| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |

Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7196
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:33:00 -
[391] - Quote
the solution to bid sniping is ebay-style bids where you give it a max and it .01 isks for you up to that max
you put in your max bid, if it's sniped then your max bid was exceeded, if you're unhappy about that you should have put in your actual max bid Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |

Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
15
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:34:00 -
[392] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:mkint wrote:Your analogy doesn't answer the question asked, but it does bring up an interesting point...
there's a reason all cars in the US are made in detroit. (except saturns, but does anybody really care about saturn? do they even still exist?) I stopped reading right there. You have false starting conditions. Toyotas are assembled in Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, and Indiana. Hondas are assembled in Alabama, Ohio, and Indiana. Fords are assembled in Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, and Texas. Et cetera. (Cite: various Wikipedia pages. Look for "List of (manufacturer) facilities") MDD
Yeah wow. Holy 1985 frame of reference. Saturns aren't even a thing anymore, let alone Detroit. |

ElectronHerd Askulf
Reasonable People Of Sound Mind
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:35:00 -
[393] - Quote
350125GO wrote:The team idea seems to encourage industrialists settling in the same system while the scaled manufacturing costs is supposed to discourage the hubs. This doesn't make sense, unless all you want is people to put up POS to do all industry. This change is very bad for the small industrialist/small corps, and especially bad for new players that may be interested in industry.
The two mechanics provide opposing forces, making your decisions trade-offs between those forces. Small industrialists may be better off 'leaching' or hiding in a very low activity system and ignoring the team mechanic. That will depend on what risks they prefer. |

Ludacrys
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:36:00 -
[394] - Quote
People will just "test" price systems X number of jumps from jita and use the cheapest one, this system promotes nothing but isk sinks. Worst expansion in a while and that is saying a lot for eve online.
Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended? |

Nyjil Lizaru
Aideron Robotics
24
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:37:00 -
[395] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid.
Well, as a very small volume, solo manufacturer I can: A) use a non-trivial amount of my relatively small wallet to try to bring a team with the 'correct' bonuses to my system, and/or B) move all my stuff occasionally to a system that has the 'correct' bonuses, and/or C) just ignore teams entirely until someone brings a team to my build system with the 'correct' bonuses, and/or D) diversify my production so that I can benefit from many teams.
Locking folks like me out of the benefits of teams would be a net buff to large groups that already have economies of scale. I'm already inefficient, I don't need your help to shrink my margins  Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity." |

Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
15
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:38:00 -
[396] - Quote
Scarlett LaBlanc wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote:The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid. The idea is that the star system is bidding to bring this team to the system. Once the Team arrives they put them selves out for hire at a set price. The team would want as many jobs as they could get. This IS cooperative industry, just not they way most of us expected. You get to cooperate with the rest of the star system to get the team, then everyone gets the benefit. I love the fact it forces you to cooperate with your competition!
The idea may be that the solar system is bidding, but the reality is probably more that just a few players coordinated to make that happen. Then after the fact, outsiders can move in and reap the benefits. I'm just saying that its OK to provide a public option, but it is equally OK to allow players/corps/alliance to make private bids as well.
There is a difference between cooperation, forced cooperation, and freeloading. But I do recognize some people are OK with freeloaders. |

Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
162
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:41:00 -
[397] - Quote
Green Gambit wrote:Kadl wrote:You discussed snipping as a problem. It is a technical problem of certain bidding systems, and can be significantly reduced by choosing a good auction system.
You don't need an alternative system, you just do what a real-auctioneer does in a real auction house. If somebody comes in with a bid at the last second, he allows a little more time in case somebody else wants to come in with a counter-bid. So all the auction system needs is a short extension if a bid is made at the end. I've found that "if the auction is within 10 mins of close, end ten mins from now" works reasonably nicely.
Your solution works in a bad sort of way but only for the snipping issue. It does nothing for the 2 am auction. It does not stop someone from 0.01 isking you for hours. Basically they are falling back on alarm clock and boredom as methods to gain advantages in EVE. Those are no fun.
Vickrey's auctions result in the same outcome without alarm clocks and boredom. You tell the trusted auctioneer your highest price and he ends the auction with a winner and a price. The price is exactly the same as the one you would reach if two rational people both set their alarm clocks and 0.01 isked each other for a month. Remove the bad game play of alarm clocks and boredom. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:42:00 -
[398] - Quote
Ludacrys wrote: Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended?
Are you seriously trying to tell me you consider purist spreadsheets online preferable to having more mechanics that allow intelligent, aggressive decisions to undermine your competitors? |

Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
162
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:43:00 -
[399] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:the solution to bid sniping is ebay-style bids where you give it a max and it .01 isks for you up to that max
you put in your max bid, if it's sniped then your max bid was exceeded, if you're unhappy about that you should have put in your actual max bid
edit: oh wait this works poorly with bid pooling, nevermind
You described Vickrey's auction and it works fine with bid pooling (in this situation).
You pool by system already. The winning system pays and returns a proper ratio to each bidder (oh intel on how much of a percent you put into the pool). |

Green Gambit
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
59
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:46:00 -
[400] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Not that you will of course. Because there's not all that much thought involved even with the changes. Just a more complicated spreadsheet. If you have to think about it, you haven't prepared properly.
If I don't have to think about it, then we've got a newer version of "press button, receive bacon"... which you still seem to be in love with despite denials otherwise.
In my real job, the business generates ideas of how we can create more money in the markets that we work in.
Yes then spreadsheets come into the equation, analysis is done. We put in some estimates about what costs may be involved, what income / extra profit may result. We have to think about the analysis here - make sure that we're considering all impacts and accounting for any variables. Any risks needs to be factored into the equation.
Some of the ideas immediately get thrown out because the risk is too high, or the returns don't justify the costs. The ideas that are left in the pot are prioritised and put into place in-line with the general business objectives.
This is how real business works, and how real entrepreneurs work.
And yes, there are parallels with playing chess, you need to consider all your moves, and make decisions based on risk and possible return analysis. |

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
303
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:47:00 -
[401] - Quote
Loraine Gess wrote:MailDeadDrop wrote: If you'll allow a comparison to the Real World (always a risk doing that), there are usually rather stringent rules against bid retractions in auctions, and frequently rather painful consequences. So, if we allow bid retractions in team auctions it seems reasonable that those retractions might have to pay a rather hefty fine, such as 15% of the bid?
MDD
First thank you for signing your post - It's very difficult for me to simply read your name. So reading your signature saved a lot of trouble. Are you trying to make me play the forums the way you play them? What is it with you guys...
Loraine Gess wrote:Secondly that's irrelevant, because with bid retractions I can always force you to pay an equivalent or higher price, either for the team, or for bidding (and then retracting). How is it irrelevant to attach a cost to the ability to force your opponent to pay an equivalent or higher price? It sounds like you want the ability to force your opponent's behavior for free.
But Kadl had an interesting contribution ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4532219#post4532219 ). Vickrey auctions would allow retractions and would also negate their manipulative aspects.
MDD
|

Ludacrys
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:51:00 -
[402] - Quote
Seith Kali wrote:Ludacrys wrote: Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended?
Are you seriously trying to tell me you consider purist spreadsheets online preferable to having more mechanics that allow intelligent, aggressive decisions to undermine your competitors?
Nobody plays this game to manufacture. Manufacturing, ratting, etc are a means to buy PVP ships and shoot each other.
|

Drone 16
Law Dogz
166
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:51:00 -
[403] - Quote
Not sure if anyone has brought this up but do you realize that industry guys are getting "crew members" before the pvp space ship guys?!?  It puts the peanutbutter on itself or it leaves the bonus round... - E1's greatest Hits |

Jayem See
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
2583
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:53:00 -
[404] - Quote
I stopped doing indy stuff quite a long time ago.
I'm going to look forward to playing with this and seeing how it pans out. From my understanding it's going to add an interesting dimension to the industrial process.
Looking forward to it. Aaaaaaand relax. |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2572
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:53:00 -
[405] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Cultural Enrichment wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote:Kendra Zane wrote:It sounds like a reasonable idea but I'm concerned that most of the teams will end up in the same few systems because of the concentration of industry happening there and the easier spread of costs.
I do like the idea of team creation being a PI activity.
How many teams can be active in a system at once? How many active over the whole of New Eden? How often do they "spawn"?
EDIT: This all feels a little too dynamic. Industry doesn't like moving around so it wouldn't surprise me if we ended up with a mostly similar cost for building the same thing, be it in a busy or empty system. The total number of teams is determined by how fast they are seeded. We will adjust this number based on usage and on how many different teams we have (for instance the seeding will speed up when we add invention teams). Currently it is around six teams per hour. 6 teams created each hour, as in 144 each day, over 4000 active simultanously? This sounds about right. so you can't buy them all to work in your WH system? eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:53:00 -
[406] - Quote
Ludacrys wrote:Seith Kali wrote:Ludacrys wrote: Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended?
Are you seriously trying to tell me you consider purist spreadsheets online preferable to having more mechanics that allow intelligent, aggressive decisions to undermine your competitors? Nobody plays this game to manufacture. Manufacturing, ratting, etc are a means to buy PVP ships and shoot each other.
Well that's not entirely true. I rarely PVP yet I fully enjoy using my disgusting piles of money to come up with more elaborate and devious ways of taking yours. |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2572
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:54:00 -
[407] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Cultural Enrichment wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote:Kendra Zane wrote:It sounds like a reasonable idea but I'm concerned that most of the teams will end up in the same few systems because of the concentration of industry happening there and the easier spread of costs.
I do like the idea of team creation being a PI activity.
How many teams can be active in a system at once? How many active over the whole of New Eden? How often do they "spawn"?
EDIT: This all feels a little too dynamic. Industry doesn't like moving around so it wouldn't surprise me if we ended up with a mostly similar cost for building the same thing, be it in a busy or empty system. The total number of teams is determined by how fast they are seeded. We will adjust this number based on usage and on how many different teams we have (for instance the seeding will speed up when we add invention teams). Currently it is around six teams per hour. 6 teams created each hour, as in 144 each day, over 4000 active simultanously? This sounds about right. so you can't buy them all to work in your WH system? (since there are no, per-system limitations) eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

350125GO
Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n
39
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 17:57:00 -
[408] - Quote
Also, it said the cost of a team would be more expensive depending on how far away from their base the winning system is in. What does this do to wormholes, since Eve lists them as infinitely far away from anywhere in k-space? |

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
304
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:00:00 -
[409] - Quote
Put a delay between the end of the auction for a team and when that team becomes available for use in the winning system. Have the team loaded aboard NPC haulers (which already exist; remember those NPC docking & undocking you see?) Have the NPC haulers travel to the winning system. Give incentive to shoot NPC haulers. Allow players to interdict teams from systems (shoot the NPC haulers).
Edit: I suppose that cargo scanners would need to reveal the NPC hauler contents, too (by team name).
MDD |

Gamer4liff
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
81
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:01:00 -
[410] - Quote
350125GO wrote:Also, it said the cost of a team would be more expensive depending on how far away from their base the winning system is in. What does this do to wormholes, since Eve lists them as infinitely far away from anywhere in k-space? As repeatedly stated in-thread, wormholes are counted as being 50 jumps away for the purposes of pricing. |

Jayem See
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
2583
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:02:00 -
[411] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:Put a delay between the end of the auction for a team and when that team becomes available for use in the winning system. Have the team loaded aboard NPC haulers (which already exist; remember those NPC docking & undocking you see?) Have the NPC haulers travel to the winning system. Give incentive to shoot NPC haulers. Allow players to interdict teams from systems (shoot the NPC haulers).
MDD
Make them be collected by players. Players that collect them automatically have a suspect flag. Oh yeah - make them 2500m3.  Aaaaaaand relax. |

350125GO
Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n
39
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:03:00 -
[412] - Quote
Gamer4liff wrote:350125GO wrote:Also, it said the cost of a team would be more expensive depending on how far away from their base the winning system is in. What does this do to wormholes, since Eve lists them as infinitely far away from anywhere in k-space? As repeatedly stated in-thread, wormholes are counted as being 50 jumps away for the purposes of pricing.
Thanks,
I read the first few pages, I don't have full time to read 20+ pages. |

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
304
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:05:00 -
[413] - Quote
Jayem See wrote:MailDeadDrop wrote:Put a delay between the end of the auction for a team and when that team becomes available for use in the winning system. Have the team loaded aboard NPC haulers (which already exist; remember those NPC docking & undocking you see?) Have the NPC haulers travel to the winning system. Give incentive to shoot NPC haulers. Allow players to interdict teams from systems (shoot the NPC haulers).
MDD Make them be collected by players. Players that collect them automatically have a suspect/criminal flag. Oh yeah - make them 2500m3.  I'm not sure how that could be made workable. It isn't like the team is going to do anything but try to make their way to the winning system, so how capturing them from the wreck would be useful eludes me.
MDD |

Ludacrys
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:12:00 -
[414] - Quote
PLEASE make them silent auctions, setting my alarm to log into eve to bid on this its just bad game mechanics |

Abla Tive
Serpent.Sisters.of.Eve
51
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:14:00 -
[415] - Quote
I fear that teams may be unbalancing because of how easy it is to over-produce.
Wait for a great team for a particular item to show up and snipe the bidding to put it into a quiet production spot. (or simply wait to see where they end up and then go there) Then flood the system with jobs (note you are still being charged relatively cheaply because the costs lag somewhat). Overproduce the item and sell your stocks off for a year or so. Leave desolation in that system behind you as costs are now high and without the great team, there is no point to running jobs there
You should be able to make good coin off your stocks at a price where everyone else is losing isk (at least until the next roll of the die produces another great team) |

Olari Vanderfall
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
106
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:15:00 -
[416] - Quote
Ludacrys wrote:PLEASE make them silent auctions, setting my alarm to log into eve to bid on this its just bad game mechanics
Welcome to Eve. |

Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
1096
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:18:00 -
[417] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: You what also is not boring?
Not your posts?
Seriously though, let's take a look at RL for a second.
60 years ago the UK was a manufacturer, it made things. Then ~economics~ happened and the manufacturing got shut and moved where the labour was cheap. Now China's economy is growing in the next 5-10 years it's like manufacturing will move again.
10 years ago everyone was talking about shutting down their call centres and moving them to India for cheaper labour. Now all the outsourced call centres are in the philippines. NOW they are moving back because the lower cost isn't worth the hassle they get from their customers.
In central Europe, three well known car manufacturers that directly compete with each other have teamed up because they can pool their resources to produce their goods dirt cheap, and then simply compete on the market.
For years now the American government has been funneling money into it's uncompetitive industries to keep them afloat. If you produce in empire space you've chosen to produce somewhere where the government believes in free trade (at least for capsuleers). If nullsec "governments" want to funnel money into making their production competitive then so be it.
There is a famous saying which is capital knows no boundries. Money goes where it is best to invest, and when there is somewhere better it moves.
In EVE there are no restrictions on moving your capital around on a daily basis, or at least very little costs. Don't you think for one second that if companies were able to up sticks and move in a day they wouldn't do it more often if it suited them.
I suspect in practice what will happen is everyone will start clumped together with the teams concetrated, and slowly one by one people will move somewhere cheaper. Eventually those ones will become tens, hundreds and you get what happened in China, a mad rush to move all your production there. Eventually you help the economy by providing paying jobs and you need to compete more, pay more for both staff and local materials. Eventually one person says "Hey, we could save money by moving here you know..." and the whole thing happens again.
As long as you don't have to up sticks and move every month or so I can't see how it's any different from real life, albeit it's more crudley implemented here for reasons of complexity. "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli |

Gamer4liff
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
81
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:18:00 -
[418] - Quote
350125GO wrote:
Thanks,
I read the first few pages, I don't have full time to read 20+ pages.
Yeah no problem.
I suppose with ~4,000 teams at any given time chances are the lower quality/weird spec ones will be obtainable fairly cheaply (relative to the higher end ones, anyway), though this seems like something that we'll only know after the fact when this goes live. CCP should be ready to re-balance somewhat if even the lowest of the low quality teams are significantly out of reach for typical manufacturers.
Having some teams be region-locked could be a good way to ensure local availability at at least some level too.
Jayem See wrote:Make them be collected by players. Players that collect them automatically have a suspect/criminal flag. Oh yeah - make them 2500m3.  4 people as 2500m3? |

Iorga Eeta
Hekatonkheires Industries
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:23:00 -
[419] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Loraine Gess wrote: How are the ME/TE bonuses planned to stack at this point? 10% ME + 7.5% ME (team) + 2% ME (PoS) = 19.5% material savings from the new base?
Whatever it is it will be precisely cancelled by the slot cost increase from the popularity of your system having a team. Not that you can predict what that'll be of course. No. It'll be completely unpredictable, which is precisely the opposite of what anyone running a business wants. Bingo. Let's pretend you are in a planning meeting at GM for the 2016 production lines.
Let's pretend you are in the room with Steve Jobs and Sergey Brin in 2006.
Steve: Sergey, let's not compete for each others workers. It'll drive up costs for both of us! Sergey: That's a great idea Steve! Let's not allow normal market forces affect the cost for our workers. Steve: Not just our workers, our agreement will likely cause sticky wages for all Silicon Valley workers.
...
Market forces affect the cost of labor in real life. GM, Chrysler and Ford really do have to worry about how much labor costs the others. If GM changed their contract with the UAW, it was very likely that Chrysler and Ford would have to meet the demands of the new labor agreement themselves. It's debatable whether adding this level of reality to a video game is desirable, but it is realistic.
|

Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
15
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:23:00 -
[420] - Quote
Gamer4liff wrote:350125GO wrote:
Thanks,
I read the first few pages, I don't have full time to read 20+ pages.
Yeah no problem. I suppose with ~4,000 teams at any given time chances are the lower quality/weird spec ones will be obtainable fairly cheaply (relative to the higher end ones, anyway), though this seems like something that we'll only know after the fact when this goes live. CCP should be ready to re-balance somewhat if even the lowest of the low quality teams are significantly out of reach for typical manufacturers. Having some teams be region-locked could be a good way to ensure local availability at at least some level too. Jayem See wrote:Make them be collected by players. Players that collect them automatically have a suspect/criminal flag. Oh yeah - make them 2500m3.  4 people as 2500m3?
or it can be like PLEX: just because it's in the game doesn't mean you can afford it or have some unalienable human right to access. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |