| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wuhu
   |
Posted - 2006.01.08 18:00:00 -
[1]
Sorry if this is already addressed; the forums need a search feature.
It seems to me that HAC prices are out of control. I've seen the price of a Cerberus more than double in the past several weeks (from 80 million to 160 million). At the current rate I can easily see these things push 200 million isk. This is great if you manufacture these things (and can find a BPC), but it is killing the market in my opinion and preventing what are otherwise outstanding ships from hitting wider use.
Not to mention insurance. I haven't done the exact math, but I doubt the payouts come anywhere near the cost of the ship.
My understanding is that it has to do with R.A.M no longer being repairable. Could be wrong though, but that's the point of the post. Whatever the reason it seems like CCP needs to do something to help us out here. NOT a nerf, you guys are too nerf happy.
|
Sardau Kar
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 18:08:00 -
[2]
Its time for skill relocation,CCP!!
and fix my account plz
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/flash/supersonik.html |
Hyperion Bloodmoon
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 18:37:00 -
[3]
Anyone care that you're paying that much? Or not as the case may be.
 Originally by: Sardau Kar}and fix my account plz
[/quote
And thanks for piggybacking off the topic.
|
Shadowsword
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 18:51:00 -
[4]
The Cerberus are the new flavor of the month ship. If you want an HAC for 80 millions, go buy an Eagle or a Muninn.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 19:25:00 -
[5]
RAM issues have raised prices.
CCP moving the industry system back from modern JIT to 1890's parallel production has raised prices.
Warning: above post may contain traces of sarcasm.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
High Sierra
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 19:29:00 -
[6]
welcome to the hard world of economics hitting T2 production.
|
ChainyMcSmoke
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 19:40:00 -
[7]
TBH I think hac prices are right where they should be. If you cant afford to loose it dont fly it or buy it. Right now cerberus are the flavor of the week a ship that has only recently lost the knick-name Carebearus. As for next week, who knows.
|
b2nwallace
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 20:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: ChainyMcSmoke
TBH I think hac prices are right where they should be. If you cant afford to loose it dont fly it or buy it. Right now cerberus are the flavor of the week a ship that has only recently lost the knick-name Carebearus. As for next week, who knows.
you sire are by farest the biggest idoit to date you are aware hac construction raised by 5mil they cost about 40mil producers are making a 120mil profit every 10 days they make about 1bil isk in profit so while normies get bankrupted by t2 producers how are thye supposed to afford it
|
LoKesh
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 21:23:00 -
[9]
Not having studied economics extensively, I might be over simplifying -
But supply and demand! If people are willing to pay 120 million, then the price will stay there. The ways to change this are - break the monopolies so competition can happen, or just don't buy a HAC.
|
evilGold
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 21:37:00 -
[10]
TBH I think CCP don't have clue how to fix the severely screwed economics of EvE :)
|
Glarion Garnier
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 21:57:00 -
[11]
Well if you think about it. First thing to lower the Hac prices would be making bpo's for RAM tools. Next step improve POS bussiness a bit once more.
|
Nocturnal Avenger
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: LoKesh
Not having studied economics extensively, I might be over simplifying -
But supply and demand! If people are willing to pay 120 million, then the price will stay there. The ways to change this are - break the monopolies so competition can happen, or just don't buy a HAC.
Right on the money
|
Jenna H4ze
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:06:00 -
[13]
if you had connections it's easy....
|
Algey
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Glarion Garnier
Well if you think about it. First thing to lower the Hac prices would be making bpo's for RAM tools. Next step improve POS bussiness a bit once more.
If the high price was dictated by the cost of the ram then this would be the case. However the ram cost is a tiny fraction of the ship selling price.
People want the ships so buy them as soon as they are produced. As such the price will keep going up until the ships start getting left on the shelves.
When demand exceeds supply you have inflation. When supply exceeds demand you get deflation.
|
Zedivh
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:39:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Zedivh on 08/01/2006 22:39:10
It may be CCP's fault that not enough R.A.M. are being distributed to the playerbase, but so what, that's part of the game. Also, the economics are NOT messed up, they are exactly how a capitalistic economy works. We can't complain about the prices when people are willing to pay 
|
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:44:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Algey
When demand exceeds supply you have inflation. When supply exceeds demand you get deflation.
QFT. And here we have an artificial shortage, which is worse everyday, due to CCP limiting the number of BPOs, and not seeding new ones while the demand has greatly increased with more and more people having the skills to fly HACs. And those new recon ships and T2 BC won't really help reducing demand, as there will still be more new people able to fly HACs than new people able to fly those new ships, hence demand for HACs will keep increasing, with a production which can't increase, and can, under some conditions, decrease (RAM shortage).
People should not throw the stone at producers (except when there is effectively a monopoly, like with cap recharger T2). The thing for HACs is that demand is too high compared to offer, and even if producers decided to sell cheaper, you'd have reseller buying all and reselling at the current prices. Only way to avoid paying such outrageous prices is to enter the waiting lists by the producers (and the cheaper they sell, the longer the waiting lists, with a lot of resellers in the queue too). Producers selling HACs cheaper would not change market price, which is determined by offer vs demand, and the artificial shortage forced upon us by CCP. The shortage is worse every day, whereas, as this technology becomes older each day, they should become more and more available, and prices should decrease...
Fix Stealth Bombers descriptions - AS need 4 bonus + Jag, Vengeance, Hawk as Missile AS? Tux/Hammer/TomB! |
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 22:47:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Zedivh
Edited by: Zedivh on 08/01/2006 22:39:10
It may be CCP's fault that not enough R.A.M. are being distributed to the playerbase, but so what, that's part of the game. Also, the economics are NOT messed up, they are exactly how a capitalistic economy works. We can't complain about the prices when people are willing to pay
Well, except in a complete capitalistic economy, components would be the limiting factor, as as long there's enough components to build more, new producers would spend some time reverse engineering the existing products to make copies of them, and existing producers would increase their production to sell more (cheaper, but making more money in the end). But in EVE, producers can't choose to increase production, 'cause there is an artificial limitations on the number of ships that can be produced each week (limited number of BPOs).
Fix Stealth Bombers descriptions - AS need 4 bonus + Jag, Vengeance, Hawk as Missile AS? Tux/Hammer/TomB! |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:20:00 -
[18]
RAM is not pushing up prices because of cost, it's pushing up prices because its lack of availability is increasing rarity
|
ShadowlordUK
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:35:00 -
[19]
Edited by: ShadowlordUK on 08/01/2006 23:36:21
There is one rather obvious economics solution to this problem...
The current artificially high prices are created by barriers to entry.
Just like in the real world, if there are high barriers to entry into a marketplace it allows existing producers to maintain abnormally high profits.
A real world example would be state run/financed industries where competition is simply not allowed.
In Eve the massive barriers to entry are the BPO's and how they are distributed.
The simple solution would be for npc's to offer an unlimited supply of all BPO's for sale on the market. The npc's already do this for commodities and the npc prices do react to changes in demand.
The Price of BPO's and the cost of the ships would eventually stabilise at a perfect market equilibrium level...
Now i realise that everybody who has research agents is going to scream and stamp their feet at this idea because it would remove the random 2-50 bil lottery payouts that a very small proportion of eve players get to enjoy.
But it would solve the problem and stay true to eve's free market philosophy.
P.S. There will always be massive inflation in eve due to the lack of money sinks in the game but thats another matter entirely...
|
Mo Steel
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:45:00 -
[20]
Boycott the producers and refuse to pay the prices if that's the main issue. If it's "I want mine for cheap, screw everyone else" then you're SOL. |
Guntaro
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:45:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Zedivh
Edited by: Zedivh on 08/01/2006 22:39:10
It may be CCP's fault that not enough R.A.M. are being distributed to the playerbase, but so what, that's part of the game. Also, the economics are NOT messed up, they are exactly how a capitalistic economy works. We can't complain about the prices when people are willing to pay
The Eve economy is messed up. In the real world there are laws against price fixing, price gouging, and monopolies. But in Eve there are no such laws.
|
CptEagle
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:46:00 -
[22]
Tbh I think this is just a game and I hate the fact that I can't fly the ship I like most and trained for a long time, just because of economics... If you can get a Deimos for 150m then have it quite cheap... But I've heard the construction cost is only like 40M.
Seems to me like there just not enough plp around that are building them. Maybe it takes too long to build 1, or there are not sufficient BPO's to satisfy all the players.
FatBalls > CCP just checked their logs and no lag ever came from EvE |
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:50:00 -
[23]
I will say one more thing (or rather quote a knowlegdeable man):
Originally by: Oveur
I am not interested in "the lottery sucks" or "more tech 2 blueprints" since that is pretty much stating the obvious 
As you can see, it's obvious we need more T2 BPOs. And the shortage in T2 BPOs (and now the - temporary I hope - RAM shortage, resulting in a bigger HAC shortage) is the issue with T2 market, and in particular HAC market.
Fix Stealth Bombers descriptions - AS need 4 bonus + Jag, Vengeance, Hawk as Missile AS? Tux/Hammer/TomB! |
Parallax Error
|
Posted - 2006.01.08 23:58:00 -
[24]
Funny how its only the Cerberus thats had massive price increases, where as every other HAC has increased roughly inline with the RAM costs.
Couldn't be anything to do with Heavy Launchers Rate of Fire being improved...
|
LUKKAT
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 00:09:00 -
[25]
Originally by: CptEagle
Edited by: CptEagle on 08/01/2006 23:49:58
Tbh I think this is just a game and I hate the fact that I can't fly the ship I like most and trained for a long time, just because of economics... If you can get a Deimos for 150m then have it quite cheap... But I've heard the construction cost is only like 40M.
agree with this comment,
ive spent 4 months training towards a ishtar and cant find one to buy, isnt the long skill time suppose to be the barrier to using them? and isk is not the issue am willing to pay whatever, to me this is a game and i like to shoot stuff
atm im just using dominix as a substitute and am regretting the training wasted on cruiser 5, should have put it towards large guns instead
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 00:19:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Malthros Zenobia on 09/01/2006 00:18:45
Originally by: Wuhu
I've seen the price of a Cerberus more than double in the past several weeks (from 80 million to 160 million). At the current rate I can easily see these things push 200 million isk.
Cerbs got a much needed boost when RMR was released. That upper their prices as much, if not more, than RAM issues.
Originally by: Oveur
I am not interested in "the lottery sucks" or "more tech 2 blueprints" since that is pretty much stating the obvious.
|
DoctorGonzo
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 00:28:00 -
[27]
Originally by: CptEagle
Tbh I think this is just a game and I hate the fact that I can't fly the ship I like most and trained for a long time, just because of economics... If you can get a Deimos for 150m then have it quite cheap... But I've heard the construction cost is only like 40M.
Build cost is more like 25 million per HAC.
HAC production is great business to be in, if you can get hold of the bpo's, which there's 20 of per type in the game. So not including bpc's there's 160 HAC's being produced each day as it takes about 24 hours to build each one. The problem the Market has is that alot of people have bpo's to supply their own pilots and not really produce for general consumption.
Get Your BoB Protection Kit Here |
Chepe Nolon
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 00:39:00 -
[28]
It's supply and demand. The most basic factors in any economic model.
HAC's are popular, and the time it takes to produce one is long. As long as the sale list is empty or has only one item in it, the seller can take whatever he likes as long as someone will pay it's price for it.
And for those that has achieved a monopoly or a trade union for a kind of t2 item: congrats. I guess that's what's happened with the t2 cap recharger. Since it started out selling for 600k when the cap relay wasn't gimped. And now it's like 15-20M a piece.
Chepe Nolon
--
My notes about agent missions. |
Amerame
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 01:15:00 -
[29]
I used to see a lot of HAC in pvp when their cost was 50-80M, now I don't see many of them roaming, a couple of eagles here and there because they are still relatively cheap and usefull in fleet, but that's all. My corp used to use small gangs of HACs, it's been a while since we last did that.
Fixed supply with no possibility at all to enter the market is indeed extremely bad. T2 ships should not be cheap, but honestly those t2 cruisers are not worth risking 5 times as much as a battleship.
I don't get it, it's impossible to increase the supply of t2 stuff when the demand has been growing constantly. Though there is a hope on the long run for T2 ships, if the supply for HACs will not increase, Recon, Command ship are somewhat substitute one for another. I don't mean they fullfill the same roles, just that what makes HAC's *cool* to fly can be found in reconn / command.
|
Mo Steel
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 01:23:00 -
[30]
Substitute goods FTW!  |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 01:27:00 -
[31]
Originally by: DoctorGonzo
Originally by: CptEagle
Tbh I think this is just a game and I hate the fact that I can't fly the ship I like most and trained for a long time, just because of economics... If you can get a Deimos for 150m then have it quite cheap... But I've heard the construction cost is only like 40M.
Build cost is more like 25 million per HAC.
HAC production is great business to be in, if you can get hold of the bpo's, which there's 20 of per type in the game. So not including bpc's there's 160 HAC's being produced each day as it takes about 24 hours to build each one. The problem the Market has is that alot of people have bpo's to supply their own pilots and not really produce for general consumption.
Not quite DG :P
36 hours each, plus it's nearly impossible to keep ANY BPO in constant production now. Oh, and Starship ram are 1 mil a pop, adding 12-15 mil to the build price AND they're 100¦ and annoying to get hold of.
So 160 is an overestimate...
Warning: above post may contain traces of sarcasm.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
DoctorGonzo
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 01:44:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: DoctorGonzo
Originally by: CptEagle
Tbh I think this is just a game and I hate the fact that I can't fly the ship I like most and trained for a long time, just because of economics... If you can get a Deimos for 150m then have it quite cheap... But I've heard the construction cost is only like 40M.
Build cost is more like 25 million per HAC.
HAC production is great business to be in, if you can get hold of the bpo's, which there's 20 of per type in the game. So not including bpc's there's 160 HAC's being produced each day as it takes about 24 hours to build each one. The problem the Market has is that alot of people have bpo's to supply their own pilots and not really produce for general consumption.
Not quite DG :P
36 hours each, plus it's nearly impossible to keep ANY BPO in constant production now. Oh, and Starship ram are 1 mil a pop, adding 12-15 mil to the build price AND they're 100¦ and annoying to get hold of.
So 160 is an overestimate...
Semantics
The point is it's 'around' 160 a day, which for 70,000 subscribers is not a lot - hence all the supply and demand high price stuff!
Get Your BoB Protection Kit Here |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 01:48:00 -
[33]
HAC prices are going up because HAC producers want to buy the new toys. Some even want to buy the BPOs to the new toys. Prices were artifically low before because HAC producers had more money than they could spend anyway. Not anymore. The person who said prices will raise as high as people are willing to pay was spot on.
TBH, the game is about to go to Hell. The same few corporations will end up with all the new ship BPOs. If they don't win em, they can use rediculous sums of money to buy them. People will get ****ed and frustrated with Eve since the new ships will become Status Symbols that only the monopolies can use. Skills and planning wasted.
I hope CCP makes some changes and quick before its too late.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Agent Kenshin
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 02:30:00 -
[34]
Here i am again. Another HACs prices are getting out of control thread. To restate what some people said is true.
- 36 hours to build a HAC. Thats 9 times longer than a Battleship with PE 0.
- 25-40 mil to build a HAC based on a good supplier of components. And assuming you have rams.
- More characters are becoming HAC qualified and can use them.
- There are not enough BPOs currently to reduce the price of HACs.
Now. HAC prices are high but this is a natural part of what is going to happen with a lot of things with extremely high build times. 20 BPOs of each hac currently are not enough to deal with the huge amount of ships being lost in PvP and in agent running. This causes the higher demand for the ships. The HAC prices keep going up because the manufactures are noticing that everytime they put their ships up they sell within hours of being placed on the market. So next time they put them up they slightly raise the price. So other manufacturers follow. The biggest problem right now is that people are willing to pay these high prices for them so the producers continue to put them up for a little more each time.
Right now the market has stabled out at about 140-160 for most of the really good HACs. Now increasing BPOs will only help prices if the amount of component makers out there increases which means more POS more moon mining and more things hitting the market. Because if the entire industry setting of EVE does not move along with the increasing of BPOs the prices of hacs will not fall. Because instead of the builders of HACs upping the prices constantly it will be the component manufacturers upping the prices of their components which will raise the build cost of the HACs.
Every part of T2 manufacturing is tied in together. If things do change and we do get more bpos we may not be ready for the increase with the amount of new ships that are currently going in. There in itself is another reason prices go up more t2 ships that use the same components and new ram so HACs are put on the back burner cause the new ships will sell for more faster and will yeild even bigger profits. But i do agree that something slowly needs to be done. Decreasing the build time would certainly lower the price of HACs a bit.
Originally by: MAXSuicide
only carebears call pvpers 'greifers'
ehehehh....
|
Freya Jones
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 02:46:00 -
[35]
Ok, I agree 160M or more is a bit much for an HAC.
Tp the twit in BoB that makes the claim that an HAC costs 25M to make, well, I can tell you dont make any.
The Munin cost (pre RMR) just under 40M to build, this includes my prod eff 5 skill and a researched print (only ME 3 though). Starship RAMs are going for 1M+ now, and a Munin uses 11 of them completely everytime it is built. Other HACs are similar I believe. They do not cost anywhere near 25M to build.
Then there is the waiting list. I have 10 people on mine, and it increases every day. Soon I will be out of RAMs and no more Munins for my customers. You think prices are bad now? Just wait. Guns (and ammo, because they use weapon RAMs for some reason...) are next.
The guy in CCP that made the RAM decision in RMR is a half wit.
|
Crellion
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 05:14:00 -
[36]
RAM s might be a peripheral issue yes but upping building costs to 50 mill does not explain selling them at 160 mill. This would be the same as sselling Scorps for 160 mill.
No what we have here is Barriers to entry placed by CCP (no more than 6 months for solo bpo ownership should be the way) concerted practices (by owners of BPOs manipulating the market) abuse of a dominant position (by said concerted entities scooping all bpos at silly prices) predatory pricing (when they use ill-begotten wealth to fill all the orders from NAGA and resell at high prices) and many more. Tech II eve economy IS broken and CCP need help I think to fix it.
|
LUKKAT
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 05:24:00 -
[37]
naga only allow u to order one hac at a time as far as i know.
|
Airdorn
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 06:33:00 -
[38]
Sellers sell at 160mil because there's a steady stream of buyers willing to buy at that price, and maybe even a little higher.
Don't forget that its getting easier and easier to make money in Eve lately.
There's an insatiable appetite for HACs these days and that can only be quelled by providing more options to the buyers. Right now HACs still reign supreme as the elite class of Eve ships, all-around.
My opinions/observations only. :)
|
Akrasia
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 07:39:00 -
[39]
Here's the optimistic view. Right now there is a quickly growing base of players that can pilot HAC's hence the demand for them has gone up significantly, and therefore the price has risen. My guess though is that this will correct itself, for two reasons.
1) People will be much more careful with a 150 million isk ship than with a 80 million isk ship, and therefore the demand side will begin to drop a bit. Long term the demand for tech 2 cruisers will be set predominantly by PvP losses.
2) The introduction of other tech 2 cruiser class vessels increases the supply of high tech ships substantially. Collectors will still pay high prices till they have one of everything, but the long term demand pressure comes from PvP losses. Those should remain constant in ratio to the population and the number of ships which fulfill the tech 2 cruiser role has just tripled if you include command ships. In another 3 months i suspect the prices to stabilize at around 100-110 million for the really snazzy HAC's.
Finally, is there actually any truth to the idea that companies are getting monopolies on HAC BPO's? Or is this just rampant speculation? There comes a point at which extra isk doesn't really do much for an individual person. I'm not sure if i had 5 billion plus in the bank that i'd be too keen on selling a HAC BPO at any price. Controlling the means of production is more valuable than isk after you've got plenty of money.
Finally, finally, I'll be honest. The current HAC price isn't a suprise at all. If 36 hour production is correct, then the profit potential for a HAC BPO is actually not that substantial. I'd never for instance trade a PDS II bpo for a HAC BPO if my interest was profit.
|
dazedandconfused
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 07:47:00 -
[40]
I saw a zealot going for 200 million, and in jita I have seen them being sold for 180 million consistantly. That is alot of cash, but worry not. It is still possible to, say, buy one for 125 million or so.
One just has to comb through the ship channel. It is very possible to get one in the low hundreds range. The person I bought mine off of podded themselves and traveled through many jumps in hostile 0.0 to deliver it to me in empire, for 125 million.
The moral of story: there is always some dude or lady that is desperate to get rid of what they got for sale. One just needs patience and has to keep looking.
Or maybe that was the only time something like that has happened in the universe, dunno. 
If someone cannot find a cheap deal for a HAC then consider this. If one can afford a ship that costs 125 million, and even use a HAC, then one can probably scrounge up another 60 million or so. To be honest the market for HACs seems to be very much alive. The ships are made, and people buy them  .
Ultimately if one cannot afford to lose something one shouldn't buy said item.
Insurance is for sissies.
Plus, who cares about HACs any more. Where are the damn Damnations, Absolutions, and Curses? If they are not for sale by the time I can use them, I will be furious with rage! 
|
Matrices Reborn
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 10:08:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Matrices Reborn on 09/01/2006 10:08:53
People here are justifying HAC prices on the rather absurd basis of some kind of professed love for capitalism or capitalist economics, probably without having read anyone from Smith to Ricardo to Keynes.
Just repeating the mantra "Supply and demand!" means absolutely nothing. Ignorance is bliss I suppose; it's ridiculous to assume the in-game economy = capitalism and capitalism = good, therefore in-game economy = good. First of all as anyone can tell you in most Third World countries, capitalism is ****. The only reason capitalism works in the rich countries is because they plunder and destroy the poorer ones to create new markets there or steal natural resources (Iraq, cough, Iraq)...and if you look at the widening gap in income in the most capitalist country in the world you can even see it doesn't even work there very well except for billionaire CEOs...
But even putting that aside, the supply/demand curve only works *assuming all other things are equal*. That is clearly not the case in the game since by definition nothing is equal in the game. The producers have the means of production, the stations and the blueprints. Meanwhile, money makes money so the rich get richer and access the better toys by virtue of their production role. The consumers have to put up with whatever prices, or simply not play anymore.
Even if you think capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread, any smart capitalist who actually has anything to do with running a real economy will tell you need some price control or government regulation or breakup of monopoly coded into law (in this case, CCP intervention) to prevent greed from getting out of hand...
|
Hugh Ruka
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 11:31:00 -
[42]
hmm I saw cerberus for 350mio isk just after RMR in The Citadel region :-)
but, I don't hink I'll fly any t2 ship besides frigs (inty, af, covop).
------------------------------
Removed due to offensive content - Laqum
I realy liked my signature. Oh well ... |
DoctorGonzo
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 11:44:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Freya Jones
Tp the twit in BoB that makes the claim that an HAC costs 25M to make, well, I can tell you dont make any.
Oh insults! So I'm a twit because there's a difference in build costs between some manufacturers? I don't know where you're getting your components from but you're getting ripped off if it costs you 40 mil to produce your HAC's.
My original pos was only suggesting they are cheaper to produce than most people think and that there are less prints than most people think. I'm starting to remember why I don't post in these forums - some people have such a pedantic view on everything that's written.
Get Your BoB Protection Kit Here |
Boo Yaaaa
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 12:34:00 -
[44]
im gonna get flamed stupid i just know it:
hac prices r a bit insain atm, but on the pluss side its made them quite a rare thing to c.
Wasnt this the plan, to make them rare.. Id rather have to pay 160mill for a ship that is rare an feel good bout flying it over paying 80 mill for it an being just 1 more hac amoungs thousands.
Back in the day wen bses came out to c one was a very rare thing, a couple of months later every1 was flying 1. Id hate for that to happen wiv hacs.
Flame away
|
Iberi
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 12:42:00 -
[45]
Syggestion:
Why not drop another BPO's into lottery seeing that prises are absurdally high(rather not prices but demand)? And repeat dropping till prices go down to smth reasonable level?
Tbh, I absolutely do not care about HACs and HAC prices, BS is in anyway more powerful and costs for PvP pilot only 30kk(instead of 80-150kk and long waiting).
I prefer to fight on BS than to carebear on HAC.
|
Simjon
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 13:01:00 -
[46]
Imho. Seeding more bpc's is the answer, if everyone could get a research agent to give them a bpc, the prices would drop as the market got more HAC's but only to a point. It is no final solution, but it will let the monopolies get semi-broken.
I would love to fly one, but I can't afford to lose 140 mil, so I will just get unhappy about playing a game where I can't fly what I want because of a bloody artificial monopoly.
But hey, don't take this so seriously and don't get offended, it is just a game, and everyone just want to have a bit of fun, thats why it is so sad that this shortage is ruining gameplay for a lot of people.
|
Semkhet
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 13:03:00 -
[47]
Isk is part of the game. But if making tons & tons of isk becomes the ultimate goal in EVE unless you want to limit yourself at flying old ships or T2 frigs, then something is wrong. And when I say wrong, it's taking into account that most people simply don't make enough isk to invest 100-200 mil isk in a cruiser, even if it's T2. I don't think that EVE will be a more interesting place if T2 cruisers end docked at stations because players may be unable to replace them.
I have the impression that HAC prices reflect conjunctural coincidences.
First, EVE's player base is expanding very fast, and many old players now have the skills to fly fancier ships. Therefore demand for T2 ships of all short can only increase.
Second, the RAM bug has crippled T2 production. At the beginning of RMR, producers could seize the RAM that was being offered on market a fair prices. Now RAM is rare or offered at ridiculous prices. Typically, a T2 frig needs 4, a HAC 12 RAM Starship. At 1 mil the RAM, you get the picture...
Third, RAM's take 100m3 cargo for each unit. Not precisely the easiest thing to move in large quantities. Empire got depleted first, and now acceptable prices are only found in marginal systems with low or no security. Therefore producers factorize also in their prices the hassle to prospect and haul back the RAM's, without forgetting the loss represented by haulers and their cargo who get popped here and there.
Fourth, when marketed RAM became out of reach, most T2 producers simply suspended production because they hope that the next patch in January will correct the RAM bug, and therefore don't want to risk the few RAM Starship they have in stock. It means that there are less and less T2 ships brought on market.
Fifth, even before RMR, the HAC production was unable to attend the total demand (just look at NAGA waiting times pre-RMR). Now the amount of cumulated ordered ships in the production queue will make difficult to significantly lower the retail prices even after correcting the RAM bug, simply because the clog is now even bigger than it was before.
Sixth, as we may expect inflation on HAC prices to continue due to the pression applied by the growing HAC-able player base, the market will attract even more as before financial opportunism, were people with billions may consider profitable to act as intermediaries if HAC prices continue to increase by 5 mil each week. Therefore pushing prices further up in order to fuel their speculative business.
Now, there are simple common sense solutions to this situation.
RAM = Either make BPO's available through NPC market, or RAM repairable again.
T2 ship BPO's = Lowering construction & BPC copying time will not suffice, because these BPO's are already in the hands of a reduced number of players who are now used to make astronomical benefits, and there's no reason (playing the devil's lawyer) why they should fairly reflect such changes on their prices. Remember that if it this in their interest, they will not hesitate to form cartels. The only way to create a production environment able to cope with the demand will be to randomly seed much more BPO's and create BPC agent mission drops.
Why the agent missions ? Because even by seeding BPO's randomly, part of them will statistically end in the hands of those who have the biggest R&D lp's. What we are looking here is to spread HAC construction ability, and not just further enrich those who already monopolize T2 production. CCP should create a competitive environment able to fight monopoly and cartels, and the only way to do it in a free market system is to give the opportunity to enough people to act as T2 ship producers.
It solely depends of CCP to decide if in the future, most T2 ships will be seen as prohibitive toys with little or no use. Personally, I don't bother using & specializing for a ship if I don't know when I can replace it in case of loss.
|
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 13:10:00 -
[48]
If you feel the market is crap, look to the makers and take them to war. Make them spend money so that they will want to generate money to keep them from being on the loosing end. In the end they will look to their consumable products and lower prices.
Stop complaining about a HAC and fly something better, like a battleship.
Originally by: "Oveur"
I don't react to threats any better than you do
|
Jamius
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 13:16:00 -
[49]
OK people LOVE to use this statement when people complain about getting ganked by some lowly pirate (which I am) and losing weeks worth of in-game effort.
"It's only a game"
I utterly disagree with this statement when applied to Eve but it seems to be the common opinion that "it's only a game".
If work was put in to make Eve be a game again, rather than a second job, then this HAC price or any price for that matter would not be an issue. I have the skills and want to then I fly a HAC, it should be that simple.
Eve is NOT just a game. It is more akin to a space life simulator or a social experiment than a game.
But as it is then supply and demand is the way of it and that's that. As others have said Cerberus' are the flavour just now cos more people want them than there are available. While Eve works as it does this will not change. Other arguments over the high prices are just side shows to this main reason.
ISK is such a big issue in Eve. Without it, and LOTS of it, you simply cannot play the game in an exciting or fun way (not by my standards anyway). Because of this people, quite rightly, suck every penny they can from any situation and these situations will always occur.
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 13:20:00 -
[50]
simple, dont buy them
they suck anyways compaired to a Good BS
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 20:32:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
If you feel the market is crap, look to the makers and take them to war. Make them spend money so that they will want to generate money to keep them from being on the loosing end. In the end they will look to their consumable products and lower prices.
Oh yes, go to war with people who have tens of billions, and most likely use an NPC corp alt to produce. Yes, teach them whose boss while they hire a few hundred mercs to utterly stomp you into the ground...
Originally by: Oveur
I am not interested in "the lottery sucks" or "more tech 2 blueprints" since that is pretty much stating the obvious.
|
Rubber Ducky
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 21:26:00 -
[52]
ok how can i phrase this....80 mil for a cerb one week...then after RMR...160. double the price. Now, please tell me....have the minerals doubled in costs? production costs? skill costs? answer....NO
The inflation is just due to greed of those manufacturing. In countries such as the UK, inflation of prices is controled slightly by the government. But do not fear all you pilots, for with peaks, there are troughs.....The price will come down, so the manufacturers can either keep charging high prices for a small while more, or charge normal prices for a whole lot longer. The time will come, but until then, dont buy a cerb for that cash for PvP...i know cos i have one and they suck pvp unless in fleet.
But yes the price is insane as are all hacs. same as cap recharger II's. but thats eve, thats the sad people who hoard it all away for their own little profit making schemes..but its eve/life
but CCP, please do something to help decrease the inflation of prices, as its killing EVEs market due to the lack of 'government' assistance. We cant alter the prices solo...we need forceful help. Ure the government, we're the companies...lower the inflation
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 21:41:00 -
[53]
Well some RAM and RdB BPOs are being seeded according to the patch notes. But of course that wont affect the price of HACs, just the profit margin.
The person that said BPC should be given out more is correct.
It would be interesting to see how many HAC are in game now. I think the price should be whatever people will pay. Thats fair for an economy game. (reversal of my previous position)
What I don't think is right is the limited availability of the HACs. HAC availability has been out of control for a LONG time. Leed times have always been sick. My hope is that the new ships will add new capacity and more people can fly more stuff.
Still CCP needs to be damn careful about creating a permanent underclass of people that can never afford the ships. Remember, time is money and you don't want the casual players excessively limited beneath the hardcore players.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Rubber Ducky
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 21:57:00 -
[54]
totally agree. We need CCP to really use their powers for good, not just nerf. Although they've done many great things, work still continues. This isnt a game as previously pointed out. no game has had an economy such as eve. Its persistant, demanding, and realistic...except theres no real power over it all. CCP need to introduce more BPC for people to produce them privately. This will therefore allow people to reduce lead times as you pointed out. This will inturn make the overpriced ones need to be more competitive and reduce price. Thus, the balance is restored. But CCP need to make the first move
|
DoctorGonzo
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 22:27:00 -
[55]
Just to play devils advocate a little with no particular agenda - what about the hardcore player that has put his (or her) heart, sole and hours of time into the game to buy a HAC bpo on the 'Sell Items Forum' only for more bpo's to be seeded? Would that be fair?
Get Your BoB Protection Kit Here |
Caeden Nicomachean
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 23:06:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Matrices Reborn
Edited by: Matrices Reborn on 09/01/2006 10:08:53
People here are justifying HAC prices on the rather absurd basis of some kind of professed love for capitalism or capitalist economics, probably without having read anyone from Smith to Ricardo to Keynes.
Just repeating the mantra "Supply and demand!" means absolutely nothing.
Very much agreed. I think a lot of folks get caught up in trying to show the logic of it - but I don't know many thinking adults (the main base of folks playing Eve) who can't grasp at least the basics of what drives price. Economics is taught to teenagers and utilized at least on a rudimentary level by all of us.
Likewise it isn't a philosophical debate, its a practical matter. HACs are a fun ship. Battleships move like bricks, and T1 cruisers can't stand up to nearly as much punishment as an HAC...neither one is a true alternative to the niche class of HAC.
160M+ is not an acceptable price for these ships, on the whole. 80M is a tag we could all live with, still reward the BPO owners, and be better for the game.
Push out more RAM, seed more prints.
---
25 or over? Join www.theoldergamers.com |
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 23:52:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
If you feel the market is crap, look to the makers and take them to war. Make them spend money so that they will want to generate money to keep them from being on the loosing end. In the end they will look to their consumable products and lower prices.
Oh yes, go to war with people who have tens of billions, and most likely use an NPC corp alt to produce. Yes, teach them whose boss while they hire a few hundred mercs to utterly stomp you into the ground...
someone forgot their ballz today... and their brainz... and it wazn't me. Anything they can do you can do better if you do something called organization. You want to war the t2 makers... start a cause and rally more money to your side. If they fight with mercs... fight back with mercs... after a while the mercs won't have any reason to fight and will back off. If I thought as you do I would question why I was in EVE to begin with.
Originally by: "Oveur"
I don't react to threats any better than you do
|
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 23:54:00 -
[58]
Supply and Demand.
It looks like the Industrialists have officially made their mark in the PvP world
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.01.09 23:57:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 09/01/2006 23:57:31
When the supply the limiting factor, the consumers, NOT the producers, dictate the effective market price.
Welcome to economics 101.
Warning: above post may contain traces of sarcasm.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 00:26:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
If you feel the market is crap, look to the makers and take them to war. Make them spend money so that they will want to generate money to keep them from being on the loosing end. In the end they will look to their consumable products and lower prices.
Ok, so you say if we think HAC prices are too high, we should run war on producers, so that they'll have to spend some money and want to generate even more money to keep their profit? This would only raise prices, and get yourself banned from producers lists (or with a huge increased in prices and waiting time), and force you to buy them on the market, as waiting in producers' waiting list would no longer be possible? Clever idea, really.
Anyway, as I said earlier, producers shall not get the stone thrown at them. Look at NAGA for example, their most expensive HAC is what, 90M? Same on market is 150M. You can't blame producers for selling that high (while most of them tend to price reasonably), while there's resellers who buy lots of ships to them, and then resell them on market for a 50M benefit. Producers can't increase their production, and production as all can't be increased either, due to BPO limitation. HAC market is screwed because of the artificial supply shortage, and the fact that the production has not increased in the past months, while the demand has greatly increased, due to much more players being able to fly those ships.
By the way, Oveur himself has acknowleged that it was obvious we needed more T2 BPOs, and that the lottery system sucked ;) No need to get over that again...
I'd recommend to those who want to make suggestions for next gen research and production (and improvements to current system) to go read and post in that thread by Oveur and stop beating the dead horse here.
=====
!!! Fix SB - Love for AFs - Fix drones AI !!! |
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 00:29:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Rob Boberton
Originally by: Algey
When demand exceeds supply you have inflation. When supply exceeds demand you get deflation.
I'm sorry but as an economist this hurts my eyes. When demand exceeds supply you have shortages. When supply exceeds demand you have surplusses.
As nobel laureate Milton Friedman said "inflation is everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon." In other words it has nothing to do with real goods.
Yeah, and when you have shortages, you get inflation, when you get surplusses, you get deflation (or lower inflation than the inflationist trend) There's of course a natural inflationist trend, that doesn't prevent other variations to be encountered along.
=====
!!! Fix SB - Love for AFs - Fix drones AI !!! |
Rob Boberton
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 00:55:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Trelennen
Yeah, and when you have shortages, you get inflation, when you get surplusses, you get deflation (or lower inflation than the inflationist trend) There's of course a natural inflationist trend, that doesn't prevent other variations to be encountered along.
If the difference were so semantic I wouldn't have brought it up.
Inflation is not the same as a one-time change in the price level, it's what happens when the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money.
If you want to look at HAC prices as an inflationary phenomena that would indicate that the root problem is that missions/mining/ratting pay too well. I doubt that's what any of you want to imply.
In fact, the thing most people are talking about is a pretty standard shortage condition. The only way for a monopoly to exert any sort of market conrol is to reduce production. Seeing as how I haven't heard of a single T2 BPO sitting unused to drive up prices it's pretty obvious that the relative real value of HACs is high compared to other ships.
|
Wuhu
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 00:59:00 -
[63]
Thanks to everyone so far, at the very least it looks llke we have a wide range of theories on the matter. I did not mean for this to turn into an amateur debate on the merits of capitalism (whoever quoted Smith, Ricardo, and Keynes in their reply REALLY needs to get out more). I wanted to provide CCP, for whatever it may be worth, with some tangible suggestions. Based on what I've read so far (minus the flames) it looks like some things CCP could do:
1. Increase BPO/BPC availability - corps/players could do this too (on the BPC front), but may not be in a supplier's best interest.
2. Decrease production times.
3. Increase availability of POS products.
Just trying to summarize everything so far. I still think SOMETHING should be done. In the end though they'll probably just nerf something.
|
Caeden Nicomachean
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:11:00 -
[64]
Quote:
Seeing as how I haven't heard of a single T2 BPO sitting unused to drive up prices it's pretty obvious that the relative real value of HACs is high compared to other ships.
Yes.
The jibber jabber ratio in threads like these is amazing. Everyone seems to be caught up in proving that the other guy just doesn't understand basic economics when in the end you can have a helping of Occam's Razor and see that there is no argument whatever.
Seed more prints. Reduce build times. Seed more RAM to missions.
Its a simple issue that gets bent out of shape.
---
25 or over? Join www.theoldergamers.com |
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:31:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Rob Boberton
If the difference were so semantic I wouldn't have brought it up.
Inflation is not the same as a one-time change in the price level, it's what happens when the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money.
Inflation is an increase in the general level of prices of a given kind in a given currency. When the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money, it will cause inflation, it's not the only possible cause.
=====
!!! Fix SB - Love for AFs - Fix drones AI !!! |
Wuhu
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:33:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Trelennen
Inflation is an increase in the general level of prices of a given kind in a given currency. When the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money, it will cause inflation, it's not the only possible cause.
Read my earlier post. ^^^^
But thanks anyway.
|
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:39:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Wuhu
Originally by: Trelennen
Inflation is an increase in the general level of prices of a given kind in a given currency. When the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money, it will cause inflation, it's not the only possible cause.
Read my earlier post. ^^^^
But thanks anyway.
oh, it was not about "you don't know economics or so", was a bit off topic in an economics discussion which should not have been in this thread.
Anyway, this thread only beats the dead horse again, as there has been lots of such thread, all with the same conclusions:
- more BPOs / BPCs
- decrease build times
- and for post RMR threads: fix the RAM issue by increasing their availability and reduce their size (100m¦ is too much), or make them reapairable again.
As I pointed out earlier, Oveur himself acknoledge some of those conclusions himself, and is now looking forward further improvements for research/manufacturing, and it's quite likely that, apart from the current RAM issue, nothing will be changed until Kali at most, with next gen research and manufacturing. Anyway, I'll stop beating the dead horse with you guys now .
=====
!!! Fix SB - Love for AFs - Fix drones AI !!! |
Liet Traep
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:45:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Wuhu
Thanks to everyone so far, at the very least it looks llke we have a wide range of theories on the matter. I did not mean for this to turn into an amateur debate on the merits of capitalism (whoever quoted Smith, Ricardo, and Keynes in their reply REALLY needs to get out more). I wanted to provide CCP, for whatever it may be worth, with some tangible suggestions. Based on what I've read so far (minus the flames) it looks like some things CCP could do:
1. Increase BPO/BPC availability - corps/players could do this too (on the BPC front), but may not be in a supplier's best interest.
2. Decrease production times.
3. Increase availability of POS products.
Just trying to summarize everything so far. I still think SOMETHING should be done. In the end though they'll probably just nerf something.
Probably the best post I've read about this. Taking those 3 steps will let consumers have HACS at reasonable prices and because producers will be able to mass produce them they'll still make a killing off of volume. Everyone is happy.
|
Rob Boberton
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:47:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Trelennen
Inflation is an increase in the general level of prices of a given kind in a given currency. When the rate of money production is greater than the demand for money, it will cause inflation, it's not the only possible cause.
While I appreciate your enthusiasm for the subject I'll concede your position to tell me the definition of inflation when you have better than a masters degree in economics.
An increase in the price of ONE good is not the same as an increase in the general price level, which in turn is not the same thing as inflation. Inflation is a sustained growth in the general price level which, it is obvious, is ONLY possible through a growth in money supply greater than growth in money demand.
|
Wuhu
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:50:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Trelennen
As I pointed out earlier, Oveur himself acknoledge some of those conclusions himself, and is now looking forward further improvements for research/manufacturing, and it's quite likely that, apart from the current RAM issue, nothing will be changed until Kali at most, with next gen research and manufacturing. Anyway, I'll stop beating the dead horse with you guys now .
No worries. Like I said in my first post these forums need a search feature. I still think something should be done pre-Kali.
|
Callan Skiderlar
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 01:51:00 -
[71]
Take a look at the patch notes:
R.A.M. and R.Db blueprints are being seeded.
So that minor issue will go away in a big way if they are on the NPC market.
Personally, I think they should be a little smarter about T2 BPO drops and do them in groups of 5 until there is a sustainable market for the item. In other words, drop 5 HAC prints, see that it's insane for a week, drop 5 more, etc. Conversely, drop 5 micro smartbomb BPOs, see that the market is already dead, stop dropping those BPOs.
---
Selling:
Naglfars: 2.1B - build queue is: 4
Havoc Precisions: 1.25M per 1,000
Improved cloaks: 17M |
Pitt
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 03:56:00 -
[72]
Well, my two isk I guess.
1. Make a catalogue for lp's. Want a hac bpo, that'll be ___X___ (enter number of lp's) to get.
2. Add ram bpo's or bpc's to the npc market. Put their production in the hands of the players.
Now these have been suggested before, many times I might add, but they seem to me to be the simplest way's to fix the problem at hand.
Will these fix the problem, yes they will. Atleast the current situation will be resolved, I can't foresee any other problems arising with the solutions, but....
ps. speeling errror"s in my wake.
How many must die in the name of God before the Devil is satisfied |
Novo DuPont
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 05:05:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Novo DuPont on 10/01/2006 05:07:04
What we need is CCP to stop sitting on thier hands and break these T2 BPO Monopolies that exist in EVE.
The only reason prices have gone up is the same reason that long ago Cap Rechargers went up in price 10 times in a matter of weeks.
CCP makes it extremely easy for persons/corps to corner the market on T2 BPO's and no new fresh supplies are brought to market.
CCP's approach " ohh the poor players they only made 100 billion profit on that BPO lets not give out anymore".
Personal to really fix the Market there should be NO T2 BPO's, just BPC's. Once they get used up then a new one is put into the R&D pool for some other lucky sole to get a chance.
The only ones in this topic that are supporting prices and BPO's like they are and want no change ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE T2 BPO's, geez how unbiased of them.
"To succeed greatly one must sacrifice greatly"
|
Minuz1
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 06:08:00 -
[74]
Those of you who don't know....
BS's: 4 hours to make=6 ships/day with a profit margin of 5-10 each gives you 30-60M profit each day.
HAC's: take 1 day and 4 hours approx to build, with a cost of 35-40M each.
Fully utilizing 3x BS bpo's and managing to sell all the ships will yield more money then the HAC will make.
Also would like to point out that HAC's are....and hopefully will be an Elite ship(someone posted that normies like himself can't afford it(and shouldn't)).
Hope I don't infuriate any wannabe eliteist
The Tech 2 Lottery is rigged, In my favor! |
Minuz1
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 06:21:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Novo DuPont
Edited by: Novo DuPont on 10/01/2006 05:07:04
What we need is CCP to stop sitting on thier hands and break these T2 BPO Monopolies that exist in EVE.
The only reason prices have gone up is the same reason that long ago Cap Rechargers went up in price 10 times in a matter of weeks.
CCP makes it extremely easy for persons/corps to corner the market on T2 BPO's and no new fresh supplies are brought to market.
CCP's approach " ohh the poor players they only made 100 billion profit on that BPO lets not give out anymore".
Personal to really fix the Market there should be NO T2 BPO's, just BPC's. Once they get used up then a new one is put into the R&D pool for some other lucky sole to get a chance.
The only ones in this topic that are supporting prices and BPO's like they are and want no change ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE T2 BPO's, geez how unbiased of them.
Dude, you've just won the bitter-ness award 2006 by default!
Yes, you could maybe dish out 500 B isk and get a Zealot monopoly, but I sure as hell can't.
The Tech 2 Lottery is rigged, In my favor! |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 06:51:00 -
[76]
Had I known that hacs would reach 175 mil isk each, I would not have wasted the time training for them.
And if CCP fully intended upon doing this, while offering us a false hope when they were 65 mil each, then I demand allowing me to redistribute my skillpoints.
**** Hacs
---
Head of Public Relations - God my job sucks
Fate. Recruitment Thread |
Trelik
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 07:36:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Hamatitio
Had I known that hacs would reach 175 mil isk each, I would not have wasted the time training for them.
And if CCP fully intended upon doing this, while offering us a false hope when they were 65 mil each, then I demand allowing me to redistribute my skillpoints.
**** Hacs
sign
not quite clever enough.
|
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 07:55:00 -
[78]
Originally I said the high hac prices were just a result of simple supply and demand, but I know there are people who are deliberately trying to drive prices up. But then again, if people didn't buy them at that price then they wouldn't stay that high...no matter how low the supply is.
|
Tar om
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 08:21:00 -
[79]
Why not reduce the print copying times to 50% or less of the build times? This would give BPO owners the option to sell BPCs when they have a shortage of RAM or Materials, and would give other people a ***** at HAC production.
--
We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net
"The belief in the possibility of a short decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human illusions." |
Crellion
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 09:30:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Crellion on 10/01/2006 09:33:30
Simple solution:
Make 1 in 50 NPC Hacs drop a HAC bpc (1 run) of that race we shall then find out if the building costs or peoples' greed is the issue :)
This will be a nice ..I.. to the monopolies...
(I bet if this happens they will start selling HACs at 60 mill per ASAP and that is the correct price)
|
LordAmarus
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 11:23:00 -
[81]
its the time for CCP to finzally start doing what they intented and release a next wave of t2 bpo's such as hac's etc
i thought they wante to release t2 ships in waves? like every 6 months a wave... dunno what happened to that anyway
if i want a vagabound i g2 bloody wait 100+ days if i want it at a reasonable price -_-
|
Taaser
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 12:47:00 -
[82]
Patch 3796 to 3805
R.A.M. and R.Db blueprints are being seeded
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 12:53:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Hamatitio
Had I known that hacs would reach 175 mil isk each, I would not have wasted the time training for them.
And if CCP fully intended upon doing this, while offering us a false hope when they were 65 mil each, then I demand allowing me to redistribute my skillpoints.
**** Hacs
tis easy to make 150mils
stop crying start npcing/mining/pos running/agent whoring insted of sitting in a station spinning ur ship complaining about how u cant offord a hac
the prices are high, good, means i have that much more fun when i pop one in a BS
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 16:09:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Taaser
Patch 3796 to 3805
R.A.M. and R.Db blueprints are being seeded
Such a small part of HAC prices its not worth mentioning.
What I do like though is the differing philosophies, the lies and deception, the spin and politicing.
If only there were game mechanics to allow this to play out in-game rather than on the forums...Making war against greedy corporations is not feasible. You can't take their BPOs away. And politics cant affect the prices for the most part.
