Nerf Dinsdale

But this is false and besides the point. You are not grasping the real issue at hand here.

The market for reprocessing trash is not related to compression in anyway shape or form, except in the pre-patch incarnation where 425mm shipments had to be first manufcatured in high sec from extant materials, and then REPROCESSED in null for the minerals they require. THAT is what was silly. That you could manufacture 425mms in high, and move them to Null for not only 100% efficiency in REPROCESSING them but also with less volume required. Null entities argue this was necessary because they feel, for one reason or another, that that was better than meeting their own mineral needs from the space they have availqble to themout there.

This was indeed silly, but its the null entities prerogative to do so, since it was indeed possible. The system allowed them to ship minerals, in the form of 425mms, with reduced volume, for a 100% efficiency payout upon arrival. By all means not an unequitable solution, but definately silly.

This is no longer the case as a result of the other elements of this change, namely compression changes and higher null refinement efficiency of ores themselves. There is no longer a need for the 425mm trick. Null can compress ores for purposes of shipment, and leverage those at their own high efficiency installations as well as their own local ores.

For better or worse, the above is not the matter of dispute or the point of this thread. All speculation and derailment aside, this is unrelated to the *insignificant* additional and superfluous non-ice/ore refinmenet efficiency change. This separate issue is not at all insignificant, it infact has universal ramifications across all secs, in that it categorically reduces the base value of all refinable non-ore/ice materials EVERYWHERE. This affects both player made and looted items. The cost of production is not increased, but the value of all such items is depressed by their reduced reprocessing yield.

You are confusing two unrelated issues.

The proposed additional non-ice/ore refinement change results in a flat, universal, sec irrelevant reduction in the value of ALL refinable items such as ships and modules. A 100% efficiency was indeed silly, but the proposed change takes it to BELOW that of ice/ore refinement with no recourse to improving it based on station or sec.

Why would anyone skill into non-ice/ore refining now?
Not only will there be less refinable materials brought in from wrecks, because they are worth less and players simply wont bother to loot and transport them to market, but the base value of those refinable items themselves is depressed by the reduction in efficiency in refining them.

Net result: Nobody will bring int trash anymore. And nobody will skill non-ice/ore refinement, because not only is the market devoid of materials to refine but the value of those items is in and of itself also depressed to where if instead you bought and refined ore/ice, you would be laughing.

Do you understand what I am saying?

---

As a result of this extraneous change, every non-ice/ore refinable in the item gets a net nerf in base value due to the reduced efficiency of minerals you can get out of them.

Anyone who potentially profits from bringing in loot from wrecks is negatively affected by this, as are the non-ice/ore reprocessors who make their trade off what they bring in.

They don't want perfect refine on modules or hulls. Get over it already. Loss is good for the game, and making mistakes and massively overproducing before tieracide should not be rewarded with perfect escape options or minerals that didn't exist before.

You are upset as your current method of isk generation will require a rethink, as will many others. You're not being objective by saying "this is how it affects me, therefore this is bad".

The latter, the actual topic of this thread, of the additional nerf of non-ice/ore refining to the point where nobody will bring back trash and nobody will skill for refining them, is as of yet still unanswered and unjustified.

I do not generate my isk through this method. So your conclusion is false.

Compression is unrelated to people refining minerals from ships/modules either produced by players or brought in from wrecks.

Compression means nothing to a mission/ratter/plexer when he decides whether to bring back the trash he finds or not.
It also means nothing to a non-ore/ice refiner who is buying what those players bring back in order to turn a small profit by reselling the minerals.

You are again confusing two separate issues.

@Tippia:

Your evasive reply and refusal to address key facts and ramifications is now sufficient to concern me that there are indeed vested interests in these proposed changes and that all attempts to objectively discuss the actual issues will be deliberately stonewalled and sabotaged.

I will express my dissent by withdrawing from this discussion. Have it "your" way.

Can you think of any reason to invade goon space other than because its goons?

So you aren't talking from experience, you are speculating on the effect on an income stream you are not actually part of?

Good job at just ignoring the rest of the points though.

@Tippia:

Your evasive reply and refusal to address key facts and ramifications is now sufficient to concern me that there are indeed vested interests in these proposed changes and that all attempts to objectively discuss the actual issues will be deliberately stonewalled and sabotaged.

I will express my dissent by withdrawing from this discussion. Have it "your" way.

You mean like people who wilfully ignore the actual reasons and logic behind a change, only to shout GÇ£no-one has provided any reasoning or logic for this change"?

Welcome to the "new" and CAOD-ized GD, where a squadron of group-thinkers holds a firm grasp on everything that moves.

Wait, removing industry skill involved compression in favor of a (nearly) skilless one so that a handful of people have a incentive to train refining to high levels to use exclusively in null seems logical to you?

Welcome to the "new" and CAOD-ized GD, where a squadron of group-thinkers holds a firm grasp on everything that moves.

While I agree it's a reduction in the income from scrap, that was never really a profession anyway.

Mission runners make more isk from LP rewards and mission blitzing than from the loot, and will still be the main source of salvage.

If you look at it from the mining point of view, miners were previously getting screwed because on-the-side income from missioners was directly affecting the mineral price. On top of that, ore compression was utterly pointless as modules existed to do that job better instead. That has now been turned into a viable tradeskill.

Then you have the effect on industry. Previously, you could manufacture a whole heap of most items, then if the market dropped away just recycle them back to minerals and try something else. Now industrialists will be forced to commit to a product, which is a good thing.

And speaking objectively, if you look at this from the point of view of someone brand new, so not involved in any side of the debate, they way it will work is balanced.

not too firm a grasp, it blocks off blood flow and reduces pleasure

Better than a gang of know-nothings randomly gibbering 50 different lies like it used to be.

But, yeah, wheres this 100% currently?

Welcome to the "new" and CAOD-ized GD, where a squadron of group-thinkers holds a firm grasp on everything that moves.

No, forum noise is a lesser evil compared to have only one Line Of Authorized Thought.

Anyone who lived in a country where this was enforced, knows how bad it can be.

Fact: getting 100% refine rate in hisec has been retardedly easy forever

Providing highsec with a mechanism to compress minerals that does not involve the use of scraps is logical, yes.

Whether it should require high-SP requirements to do so (especially in relation to mobile compression) is more a matter of balance than logic.

First you contrive that I am self-interested and therefore not objective.
Then when I inform you that I am not self-interested and trying to be objective, you accuse me of being incapable of being objective because I am not self-interested.
Then you accuse me of ignoring other points, all of which where contingent on the previous contrivances.

This is exactly the kind of deliberate stonewalling and sabotage of discussion I was talking about earlier.

Kindly allow me the dignity of withdrawing from this discussion without throwing aspersions at my back as I rescind.
I already said I am not concerned enough to invest time and effort in resisting the already decided and vested changes.

You can have it "your" way. I am walking away. Let me do so.

@Benny Ohu: I hope you are right.

it's because you refuse to respond to the arguments opposing yours.