| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
25
   |
Posted - 2014.04.29 13:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
The examples Greyscale calculated are based on a snapshot from a system under different rules.
It is safe to assume that for unlimited number of production jobs possible with only a 4% price markup, everyone will rush to Jita 4-4 and do the manufacturing there.
So this number will change very quickly (read: after 28 days ;-) ).
Question is: where will it stabilize, or put differently:
At which percentage of global manufacturing activity will Jita reach 10% (15%/20%) total cost increase?
Which percentage is necessary until the surrounding systems are also considered "full".
Could produce a nice effect when goods are manufactured in different places based on profit margin... but still I wonder whether the differences will be big enough to justify transport expenses (time & ISK).
Another thing is that a quick scan on dotlan revealed that there way more stations per system in Caldari space than anywhere else. Is that true?
|
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
25
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 13:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
NEONOVUS wrote:So basically I want to drop my hisec POS into a stationless system and thus only have the base floor pricing?
You want to drop your POS in a stationless system with AS FEW MOONS AS POSSIBLE.
Only there are very few such places. Might spark conflict... |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
27
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Tippia wrote:
Use the same method you're using to replace total system slot count with a system cost bonus, only when you use a POS, it counts the number of relevant arrays at that POS to determine the bonus (and completely ignores all system-based bonuses). The exact per-array bonus can be tweaked, or you can be all fancy and give different arrays different bonuses. A GÇ£relevant arrayGÇ¥ would be any array that can perform the kind of S&I job you're about to do.
Counting facilities at a starbase is somewhat computationally expensive right now, as we don't keep track of which structures are associated with each control tower in the DB. The "obvious solution" (ie what you've described, and what's in the original design) requires us to do some legwork to track that properly, which as I alluded to earlier is not particularly conceptually complex but requires a reasonable amount of work that we may or may not have time to do.
Then do it slightly different. Two suggestions:
A) Your database can tell in finite time how many arrays are there that are
- of a specific type
- in a specific system
- owned by your corp or alliance
- online
Then you just say: all these arrays/labs somehow provide accomodations/workspace for your work force and the job cost is reduced by a factor that is determined by the number of your available labs (read: ex-slots) and the number of job hours your corp/ally is currently running.
If you want a POS farm with 38 labs in a system, fine.
B) Your database cannot tell to whom these structures belong, but it does at least know how many structures of a given type are there online in a given system.
Then the formula uses the total number of online arrays for cost reduction. This implies that you could "use" even enemy structures. To compensate, EVERYONE pays a tax, also at POSes.
All taxes go to a tax pool and every once in a while the server distributes the tax pool among all array/lab owners.
With this you could also have a "lab farm" just to collect taxes even when you are not running any jobs yourself at all.
POSes with a large number of arrays would have a similar role as POCOs have - you provide infrastructure.
Lorewise, this would mean by setting up labs or arrays you rather support the systemwide NPC work forces instead of one specific project.
In return you get some "rent" for their accomodations which is deducted from the systemwide tax pool. |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
27
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
OK, maybe B) may start a war or another, because Nonni and Malkalen only have 2 moons each...  |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
27
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Fal Dara wrote:
to make a single max-run copy of a modual (which is what we all do for inventing), we will be spending 600% of the production cost to do so? and with a ~50% success rate at inventon, that means about 12 moduals cost. for a thing like a 425mm rail, that's 24m isk, to make JUST the bpc for making 10 mods.
so a 425mm rail II would go from 3.5m to 5.9m ... a 170% price jump. This wouldnt even include the new production costs.
Looks to make a LOT of t2 mods 200% more expensive.
CCP, i hate to say it, but i think the modifier for the cost of making copies needs another zero. not 2% of mod cost, but .002.
No. A single max-run-BPC would include 600% of the production cost of a single module. But that does not mean that the Copy job costs six times as much as a Railgun!
It means the job costs (at least this factor of the job cost - the scaling down thing will reduce it again) is six times as high!
But if the job cost to install a manufacturing job ends up being say 3% of the module value in the end, then a max-run copy would be "only" 18% cost of the T1 item.
T1 version is currently at 2m ISK. -> 2 max-run BPCs = 36%*2m ISK = 720k ISK or 72k ISK per resulting T2 module.
(also if you go to a very remote place, it will only cost you six times of nearly zero) |
| |
|