If their were more BPOs then there would be more in-game recourse to profiteering.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Ghey Iislandur
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 16:27:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Glarion Garnier
Well if you think about it. First thing to lower the Hac prices would be making bpo's for RAM tools. Next step improve POS bussiness a bit once more.
You're insane. How is this going to help at all? If a T2 HAC producer is weathly enough to make big profits on their HAC, then they aren't going to worry about the cost of trying to obtain a R.A.M. BPO as well.
Once they have that, it's business as usual.
However, if CCP would release more BPO to ppl that actually enjoy manufacturing and research instead of giving them to combat characters that just want to sell them, then you just might see a few more HAC's in production.
So unless R.A.M. is a T1 BPO that can be purchased anywhere, you aren't going to see that much of a reduction in HAC prices at all even if R.A.M. BPO's are available.
As long as we're on the subject, couldn't CCP be so kind as to release more of these type of BPO (Electronic Parts, Scan Probes, Construction blocks, cargo i's etc.) as consolation prizes for ppl doing research when "no predictable patents" is the only possible outcome.
Jesus, throw the manufacturers a fecking bone once in a while would you CCP?
______________________________________________
Won't you give to the Minmatar Orphans of War Charities? With your generous donation of ore or isk, we can reunite a Minmatar slave with his family. |
HankMurphy
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 16:34:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Imhotep Khem
Originally by: Taaser
Patch 3796 to 3805
R.A.M. and R.Db blueprints are being seeded
Such a small part of HAC prices its not worth mentioning.
What I do like though is the differing philosophies, the lies and deception, the spin and politicing.
If only there were game mechanics to allow this to play out in-game rather than on the forums...Making war against greedy corporations is not feasible. You can't take their BPOs away. And politics cant affect the prices for the most part.
If their were more BPOs then there would be more in-game recourse to profiteering.
I think the 'greed' factor is the key you all are looking for. I'm not gonna get all mumbo jumbo on ya, but Capitalism only works well when its kept in check. In this case more BPOs are DEFINITELY what the doctor ordered.
HACs?!?... Can you say 'Cap Recharger II'? *insert any other cornered item averaging insane price on market here*
|
Ghey Iislandur
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 16:34:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Minuz1
Those of you who don't know....
BS's: 4 hours to make=6 ships/day with a profit margin of 5-10 each gives you 30-60M profit each day.
HAC's: take 1 day and 4 hours approx to build, with a cost of 35-40M each.
Fully utilizing 3x BS bpo's and managing to sell all the ships will yield more money then the HAC will make.
Also would like to point out that HAC's are....and hopefully will be an Elite ship(someone posted that normies like himself can't afford it(and shouldn't)).
Hope I don't infuriate any wannabe eliteist
You assume that you'll sell the BS for a good profit. This won't happen since anyone can make them. You also assume all three will be sold, which they won't due to stiff competition.
I won't sell 3 BS a day in the same spot for any good ROI, no matter how much you wan't to spin it. The ROI for the HAC is what? 200%? A BS is what? 10%?
There is no comparison between the two. Not even close.
______________________________________________
Won't you give to the Minmatar Orphans of War Charities? With your generous donation of ore or isk, we can reunite a Minmatar slave with his family. |
Liet Traep
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 18:30:00 -
[88]
I'm glad that the ram bpos are being seeded. that may help a bit. But more BPO's still need to be dropped and the build time on them cut. I think there's a place for uber rare ships and those are the faction ships. I think anyone who spends the ungodly time training to flhy HAC should be able to buy one at a decent price. It's one of the reasons that people play the game after all.
|
Dash Ripcock
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 19:19:00 -
[89]
I think it's pretty simple:
[1] Finite number of BPOs results in a ceiling in production levels
[2] Ever-increasing number of people able to fly HACs means ever-increasing demand
[3] Demand is so high that people are willing to pay tooth and nail to get what they want
[4] T2 Producers can sell HACs at highly inflated prices because people will pay them
Say CCP issue new BPOs, as long as the number of pilots hoping to fly HACs increases we'll be stuck in a vicious circle. It'll just happen all over again. Sure, if demand peaks and refuses to increase we'll be fine and dandy, but people join EVE every day and ever few minutes someone clocks in the skills and cash required to fly a HAC.
A solution? I think it would have to be radical as the current system doesn't work. As mentioned an increase in BPOs and a decrease in build time would make more HACs available for a short while, but who is to say demand won't catch up again? Only when the manufacturers have surplus ships will they lower prices. An alternative is the implementation of a system that allows manufacturers to continually refine the production process to increase productivity inline with demand.
I have to say from personal experience that Battle Angels fly far fewer HAC squads than we used to. Sure, there is always the inside deal with regards to purchases but it has come to the point where it simply isn't economically viable to field them in constant battle. Something does need to change, but it must be a long-term decision not a short-term fix.
Movie Trailer |
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 20:15:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Matrices Reborn
Edited by: Matrices Reborn on 09/01/2006 10:08:53
People here are justifying HAC prices on the rather absurd basis of some kind of professed love for capitalism or capitalist economics, probably without having read anyone from Smith to Ricardo to Keynes.
Just repeating the mantra "Supply and demand!" means absolutely nothing. Ignorance is bliss I suppose; it's ridiculous to assume the in-game economy = capitalism and capitalism = good, therefore in-game economy = good. First of all as anyone can tell you in most Third World countries, capitalism is ****. The only reason capitalism works in the rich countries is because they plunder and destroy the poorer ones to create new markets there or steal natural resources (Iraq, cough, Iraq)...and if you look at the widening gap in income in the most capitalist country in the world you can even see it doesn't even work there very well except for billionaire CEOs...
But even putting that aside, the supply/demand curve only works *assuming all other things are equal*. That is clearly not the case in the game since by definition nothing is equal in the game. The producers have the means of production, the stations and the blueprints. Meanwhile, money makes money so the rich get richer and access the better toys by virtue of their production role. The consumers have to put up with whatever prices, or simply not play anymore.
Even if you think capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread, any smart capitalist who actually has anything to do with running a real economy will tell you need some price control or government regulation or breakup of monopoly coded into law (in this case, CCP intervention) to prevent greed from getting out of hand...
Marx and the fall of the imperial era 4tw!
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 22:05:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Kaylana Syi
If you feel the market is crap, look to the makers and take them to war. Make them spend money so that they will want to generate money to keep them from being on the loosing end. In the end they will look to their consumable products and lower prices.
Oh yes, go to war with people who have tens of billions, and most likely use an NPC corp alt to produce. Yes, teach them whose boss while they hire a few hundred mercs to utterly stomp you into the ground...
someone forgot their ballz today... and their brainz... and it wazn't me. Anything they can do you can do better if you do something called organization. You want to war the t2 makers... start a cause and rally more money to your side. If they fight with mercs... fight back with mercs... after a while the mercs won't have any reason to fight and will back off. If I thought as you do I would question why I was in EVE to begin with.
I doubt you'd realize when you forget your 'brainz'.
Again, you fail to realize you cannot beat an enemy who doesn't undock, and can send people after you when you undock. Sure, you can use mercs on the mercs, but the bottomline is you will still never damage the production line. If anything, you'll help them because the damage you, and any mercs involved take, may cause them to purchase from the producers, without you realizing it.
Also, alot of t2 production takes place in alliance, but if you think you'll 'win' by warring them, go right ahead. I personally doubt many mercs would take on a job where they'll be alienating themselves from the makers of some of their favorite ships and mods.
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve...
This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
|
Nifel
|
Posted - 2006.01.10 23:11:00 -
[92]
CCP basically need to hurry up their t2 bpo auction scheme. And make sure people can pool together research points so that groups can make a bid for them. AND make them cost lots of research points :o.
"We wield swords for the sound of laughter that used to be there long ago."
RKK Ranking: (MIN13) Jata |
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 00:19:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Vishnej on 11/01/2006 00:20:19
Originally by: Nifel
CCP basically need to hurry up their t2 bpo auction scheme. And make sure people can pool together research points so that groups can make a bid for them. AND make them cost lots of research points :o.
How do you "make" them cost lots of research points in an auction? And wouldn't this upset the balance of power in the favor of the largest collaborative group, giving the rest of hte players nothing? Every last BPO would go to ISS / Big Blue and similar groups.
No, you can't make RP poolable without problems.
What you CAN do is release:
A) an isk auction with a very high minimum bid as a pressure valve
B) a simple 1 BPO released normally
C) an RP auction, so that the most long-suffering players with tons of RP and bad luck get compensated
per month, or on alternating months.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 00:19:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Vishnej on 11/01/2006 00:20:19
Originally by: Nifel
CCP basically need to hurry up their t2 bpo auction scheme. And make sure people can pool together research points so that groups can make a bid for them. AND make them cost lots of research points :o.
How do you "make" them cost lots of research points in an auction? And wouldn't this upset the balance of power in the favor of the largest collaborative group, giving the rest of hte players nothing? Every last BPO would go to ISS / Big Blue and similar groups.
No, you can't make RP poolable without problems.
What you CAN do is release:
A) an isk auction with a very high minimum bid as a pressure valve
B) a simple 1 BPO released normally
C) an RP auction, so that the most long-suffering players with tons of RP and bad luck get compensated
per month, or on alternating months.
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 01:21:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Vishnej
Edited by: Vishnej on 11/01/2006 00:20:19
Originally by: Nifel
CCP basically need to hurry up their t2 bpo auction scheme. And make sure people can pool together research points so that groups can make a bid for them. AND make them cost lots of research points :o.
How do you "make" them cost lots of research points in an auction? And wouldn't this upset the balance of power in the favor of the largest collaborative group, giving the rest of hte players nothing? Every last BPO would go to ISS / Big Blue and similar groups.
No, you can't make RP poolable without problems.
What you CAN do is release:
A) an isk auction with a very high minimum bid as a pressure valve
B) a simple 1 BPO released normally
C) an RP auction, so that the most long-suffering players with tons of RP and bad luck get compensated
per month, or on alternating months.
Its already upset in favor of those with lots of money, don't kid yourself. Yes we need T2 auction with BPO as corporate assets which can only be transferred through a successful vote.
It should cost RP with a certain agent to enter the auction for his items.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Wuhu
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 01:33:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Wuhu on 11/01/2006 01:33:54
Thanks again. Thankfully it looks like the capitalism = bad chain and debate about the actual book definition of the word 'inflation' have died down.
I'd love to hear from one of the Devs on this one. We keep coming back to roughly the same suggested solutions, but I want to know CCP's thoughts. Any takers?
Wu
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 02:38:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Nifel
CCP basically need to hurry up their t2 bpo auction scheme. And make sure people can pool together research points so that groups can make a bid for them. AND make them cost lots of research points :o.
CCP have said it is going to be *one* BPO a month, and no repeats in a year. So it will make sweet **** all differences except to the people who get one. Now if the auctioned ten or so you would see a change in prices.
I don't think you trust, in, my, self-righteous suicide. |
Minuz1
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 05:34:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Minuz1 on 11/01/2006 05:34:19
Originally by: Ghey Iislandur
Originally by: Minuz1
Those of you who don't know....
BS's: 4 hours to make=6 ships/day with a profit margin of 5-10 each gives you 30-60M profit each day.
HAC's: take 1 day and 4 hours approx to build, with a cost of 35-40M each.
Fully utilizing 3x BS bpo's and managing to sell all the ships will yield more money then the HAC will make.
Also would like to point out that HAC's are....and hopefully will be an Elite ship(someone posted that normies like himself can't afford it(and shouldn't)).
Hope I don't infuriate any wannabe eliteist
You assume that you'll sell the BS for a good profit. This won't happen since anyone can make them. You also assume all three will be sold, which they won't due to stiff competition.
I won't sell 3 BS a day in the same spot for any good ROI, no matter how much you wan't to spin it. The ROI for the HAC is what? 200%? A BS is what? 10%?
There is no comparison between the two. Not even close.
You assume I don't....well I do. And they are 6 per day per BPO.
7xBS vs 1 HAC in build time so the going rate would be BS 70% vs 200% of the HAC's. Buy 3 BS BPO's and tada, you are getting more income then any HAC maker.
I spent 3 months doing agent missions before the R&D lottery was introduced which went into a corp that didn't have R&D agents.
1-2 months after that was used to get the right standing with a good R&D corp.
6 months to get the 1st BPO.
Countless hours figuring out how the R&D system would work.
5M sp's invested
a) Social skills <-to get better standing increases.
b) max the starship eng skill
c) Be able to get 5 agents
d) Be able to research and produce the ships
Like you said, ANYONE can build BS's.
If I had used that time mining or NPC'ing instead, bought a BS bpo and produced that and kept on going, I would have been alot richer now then before.
The Tech 2 Lottery is rigged, In my favor! |
Caeden Nicomachean
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 06:14:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Minuz1
You assume I don't....well I do. And they are 6 per day per BPO.
7xBS vs 1 HAC in build time so the going rate would be BS 70% vs 200% of the HAC's. Buy 3 BS BPO's and tada, you are getting more income then any HAC maker.
Dude. You are comparing moving 21 battleships worth of minerals to one cruiser's worth, and leaving out all the hundreds of competitive sales in both directions that implies. Come on man.
The issue is how to push HAC prices closer to 80-100M (which is reasonable), not to berate T2 print owners, discuss the SP invested for research, or to detail x y or z way that you can make a bloody killing with T1 Khatred style.
Cheers.
---
25 or over? Join www.theoldergamers.com |
Hugh Ruka
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 06:38:00 -
[100]
one suggestion for the RAM problem.
Education of new players ?
I always left any loot other than modules and some trade goods in space. Many RAM modules do not reach the market just because players do not loot them, as they don't know what they are used for. Now I know to collect RAMs from missions for the future ships I'll want (or my corp).
------------------------------
Removed due to offensive content - Laqum
I realy liked my signature. Oh well ... |
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 08:07:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Matrices Reborn
Edited by: Matrices Reborn on 09/01/2006 10:08:53
People here are justifying HAC prices on the rather absurd basis of some kind of professed love for capitalism or capitalist economics, probably without having read anyone from Smith to Ricardo to Keynes.
Just repeating the mantra "Supply and demand!" means absolutely nothing. Ignorance is bliss I suppose; it's ridiculous to assume the in-game economy = capitalism and capitalism = good, therefore in-game economy = good. First of all as anyone can tell you in most Third World countries, capitalism is ****. The only reason capitalism works in the rich countries is because they plunder and destroy the poorer ones to create new markets there or steal natural resources (Iraq, cough, Iraq)...and if you look at the widening gap in income in the most capitalist country in the world you can even see it doesn't even work there very well except for billionaire CEOs...
But even putting that aside, the supply/demand curve only works *assuming all other things are equal*. That is clearly not the case in the game since by definition nothing is equal in the game. The producers have the means of production, the stations and the blueprints. Meanwhile, money makes money so the rich get richer and access the better toys by virtue of their production role. The consumers have to put up with whatever prices, or simply not play anymore.
Even if you think capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread, any smart capitalist who actually has anything to do with running a real economy will tell you need some price control or government regulation or breakup of monopoly coded into law (in this case, CCP intervention) to prevent greed from getting out of hand...
QFT
|
Minuz1
|
Posted - 2006.01.11 09:49:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Caeden Nicomachean
Originally by: Minuz1
You assume I don't....well I do. And they are 6 per day per BPO.
7xBS vs 1 HAC in build time so the going rate would be BS 70% vs 200% of the HAC's. Buy 3 BS BPO's and tada, you are getting more income then any HAC maker.
Dude. You are comparing moving 21 battleships worth of minerals to one cruiser's worth, and leaving out all the hundreds of competitive sales in both directions that implies. Come on man.
The issue is how to push HAC prices closer to 80-100M (which is reasonable), not to berate T2 print owners, discuss the SP invested for research, or to detail x y or z way that you can make a bloody killing with T1 Khatred style.
Cheers.
Alot better arguments then before, atleast you didn't assume as much(only thing is that I don't move any minerals anywhere)
It's all about income/time, and R&D is like education, sometimes it just doesn't pay off to advance your studies any further(income wise).
The Tech 2 Lottery is rigged, In my favor! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |