mined? If you cannot be bothered to mine then you should not just be given free minerals. If you want minerals you should have to use the primary income gained from your profession as a bartering tool. In this case it would be actual currency gained instantly without having to refine or sell anything first.
Zircon Dasher wrote:I did not forget about the skills you list (and tank+drones would not count under your rubric) with the exception of the mining specific leaderships. I also forgot mining drones. I am sure those will compensate for the multiple rank 5,8 and 14 skills that other professions need. If tank and drones are skills needed for mining, then miners do not need to "switch" to combat -- or combat ships-- in order to do mining missions. Ah, so you are crusading against high volume. I am sure that you can provide up to date and accurate data to show that such a high volume exists? Meaning you have up to date CCP data which shows the amount of minerals that come from rats? Troll on playa'..... it keeps this thread amusing since it is otherwise devoid of empirical content. If by these other "professions" you my piloting a titan, then yeah, you have mining beat. Good job pointing out that flying caps are the SP peak that keeps on going.
Tank and combat drone skills are not needed for mining. They are needed for combat. And because there's going to be at least a slight amount of combat mining anything then you're going to be forced to train up a certain amount of those skills.
Based on the markets for the Named modules and the faction/deadspace/officer modules it is overwhelmingly clear that the volume of named modules dropped is much much much higher. If you don't understand this concept then i don't know if you have the cognitive powers to understand very much at all. I guess that's why you can't find "empirical content" in this thread. |
supernova ranger
EVE University Ivy League
29
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 03:37:00 -
[98] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:supernova ranger wrote:How do you propose to get the meta lvl items then? grab them from sites that drop blueprint copies of them?
Not many options for reinserting them into the game if they are taken from their major farming area, mission rats...
Easy enough fix on the isk side though... add 50k bounty per ship? covers the cost and more of most modules that are dropped When a rat drops something it drops a "broken" item. To fix the broken item, you have in your hangar, the broken item and a meta 0 item of the same type. Right click the broken one and pick "fix", and poof. For instance, instead of a rat dropping "Limited Energized EM Membrane 1" it drops a "Broken Limited Energized EM Membrane 1" Now to fix it, or 'upgrade' used by the OP, you place a meta 0 "Energized EM Membrande 1" in your hangar, right click the "broken" item and pick fix. It consumes both the broken item and the meta 0 item and results in a functional "Limited Energized EM Membrane 1"
I see and "I see now said the blind man to the deaf woman" is what I'd like to say but I actually do understand :O
Makes sense lore wise as well and doesn't cut into a missioners isk making much... Just need to compensate for the 20k isk you spend and maybe an extra, I'm guessing, 5 to 10 seconds of isk/hour for acquisition and assembly of meta 0 modules to meta w/e for each you would find. Unless there was a market for them that you could just immediately sell them on... you would have to right click and assemble each one and the time doing that would add up and that would eat into your mission running time.
Lore wise you wouldn't expect to find a module in pristine working condition and better then what you could make after the ship it was in just vaporized leaving, visually at least, a twisted hunk of metal wreck. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 03:57:00 -
[99] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote: Ok, so have rats drop everything, then everyone can suffer.
If player ships don't drop "everything" why should NPC ships do so? That's about as silly an idea as making mission whores suffer for the sake of industrialists. This is called sarcasm. Allegedly it exists in all languages.
Psychoactive Stimulant wrote:LOL, so stop mining and grow balls....... Troll or not, this is the point of this thread. Everything is less rewarding than combat. Combat is supposed to be the resource sink, not the source!!!
Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Incidentally, I know what "opportunity cost" is. Do you?
In case you havent figured it out yet opportunity cost is basically what you miss out on by making a choice. ie: You have enough money to buy a Bicycle or a Snowboard. If you buy the bike your opportunity cost is winter activities. If you buy the snowboard your opportunity cost is summer activities. In the example given earlier he was saying that by not making the change you're costing the jobs people would have by being able to make the items instead of them just falling out of the sky. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 03:59:00 -
[100] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:tiericide with weapons would be interesting....
and being the dev responsible for them is not a job I would even wish upon my mother-in-law. would be interesting so meta 4 guns get close to damage and fitting requirements of the t2 part were as meta 1 get the lowest fitting req and lowest damage :P Tiericide would mean that all the weapons were the same but would have a different "role". One would have the best tracking, one the best damage, one the best range, one the most balance. All of them would have the same fitting. We don't know where T2 fits in to tiericide just yet. Though we do understand the concept.
Zircon Dasher wrote:Discussing weapon tiericide is probably a bit premature atm. Tiericided ships without tiercided modules? Modules are an intricate part of our ships, without them we'd all just be playing a flight simulator.... in space. (not to be confused with a space-flight simulator)
Danika Princip wrote: Psst. Tier 1-3 items are mostly useless, and sold to people for pennies to be melted down. If they're replaced with upgrade parts, no-one will buy them outside of a handful of niche situations.
This is true, i agree with you. However there are plenty of things in eve that are unused even though they exist. I don't agree with this being enough reason to stifle a revamp. |
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
513
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 04:02:00 -
[101] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Okay, after reading this post I have come to the conclusion that you've got to be trolling and we're all just misguidedly continuing to feed you. The only other alternative is that you've been bumped and conned by the New Order one too many times and have finally lost your marbles. Nevertheless, I'll take your bait - as bad an idea as it may be.
I don't mine much, try again. Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Research: ...I actually laughed out loud on this one. If rats didn't drop modules, research would improve? More T1 BPOs would be researched? Do you even know the first thing about research and invention?
Who's going to build the meta 0s needed to 'fix' the broken modules/upgrade what ever it is called, gnomes fairy land? Think all those people are not going to want to research their BPOs? Your ignorance is staggering. Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Incidentally, I know what "opportunity cost" is. Do you?
More than you do apparently.
Right, then. So judging by your replies to my post, the problem actually seems to be that you aren't very good at reading. Understood. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 04:06:00 -
[102] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Right, then. So judging by your replies to my post, the problem actually seems to be that you aren't very good at reading. Understood.
Please refer to post #99 before you continue your replies about this concept. |
Adunh Slavy
1047
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 04:09:00 -
[103] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Right, then. So judging by your replies to my post, the problem actually seems to be that you aren't very good at reading. Understood.
Pretty full of your self if you think I am going to waste my time with your red herrings. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
513
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 04:38:00 -
[104] - Quote
Opportunity cost is defined as: "The loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen".
This means that when I have a rat module, I have choices. I can sell it, use it or melt it into minerals. If I melt it, that costs me the ISK I could have gained by selling it as well as the ability to use it. If I sell it, that means I no longer have the opportunity to use it or convert it into minerals. If I decide to put that module onto a ship and use it, then that costs me the gains from melting it down or selling it - although in the case of "use it", I can decide to use it for a while and then melt or sell it later so the opportunity cost of using a dropped module is very low and qualifies more as "opportunity deferment".
So again, I understand very well what "opportunity cost" is. It's a concept I work with every day. Kindly stop insisting that I don't understand it simply because you have a desire to validate your position by attempting to belittle my intelligence.
With regards to Malcanis' notion of rats no longer dropping meta modules but instead dropping meta BPCs that could be used for invention: Is that in addition to or in place of standard null-meta BPCs? With BPCs dropping, no additional cost is incurred to the inventor (his costs may actually decrease) and it actually becomes feasible to store a large stack of these BPCs in a small container.
If the BPCs take the place of a null-meta BPC in invention then I would have to propose that the % bonus on a meta BPC not be as good as the bonus to research with a null-meta BPC and an actual meta item in order to prevent the null-meta BPCs from becoming less valuable and harming a market that already exists. |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
63
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 05:28:00 -
[105] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:mynnna wrote:OP is a bit hyperbolic and/or hysterical.
But it's an interesting notion. I am an industrialist. And the recent ore redistribution in null sec seems to have had no impact on mineral market trends. Though it may just be delayed market reaction(quite delayed) it would seem as though high end minerals are actually taking a dive. The most likely reason i can think of is because of high sec generated supply of high end minerals. It's only been a few weeks since the expansion launched and furthermore, most of nullsec is currently at war. And on top of THAT, highsec mining is still the vast majority of mining by volume in the game... I'd have to go back and dig through Diagoras' twitter feed to find the relevant tweets, but its not like low end supply was suddenly increased by 50% or something.
Nerfing module drops would make hs mining more profitable, trit, pye and other low to mid ends are the bottle necks to production, not high ends like megacyte.
Of which high ends make up very little content min wise of a reprocessed item. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1977
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 06:37:00 -
[106] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:With regards to Malcanis' notion of rats no longer dropping meta modules but instead dropping meta BPCs that could be used for invention: Is that in addition to or in place of standard null-meta BPCs? With BPCs dropping, no additional cost is incurred to the inventor (his costs may actually decrease) and it actually becomes feasible to store a large stack of these BPCs in a small container. It doesn't have to literally be a BPC, but for manufacturing purposes it would serve much the same role. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Sigras
Conglomo
434
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 06:40:00 -
[107] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Sigras wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Now you're talking about "other professions" that are "suppressed" because of "rats dropping too many things". What other professions are suppressed, then? I'm interested to hear the list of professions that would suddenly be free to grow if rats dropped nothing but ISK and these weird "upgrade pieces" that a lot of players would be too lazy to bother with. saying that nobody would bother with them is probably the most moronic thing ive heard today. Mission runners already loot every wreck for every piece of equipment they can get, and in fact most of them come back and salvage the missions too spending additional effort to get things out of the wrecks . . . now i wonder . . . why do they do this? Im just under the assumption that they are selling those items to other players who manufacture them into things, or if they want to be vertically integrated, the manufacture the items themselves. So what you're saying is that mission runners would stop collecting items from wrecks to sell? especially if these items had other uses beyond just repairing. Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Mining: I think the big thing suppressing mining is the fact that it is soul-crushingly boring and really only suitable for people who are AFK, alt-tabbed, trying to manage 10 accounts at once or not actually human - that is to say, a bot. If mining were.. you know.. interesting, then I'm almost completely certain that many more people would do it. There'd be people and more competition and it would look like an actual community. well you think wrong . . . I know several people who mine because they like it; they think it's fun. I dont really understand them because to me that isnt fun, but he actually made a game out of how many asteroid belts he could clean out in a play session. The problem was, they cant ever make enough isk to keep their accounts plexed because mining's isk/hour is terrible. im not saying this idea is perfect, or even very good, but it definitely deserves some consideration more than *WAH WAH WAH DONT NERF MY MISSIONS!!!!111oneoneone* in fact this could even be a bonus to mission runners and PvPers, these items could be smaller than the modules they represent because they cant be used for mineral compression. This could actually be a mission running buff. Psst. Tier 1-3 items are mostly useless, and sold to people for pennies to be melted down. If they're replaced with upgrade parts, no-one will buy them outside of a handful of niche situations. unless someone were to add some additional value to them . . . say allowing them to be used instead of working modules in invention . . . or maybe . . . if a module rebalance were done . . . oh wait . . . |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
63
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 07:01:00 -
[108] - Quote
what the game really needs right now is to create millions of non stack able bpc's that cant be sold on market. and only one at a time by contract |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 07:08:00 -
[109] - Quote
GizzyBoy wrote:mynnna wrote:Erutpar Ambient wrote:mynnna wrote:OP is a bit hyperbolic and/or hysterical.
But it's an interesting notion. I am an industrialist. And the recent ore redistribution in null sec seems to have had no impact on mineral market trends. Though it may just be delayed market reaction(quite delayed) it would seem as though high end minerals are actually taking a dive. The most likely reason i can think of is because of high sec generated supply of high end minerals. It's only been a few weeks since the expansion launched and furthermore, most of nullsec is currently at war. And on top of THAT, highsec mining is still the vast majority of mining by volume in the game... I'd have to go back and dig through Diagoras' twitter feed to find the relevant tweets, but its not like low end supply was suddenly increased by 50% or something. Nerfing module drops would make hs mining more profitable, trit, pye and other low to mid ends are the bottle necks to production, not high ends like megacyte. Of which high ends make up very little content min wise of a reprocessed item.
I have no objection to this at all. Mining should be as profitable as the minerals are to mine and should not be subsidized by the activity that is supposed to be the target consumer of those minerals. But yeah, to be honest, it feels like the only bottleneck mineral now is Mexallon. It's the only thing that feels lacking in supply when i'm mining. |
Arya Regnar
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 07:18:00 -
[110] - Quote
NPC loot underminds the mining and production professions!!
Just a late reminder about a typo in the title.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 07:37:00 -
[111] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:NPC loot underminds the mining and production professions!!
Just a late reminder about a typo in the title.
Not sure what the typo is, but you will get to continue to look at it, and cringe!!!
bwah hahahaha |
Verity Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
476
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 09:42:00 -
[112] - Quote
They've already nerfed the NPC loot while buffing the mining profession... and here you are shortly after, whining for more.
What I'd like to see, is meta0 loot return, and the meta 1-4 loot dramatically scaled back - then add meta 1-4 BPCs as posible invention outcomes (the chance to make T2 would stay the same, but instead of T2 bpc or fail, you have some intermediate outcomes where you invent a meta BPC instead of failing completely) |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1412
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 12:40:00 -
[113] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Sigras wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Now you're talking about "other professions" that are "suppressed" because of "rats dropping too many things". What other professions are suppressed, then? I'm interested to hear the list of professions that would suddenly be free to grow if rats dropped nothing but ISK and these weird "upgrade pieces" that a lot of players would be too lazy to bother with. saying that nobody would bother with them is probably the most moronic thing ive heard today. Mission runners already loot every wreck for every piece of equipment they can get, and in fact most of them come back and salvage the missions too spending additional effort to get things out of the wrecks . . . now i wonder . . . why do they do this? Im just under the assumption that they are selling those items to other players who manufacture them into things, or if they want to be vertically integrated, the manufacture the items themselves. So what you're saying is that mission runners would stop collecting items from wrecks to sell? especially if these items had other uses beyond just repairing. Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Mining: I think the big thing suppressing mining is the fact that it is soul-crushingly boring and really only suitable for people who are AFK, alt-tabbed, trying to manage 10 accounts at once or not actually human - that is to say, a bot. If mining were.. you know.. interesting, then I'm almost completely certain that many more people would do it. There'd be people and more competition and it would look like an actual community. well you think wrong . . . I know several people who mine because they like it; they think it's fun. I dont really understand them because to me that isnt fun, but he actually made a game out of how many asteroid belts he could clean out in a play session. The problem was, they cant ever make enough isk to keep their accounts plexed because mining's isk/hour is terrible. im not saying this idea is perfect, or even very good, but it definitely deserves some consideration more than *WAH WAH WAH DONT NERF MY MISSIONS!!!!111oneoneone* in fact this could even be a bonus to mission runners and PvPers, these items could be smaller than the modules they represent because they cant be used for mineral compression. This could actually be a mission running buff. Psst. Tier 1-3 items are mostly useless, and sold to people for pennies to be melted down. If they're replaced with upgrade parts, no-one will buy them outside of a handful of niche situations. unless someone were to add some additional value to them . . . say allowing them to be used instead of working modules in invention . . . or maybe . . . if a module rebalance were done . . . oh wait . . .
So...one of those proposals where sweeping game changes are piled on top of sweeping game changes until the original point is buried so deeply under the other massive changes it would require that everyone forgets all about it then? |
Johan Toralen
IIIJIIIITIIII
134
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 12:59:00 -
[114] - Quote
I'm still trying to figure out what the issue is. Npc loot drops out of thin air. Asteroids for mining drop out of thin air. Both are equally means to purchase minerals. Mining doesn't stop you from purchasing mission loot and vice versa. To the contray miners have more time then most players to adjust orders as a side profession.
Mission loot is better then the t1 equivalent? Then purchase and trade said mission loot instead of producing the t1 item. Minerals on the market are too expensive to produce certain items with a profit margin? Then find bargains in the mission loot market and produce from them. etc. etc. Just have to think a little out of the box and see the opportunity instead of the threat in everything. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
141
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 14:04:00 -
[115] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Just have to think a little out of the box and see the opportunity instead of the threat in everything.
Heresy! You aren't supposed to think outside of the box in a sandbox game! |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
196
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 14:28:00 -
[116] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:NPC loot underminds the mining and production professions!!
Just a late reminder about a typo in the title.
I'm not sure what is worse:
That I didn't see that typo and begin twitching immediately,
or that I now can't stop looking at it and have begun to twitch uncontrollably.
Bonus points on the typo occurring in a sentence about mining, and still getting Undermine wrong. |
Adunh Slavy
1049
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 15:15:00 -
[117] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:[ So again, I understand very well what "opportunity cost" is. It's a concept I work with every day. Kindly stop insisting that I don't understand it simply because you have a desire to validate your position by attempting to belittle my intelligence.[/i]
It is no surprise that the opportunity cost you cite is all about you, which is what your objections are really about, *your* mission rewards. But of course you don't care about someone else's rewards or care about the health of the game as a whole, and that is the cost you want to ignore.
The opportunity costs, as stated before, are, less people in the belts, less people manufacturing, less people doing research. Instead we have more people shooting rats, creating ISK, salvage, modules and minerals, all the while tucked safely away in their dead space pockets.
Cry and whine all you want, it can not change the fact that all of that extra stuff, dropped by rats, has a negative impact on other professions in Eve. Opportunity cost can be viewed from more than one perspective, not just yours. |
Darth Kilth
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
124
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 15:49:00 -
[118] - Quote
This topic has some great ideas, not from the OP mind you, but ideas by Malcanis and others are pretty decent.
The OPs main problem seems to be that he believes forcing people to mine and produce more is actually going to make it happen and more people will while in reality people will either quit the game, keep doing it despite nerfs or find something else thats more interesting. Or maybe that's what the OP hopes as it would increase his profits.
Eitherway, Meta modules are not the source of most of the resources, dozens of bot operations are the problem, and just making mining more profitable is only going to get more botters into the game anyway. IMHO they should remove the Meta 1 and 2 tough, nobody ever uses them. |
Nick Bete
The Scope Gallente Federation
224
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:11:00 -
[119] - Quote
Posting in yet another nerf missions thread...
"Gun mining" in missions has already been addressed. You have no hard data to back up your simple assumptions. CCP does have that data and has not deemed it necessary to make further changes. |
Sigras
Conglomo
437
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 22:41:00 -
[120] - Quote
Nick Bete wrote:Posting in yet another nerf missions thread... "Gun mining" in missions has already been addressed. You have no hard data to back up your simple assumptions. CCP does have that data and has not deemed it necessary to make further changes. how would this in any way be a nerf to missions? if the drops were changed to upgrade modules and were allowed to be used in invention like the normal meta items are now there would be very little change at all.
And these modules could even be smaller because they couldnt be reprocessed into minerals so you dont have to worry about mineral compression. this could actually be a buff to missions . . . . |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |