| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rells
   |
Posted - 2006.02.10 18:04:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Rells on 10/02/2006 18:04:32
One of the thing that irritates many shoppers is prices that are so high that they leave you with the feeling of being violated. If you are like me, you might not mind paying 30% or even 100% above the build cost for some powerful items but there are some things in the game that are marked up 1000% above cost (cap 2s for example). When CCP says "BPO Lottery" they werent kidding! Those that win these choice BPOS have market control with a quasi monopoly. They get billions not for hard work or genius play but just for being stupidly lucky. Its like the real world economy beign run by only Lottery winners.
At the same time this has another effect. Since there are so few people with these BPOs there is little market for the things that these BPOs consume in the making. This renders POS owners to the point where they scratch out a desperate living if at all. The megopolies that have the BPOs can field all of their resources and dont need help from anyone else, leaving a thin market for moon products.
So what can be done about this without making Tech 2 as common as tech 1? The first thing is to seed those BPOs to the market. Now stop reaching for that reply button and hear me out. If you could save up and buy one of these BPOs as some large amount of money you could start up your own supply business. So what is to keep the market from becomming as saturated as the Tech 1 market? Simple, change the rarity on the component minerals and materials.
Each tech 2 item is controlled by the number of BPOs in the game and CCP monitors this. However it is very transient and it could be that one guy with 3 accounts owns all three BPOs. If he goes on vacation for a month the market price rockets. What is more, those that can afford the price simply cant find the items to buy; there is no way another producer can step in and fill the gap with higher priced items.
Controlling the price by controlling the rarity of the minerals and materials would be far more subtle and easily adjustible. You could slightly bump down the yield from moon harvesting 10% and see a 10% rise in the price of items made from that material. Other materials could go through even more radical reductions in yield. If you want to make an item rare, drop a component mineral to rarity.
What would this do to the market? Well instead of being able to do everything themselves, these mega corps would be much more compelled to buy materials off the market as they couldnt possibly field enough POSes to get all of that rare material they need. What is more, the profession of exploration and survey would be introduced with intrepid pilots selling off moon survey results of moons found to contain needed materials. The market of materials would be revived and the POS market with it.
To make the deal even sweeter I would change the T1 recipies to include small amounts of materials for each recipe. Instead of the whole economy balancing on overmined minerals, it would balance on player produced materials. This would further restore the T1 market to the point that producing would actually become compeditive agian rather than a flooded market. Furthermore, it would create much more demand for materials and massively diversify the marketplace. People would be compelled to trade with others as getting it all wouldnt be possible alone.
Now I know some people will fight with me over the fact that they will loose their trillion isk monopoly and I have to say I dont much care. They have had their run, made their trillions and now its time to do what is right for the game population at large.
The tools are all there. All it requires is some seeding and tooling with recipies and material rarity and the market of eve would get a whole new life with new professions and new opportnities for rich and poor alike.
Comments welcome, Debate welcome, Flames can be left outside please.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.10 18:56:00 -
[2]
I love how people read the first paragraph and then think they are ready to reply. *sigh*
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.10 20:58:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Berrik Radhok
Originally by: Abbey Smallwood
What you are, in short, suggesting is the t2 market becoming virtually identical to the t1 market, except that it requires some new mins?
Would that really be so bad? Last I checked there are plenty of T1 producers that eke out a decent enough living.
And this justifies screwing over all the T2 producers?
Some of them actually worked for their ISK, mind you. If you had 5 billion ISK that you worked months to earn, would you like it if CCP suddenly stole it from you? No, you'd quit the game and post a whine thread about it.
Come on people, stop posting these threads over and over. Tech 2 as a whole is fine. Perhaps we need more HAC and cap II BPOs.
Do I smell a T2 producer with a 1000% markup license to print isk? There will be those people in he thread. Look for the most unreasonable folk.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.11 11:00:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Rells on 11/02/2006 11:03:34
Sorry but that is a dwwebish response. You got incredibly lucky, made 2.5 billion and tell people "go out and work hard like I did"??? Get off it, you didnt work hard, you won lotto.
T2 Items SHOULD be much higher priced than T1 items. However, the means of that price control is borked. The prices should be controlled by the availability of materials, an attribute that can be tuned much more subtlely. This means that you might still pay 150 mil for a HAC but thats because mining some particular material is rare and thus high price.
This would distribute the wealth.
To compensate the BPO ownsers I would give them copies of the BPOS that amount to the current retail value of the BPO. So if a cap II BPO is worth 10 bil and the seeded one is 2 bil common on market, the owner would get 5 of them in the exchange and can sell them off for prices below NPC to recover investment.
What I dont agree with is the fact that so few control the economy of eve.
And anyone that says tech 2 isnt necessary hasnt fought much in 0.0 against other players. The inty is probably the most commonly flown ship in 0.0.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.11 11:05:00 -
[5]
Originally by: mrg29
Originally by: Rells
So what can be done about this without making Tech 2 as common as tech 1?
therein lies the whole problem with your concept.
tech2 is not meant to be as common as tech1.
And that can be controlled easily by controlling the yields of Materials from moon mining. Did you read the rest of the post or merely pull that sentence out of context without quoting the answer.
If marerial X is very rare, the price of it will be high and thus will be the price of the materials generated.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.11 11:11:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Rells on 11/02/2006 11:11:34
Originally by: mrg29
as soon as i realised i misread i edited my reply.
apologies.
i still dont agree making t2 bpos available on market solves the problem as u will never put the necessary contraints on supply on raw materials without it affecting existing supplies.
Affecting existing supplies is rather the point.
It boils down to one simplistic equation. If it is left as it is today, a very few people "win the lottery" and control the T2 market with an iron grip. Keeping it like it is helps that perhaps 1% of eve enormously. Changing it to put economic forces into the equation helps maybe 95% of eve.
I say you try to be fair in the conversion and if the crybabies that have had their multibillion dollar run want to run from the game after that, let them go. I shant shed tears over the plight of people that currently can practically print isk. I dont mind paying 200mil for my HAC but I at least want it to be there on the market.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.11 11:25:00 -
[7]
Dropping production times of T2 items and BPCs only makes the BPO holders richer.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.12 00:35:00 -
[8]
Im looking at T2 ammo on the market for 1000 per shot. That is small ammo. THat underscores the point nicely.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.13 12:23:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Rells
Im looking at T2 ammo on the market for 1000 per shot. That is small ammo. THat underscores the point nicely.
You're looking at an item that was just released and hasn't had time to saturate the market yet. Another set of small T2 ammo is 200 ISK a piece, which is fine if not too low.
200 per shot is also still stupid high. The ammo is not that good. 200% over T1 ammo is fine, even 300% is fine but 2000% over t1 ammo is just plain stupid. No, not unbalanced, stupid!
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
Rells
|
Posted - 2006.02.13 14:40:00 -
[10]
The difference between T1 and T2 ammo is not that great. It certaily isnt worth 200 per shot for SMALL ammo. Being that I go trough 2k of this ammo like water, that is a serious amount of cash just to shoot. And it doesnt cost near 200 per ammo item to produce. Again this is the result of a monopolistic market immune to economic forces.
Oh and I assure you I dont like the price and I dont buy it. However with ships that is a different story. I dont liek the price and have to buy it anyway. Its a monopoly that makes Microsoft look like nothing. The T2 producers dont have to bend to market forces because they CONTROL the supply. If they werent such a cash cow then why are the T2 producers going to such extrordinary measures to keep things as they are?
However we know you are personally motivated by your personal greed on this matter. So you represent the interests of the cartels out there holding the T2 market. I represent the several thousand consumers out there. There is a reason there are antitrust laws in real life and this is the reason.
-- Rells
◄ Replacing Local with a practical alternative.
|
| |
|